sign in sign up
<<
Home , Beuthen District, Ceslaus, Districts of Germany, Flatow (district), Free State of Prussia, Frisians

[Distributed to the Council.] Official No. : C-422. I 932 - I-

Geneva, May 30th, 1932.

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

PROTECTION OF MINORITIES IN UPPER

PETITION FROM THE “ASSOCIATION OF IN ”, SECTION I, OF OPPELN, CONCERNING THE SITUATION OF THE POLISH MINORITY IN GERMAN

Note by the Secretary-General.

In accordance with the procedure established for petitions addressed to the Council of the under Article 147 of the Germano-Polish Convention of May 15th, 1922, concerning Upper Silesia, the Secretary-General forwarded this petition with twenty appendices, on December 21st, 1931, to the German Government for its observations. A fter having obtained from the Acting-President of the Council an extension of the time­ limit fixed for the presentation of its observations, the German Government forwarded them in a letter dated March 30th, 1932, accompanied by twenty-nine appendices. The Secretary-General has the honour to circulate, for the consideration of the Council, the petition and the observations of the German Government with their respective appendices. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Page I Petition from the “Association of ”, Section I, of Oppeln, con­ cerning the Situation of the Polish Minority in German Upper Silesia . . . 5 A ppendices to th e P e t i t i o n ...... 20

II. O bservations of th e G erm an G o v e r n m e n t...... 9^ A ppendices to th e O b s e r v a t i o n s ...... I03

S. A N. 400 (F.) 230 (A.) 5/32. Imp. Wyss. Berne. — 5 —

[Translation] I. PETITION. ASSOCIATION OF POLES i n G e r m a n y Section I

Oppeln, November ioth, 1931.

To the Council of the League of Nations, Geneva.

In a series of petitions and documents addressed to the Council of the League of Nations, the Upper Silesian Mixed Commission, the Minorities Office and to various German authorities, we have presented the situation of the Polish minority in and described in general terms and with detailed examples how that minority is discriminated against in every sphere and phase of its life a n d a c tiv ity . We had hoped that, on the one hand, the authorities and the general public would in time change their attitude and, on the other hand, that the action of the League Council would result in both the spirit and the letter of the Geneva Convention being observed and the provisions of P art III of that Convention being applied. Unhappily, our position has in the meantime not only not im proved— it has changed for the worse. In reply to our petitions and applications, we have only been given an explanation of the particular incident referred to, without any change whatever being made in the general policy of the administra­ tion as a whole. That section of the German public which, without any interference on the part of the authorities, remains bitterly opposed to the cultural development of any other race than the German, creates an atmosphere which is generally hostile and has, recently in particular, become considerably accentuated. Disregarding for the moment the causes and consequences of such a state of affairs, we consider it to be our bounden duty, in connection with the resolutions of the Council and, particularly, our petitions of — April 3rd, 1928 ...... Document C.249.1928.1, October 20th, 1928 ...... „ C . 1 0 8 .1 9 2 9 .1, October 22nd, 1928 ...... „ C.284.1929.1, October 22nd, 1928 ...... „ C . 10 7 .1 9 2 9 .1, October 23rd, 1928 ...... „ C. 1 0 6 .1 9 2 9 .1, December 22nd, 1928 ...... „ C. 1 4 5 .1 9 2 9 .1, March 25th, 1929 ...... „ C.266.1929.1, March 26th, 1929 ...... „ C.335.1929.I, May 8th, 1929 ...... „ C. 309.1929.1, June 4th, 1929 . „ C.491.1929.I,

to apply once a g a in to the League Council in virtue of Article 147 of the Geneva Convention of May 15th, 1922, and to explain how the provisions of Part III of that Convention are applied and what is the position of the Polish minority generally. The main reason for this state of affairs is the policy of hostility towards minorities which the Government authorities and the German population continue to pursue towards the Poles in German Upper Silesia. The racial individuality of this m inority is highly developed; the best proof is the fact that, in spite of the territory in question having been German for centuries, and in spite of the German policy of denationalisation, this m inority has preserved its own language and customs. A t the present time, the German authorities and population combat the Polish element in German Silesia, by exploit­ ing the economic dependence of the Polish minority on German employers. The economic and poli­ tical pressure exerted on the Polish population contrary to the spirit and the letter of the Geneva Convention is a serious embarrassment in every phase of minority life in German Silesia. Nor are our compatriots in other parts of Prussia any better off. A cursory review of the various departments of political, economic, intellectual and religious life shows how unfairly the Poles in German Silesia are treated — and it is of this that we here com­ plain — as compared with the German population, a clear violation of the letter and the spirit, not only of the Geneva Convention, but of the generally accepted principle of the equality of all citizens of a State in the eyes of the law. The intolerant attitude of the German authorities and population towards the Polish minority can best be illustrated by a number of instances taken from the life of that minority. We cite these to prove that our general assertions are based on facts and cannot be said to be unfounded (see the German Government’s Observations of September 4th, 1929, last sentence, in documents C.491.1929.I and C.30.1929.I). In spite of the loyalty of the Polish population to Germany, it is constantly being accused, quite undeservedly, by the German Press and German organisations of irredentism. The German Nation­ alist Press is particularly fond of making this reproach in order to stir up German feeling against the Poles. The efforts of German leaders, supported by the whole of the German population, are directed towards exterminating the Poles from German Silesia entirely and destroying all traces of Polish tradition in that .

I — 6 —

The same tendency may be observed in other also. As an instance, we may cite a couple of facts from Northern Prussia, where the authorities try to prevent members of the minority from keening in touch with by refusing frontier permits and passports, this being considered to be • i, nffirial attitude of the German Government on the community of cultural tradi- don&rFo^m^ance in 192^ Ae Meseritz Landratsamt refused to give the son of M. Bimka farmer i„ Gross-Dammer a passport to travel to Poland for purposes of study. In the summer of 1931, the lo S com“ ôner of Kuschten in the above declined to give passports to a number of ch,l- d 5 n w ho w ? e going to holiday camps in Poland on the pretext that they had well-to-do parents and did not need a rest. Wladvslaw Misiewicz, the son of a well-known Polish family in Scharzig, district of Meseritz, a m o ü of the Plock Secondary School, was deprived by the local authorities of his p a s s p o r t w hen he was spending the long vacation this year at home and was thus unable to return to Poland to continue the sTudies he had commenced there. His father's representations to the local authorities of Betsche and the Landratsamt of Meseritz proved fruitless. The official at the Landratsamt absolutely refused W iv e un the nassoort stating: "The famüy is in too close touch with Poland. There is far too much coming ^nd going”. Shortly afterwards, Mile. Walerja Misiewicz's pa^port was withdrawn vvithout any expfaimtfon , a n d , w h en personal enquiries were made, she was told at the Mesentz Landratsamt ?hat not only would no further passport be given to her and to her brother Wladislaw, but th a t the whole family would in future be refused permission to enter Poland even on frontier permits. Action by the Association of Poles also gave no results. In October 1030, the Landrat of the district of Stuhm informed several members of the Polish minority in Weichselgau that the Regierungsprasident had decided to withdraw their r ™ n fn^,>n nassnorts as these had to be returned to the authorities within three days. This measure ifuTdoubtedty an hSance of the terrorism show n towards the Polish minority, which is thus unable to communicate with Poland or with relatives resident there. The Landratsamt refuses the inhabitants of the village of Wierzchucino permits to cross the frontier to Poland, particularly to attend the religious festivals at Zarnowec. It has also withdrawn the church attendance permits of the inhabitants of Sellnow, Chinow and district, thus preventing them from attending the Catholic services at Gôra. On Tulv 20th 1030, M. Zimmermann, the of Oslau-Damerow, threatened to dismiss the timber workers if they sent their children to the holiday camps m Poland. There have also been cases of open attacks by official personages on the Polish minority. For instance, Dr. Giinther, Chairman of the Schneidemtihl Chamber of Commerce, published, in Iso. 241 3 th e Èlbinger Zeüung, of October 14th, 1930, an article entitled Poland s Kulturkampf against Germanism ”, containing an extremely bitter attack on the Polish mmonty. It is a fact that, wherever the members of the Polish minority show any intellectual or social initiative, the German authorities immediately try to counter it by means of the subordinate policeforces (by spying, denunciation and other methods adapted from the intimidation system ) or German organisations, and by anti-Polish agitation of an ultra-chauvmist character, such as Press propaganda, public meetings, hostile demonstrations, etc.

E d u c a t i o n .

Experience hitherto has shown that the regard minority schools, n o t a s a cultural require­ ment, but merely as a political factor. A cleverly conceived and organised system has been devised to combat the Polish minority and the minority schools. The results of this system became clearly discernible, chiefly as regards public m in o r ity schools in German Silesia, from the earliest days of the existence of such schools. Although 5,242 aPP1™ have been lodged since 1922, barely 250 children actually attend Polish nunonty- sclkjokO jU * basis of the applications made, there should be sixty schools open, instead of barely twenty-seven, as at present.

The reproach is frequently made that we do not take advantage of our r e c o g n i ^ r ig h ts in the sphere of public minority schools. The fact is that the inability to take advantage of these is due to the lack of a real spirit of equality in German Silesia and to the a c t that those who app for public schools to be opened were frequently victimised and interfered with by the ue authorities and population. The opposition to minority schools is conducted by all the German elements in the such schools exist — i.e., the local authorities, the officials and the members of German oream»-

A prominent part is taken by the teaching profession, as is shown by the n u m e r o u s complaint ^ g with various authorities by the Association of Poles. It should be pointed out tha , „iTamst appointed by the German authorities to work in Polish minority schools have frequently agitaieud* those schools. Such teachers have, by their unfriendly attitude towards Polish education, iai secure the confidence either of the Polish children or of their parents. — 7 —

Minority schools have declined for the further reason that the German authorities adopted the system of transferring to other districts teachers who were trusted by the minority and replacing them bv teachers who were hostile towards the Polish minority. Such action, of course, could not but paralyse completely the development of minority schools.

Furthermore, on January 30th, 1925, the Oppeln Provincial Government issued a regulation by w hich children could transfer at any period of the school year from the Polish minority schools to German schools and vice versa. The existence of such a regulation accelerated the decline of the minority schools, as teachers, during the course of the school year even, would urge children to transfer from the minority schools to the German majority schools.

In agricultural districts, particularly, the police authorities did great harm to the minority school5 by personally checking the signatures of parents who had applied for such schools to be opened. This is the chief reason why, out of 5,242 applications lodged, barely 1,950 children made an appearance when the minority schools were opened ; the German authorities disregarded entirely the application made for the opening of seven minority schools.

Anti-Polish organisations do not confine themselves merely to combating Polish schools by spread­ ing false reports about them; they even go so far as to menace and assault persons who send their children to such schools.

A typical instance of this is a case which occurred in Stolarzowice, where armed members of a Ger­ man organisation one night extorted from a prominent Pole a list of the names of those who had applied for the opening of a minority school. The German authorities failed to recover the list. This incident naturally caused consternation among the Poles residing in the surrounding communes, and parents were afraid to lodge applications for the opening of a minority school.

The hostile attitude of the German population generally towards minority schools and the pressure exerted by German employers on Polish parents who send their children to a Polish school were the decisive factors in determining the fate of public minority schools.

Although the Poles in German Silesia, numbering, according to German statistics, over 500,000, contribute heavily to the State budget, from which large sums go to support public education, they receive no return in the form of suitable schools adapted, qualitatively and quantitatively, to the needs of the minority and giving tuition in Polish.

It might, accordingly, be expected that the authorities would not hamper private education, which means a heavy additional burden on the population; unhappily, the exact contrary is true. The creation of private schools, both in German Silesia, on the basis of the Geneva Convention, and in other parts of Prussia, on the basis of the Ministerial Decree of December 31st, 1928, meets with numerous obstacles, although in the rest of Prussia outside Silesia there are no Polish public elemen­ tary schools and the only Polish schools are private institutions.

The hostility shown towards Polish schools even before the Decree of December 31st, 1928, came into force is reflected in an article by Dr. Fritz Rathenau (Ministerial Counsellor and member of the German delegation to the League of Nations Assembly, 1931) contained in the Berliner Tageblatt of November 29th, 1928, in which the author stated that the struggle was commencing in the educational field and he hoped that the German school would win. When a certain new school was started, the Ger­ man Press complained that its opening “ was all the more astounding, as the population had imagined that the Government would do its best to stop or, at any rate, to hinder the opening of further schools in the frontier zone ” (Die Grenzntark, No. 241, of October 13th, 1929). This proves at a glance that the theoretical German attitude of commending the educational systems of Latvia and Estonia for the standpoint assumed towards national minorities has no domestic application. There the system which enables children to be sent to their own national schools is commended, but Germany pugnaciously asserts its right to germanise every single child.

As soon as the organisation of Polish private schools assumed larger proportions and spread beyond the Grenzmark Province to and the Provinces of Kôslin and Upper Silesia, counter­ action was taken by the Germans. In doing so, the governing authorities, certainly, adopted, only to a very slight degree, methods to which quite definite exception could be taken. The plan was mainly to apply the regulations unfairly and so hamper the opening of schools, delay the arrival or removal of teachers, etc. Simultaneously, German organisations or private individuals of German nationality with a certain standing in the village in question would take steps to prevent children being sent to the Polish school, mostly by bringing pressure to bear on the parents, but occasionally by more violent action to which we shall refer in detail later.

A further characteristic symptom of the atmosphere prevailing is, e.g., the resolution passed by the Provincial Diet of Prussian in March 1931 demanding the closing of Polish schools. In and the also, where there are 100,000 Polish residents there is not a^ingk Government school for the Polish minority or even honrs allotted for teachmg the P * h language. . . T+ might also be mentioned that the minority receives no special Government funds for its own purposes, nor do the communal budgets make provision for meetmg the educational needs of the Polish m inority. As an illustration, we may mention the most recent cases affecting teachers:

t On March 26th icni, Marian Karaskiewicz, teacher at the Polish private school of Wendzin, German Silesia, was attacked at home by a group of twenty-five persons including the mayor, the ta x ™ llector and the postman, and forced to leave the village. He was assaulted several t,mes on the road Inconsequence, lessons could not be held that day in school As a result of a complaint made by the Union of Polish School Associations to the Oppeln Public Prosecutor Appendix 1) the case was on Sentember 8th, 1931, brought before the Kreuzburg Court and resulted in a light sentence of one month’s imprisonment being imposed on one of the culprits, and lesser sentences, with the option of a fine, on the others, including the mayor. Karaskiewicz was subsequently th reat« P * sion (letter of the Upper Silesian Oberprasident of April 4th, 1931, No. Q .F.IIL^M ^o dix 2)) and finally compelled, without any serious reasons being given, to leave (letter of the Upper Silesian Oberprasident of September 16th, 1931, No. O.P.III.3.M.1360).

2 In a letter of August 28th, 1931, No. H a.3.P.3.N.368 the Oppeln Provincial Government refused to give Augustin Wagner of Gross-Strehlitz, German Silesia, a school-teacher of German nationality a teaching permit (Unterrichtserlaubnisschem) because, at a meeting he criticised the pro- German activities of German teachers. The Union of School Associations sent a letter of protest, dated September 3rd, 1931, No. Ia.6292/31 (Appendix 3), to the Uper Silesian Oberprasident pointmg out that such action was contrary to Article 98 of the Geneva Convention, which apart from other conditions (which Wagner fulfilled), restricts the refusal of teaching permits solely to cases where the teacher takes advantage of his position to be actively disloyal to the State, which was not the case here.

n Rychel Stvp-Rekowski a n d W alasiak, teachers of German nationality, residing in Upper Silesia did not, though they applied on April 2nd, 1931, receive teaching permits; the Provincial Government is prepared to issue a permit valid for one locality only, which is contrary to the Ministerial Decree of June 29th, 1911, U.III.D.2.2400.U.III.

4. R vszard Goetze, a teacher of , district of Rosenberg, German Silesia, received a threaten- ine letter posted in Rosenberg on November 14th, 1930, readmg as follows: \o u dirty Pole, if you don’t leave Wysoka by January 1st, 1931, you’ll be a dead man. W ake up, Germany . To show that such proceedings are not exceptional, we would instance other cases which occurred in Prussia: s O n M ay 2 v d , 1931, J a n Bauer, a German national, teacher and director of the Bütow School Association, was re-arrested (he had previously been arrested and released after a few months without having been accused) and is still in prison pending investigation (Appendix 4). The court authorities, in conversations with his lawyer, first asserted that he had been arrested for perjury, but later gave other reasons for the arrest, without allowing the lawyer access to the evidence. The real reason for Bauer being twice arrested is a desire to prevent schools being opened in the province of Koslrn.

6. Boleslaw Kwella, a teacher who had not been interfered with while he was teaching in a school in the Grenzmark province, was, on being transferred to Koslin, ordered to quit Germany (Appendix 5 ), the reason being, as above, the desire to prevent any more Polish schools being opened in tna province.

7. M . Kabza a n d M.Szumocki, teachers, were refused teaching permits; the schools at Pschywors and Klonschen could, therefore, not be opened, although premises were already available and children registered. In opening schools, there is a noticeable tendency to protract decisions, mainly on the pretext that various repairs must absolutely be made to school premises. Again, in a few c a s e s w heie 0 schools in German Süesia were started in settlements remote from the villages proper, the autnonne protracted the formalities in order to gain time and start a German school m the same district neio the Polish. Naturally, no objection whatever can be taken to the opening of a German school, it is at any rate rather a characteristic fact. The following are further instances:

1. In Wollentschin, district of Rosenberg, German Silesia, a locality which had no school at. all, after an application had been lodged on October 20th, 1930, for permission to open aPolish sen , steps were taken to organise a German school, and only after the latter had been started on ece 22nd, 1930, was the Polish school allowed to open, though there was no reason whatever tor 10 up the permit.

2. In Jendrin, district of Gross-Strehlitz, German Silesia, after a Polish school had been opened on April 24th, 1930—in a place where, notwithstanding the applications made for a number ot y . by the commune, no school had ever existed—steps were taken to organise a Gennan national sc — 9 —

/Appendix 6). It was duly opened on January 22nd, 1931, for five children who had been attending school in the neighbouring locality of Rozmierka. Later, some of the thirty-eight children attending the Polish school were, by various means, enticed over to the German school.

3. Kutzoben, German Silesia. In confirming the plans of the school premises (A p p en d ix 6a.) conditions were imposed regarding the height of the rooms, etc., which had never previously been demanded in the case of other schools. In this way, the opening of the school has been delayed since May last until now.

4. W endzin, German Silesia. Here again, in a locality which had no school of any kind, the approval of the plans for the school building was held up for several months. The same applies to the opening of the private schools at Radlau and Klein-Lagiewnik. Quite unjustified stipulations were made regarding the premises and the issue of the permit thus delayed for several months. Some of the stipulations would not even apply to public schools and are contrary to the provisions of the Geneva Convention and the Decree of December 31st, 1839. Article 100, para­ graph 2, of the Geneva Convention was also quite arbitrarily interpreted by the Prussian authorities.

5. Oslau-Dmmrow. The Polish school temporarily located in the German school, was a little later given notice to leave. From July onwards, lessons were given in the open air. Subsequently, when the school settled in private premises, these were, after some months, pronounced unsuitable, though the ‘ ' Ordinance ’ ’ provides that private school premises need not comply with the requirements laid down for public schools. Classes were again held in the open air. When the Union of School Associations failed to obtain permission to teach in much better premises than those previously occupied, and, owing to the shortage of accommodation, started to build its own premises, the local mayor, Zimmer- mann, a notorious enemy of the Poles, seized every pretext to avoid appearing at the public surveyor’s inspection (see letter of August 23rd, 1931, from the Public Surveyor, Tietze, to the Union of Polish School Associations (Appendix y)).

6. Pschywors. The Provincial Government refuses to permit the opening of a Polish school.

7. Klonschen. The Provincial Government refuses to give permission for a Polish school to be opened in a building specially erected by the Poles for the purpose.

8. The Plattenheim Communal Council gave the Polish school notice to leave the premises of the German school as from December 1st, 1930. The school was, therefore, forced to remove to un­ suitable private premises, the road to which is long and tiring for the pupils. The Polish school contains thirty children who have to be taught by one teacher in a single room, while the German school has nineteen children, two teachers and two class rooms.

9. Similarly, the plans for a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau (Appetxdix 8), district of Marien- , have been lying since December 1930 until now with the Prussian authorities. Attacks of a quite definite character are frequently made on the schools. Among the German population and officials of the lower categories who are most frequently in contact with the village population a spirit of hostility towards Polish schools is steadily encouraged, finding expression in threats and observations of different kinds made to parents who send their children to those schools. Naturally, in so acting, the persons referred to do not always definitely say that various privileges, such as pensions, tax rebates, bank credits, etc., depend on their not sending children to the Polish school, but it is nevertheless made perfectly clear what Poles stand to gain if their children are educated at German schools. In the case of threats made against the more well-to-do Poles — e.g., independent farmers — the consequences prophesied do not always materialise, but labourers who depend on their employers often do lose their jobs in the end.

1. MiiUmen, German Silesia. On the night of July 20th, 1931, shots were fired at the Polish school (Appendix 9).

2. A t Wollentschin, German Silesia, on March n th , 1931, a German teacher called Tschauder, at a gathering held after the Communal Council’s meeting, abused the Poles and then told M. Duda, whose son was standing by: “ W hat a pity the boy has to go to the Polish school; it’s his father’s fault.” To show that the occurrences in German Silesia are not exceptional, but form part of a regular system which is more or less strictly observed, we may mention cases which occured in other districts nf tkllSpa P°Pl^ated by large groups of the Polish minority and which are highly typical of the attitude 0 e German public and the German authorities towards the problem of minority schools.

Bfit3 / SePtember 7th, 193°. a social entertainment organised at Oslau-Darnerow , district of un h°'Vk *^1C schoolchildren of that locality, and of Bemsdorf and Grôbenzin, was broken whr, h ai™ a * ' n village> in forty-two motor-cars, of 300 members of the Stahl helm (Appendix 10), , ulrfaîenetl tl}e l'ves and property of members of the Polish minority, burst forcibly into houses, s e e furniture of the Polish school, etc. The police stood idly by and no proceedings were — 10 — taken either by the Public Prosecutor or the Landrat against the culprits. At a meeting of the Stahl- helm on September 28th, 1930, at Schlawe, thanks were tendered to the assailants for breaking up the party.

4. On the night of October 29th, 1930, an attack was made on the school premises at N ikolaiken the school furniture destroyed, as well as the adjacent apartm ent of the owner of theprem ises, M.Osfoski! In this case, the court sentenced the chief culprits to imprisonment or payment of a fine.

5. Preussenfeld. In the autum n of 1929, M. Weise, the lessee of the Government estate, dismissed thirteen labourers for, as he openly admitted, sending their children to the Polish school. Several of these labourers had in 1926 been awarded certificates by the Schneidemühl Chamber of Agriculture in acknowledgment of their long and faithful service on one estate. Some of the discharged labourers had to leave Preussenfeld for lack of means of existence there.

6. Oslau-Dattterow. In July 1930, M. Zimmermann, forestwarden and mayor, dismissed the labourers Jan Zaborowski and Pawel Pela, promising on July 27th to withdraw the notice of dismissal if their children would attend the German school, and if they agitated against the Polish school.

7. Stanislewo. On May n th , 1931, the mayor of this village explained to the labourer Piotr Zremba that he could not receive unemployment benefit if he sent his children to the Polish school.

8. Braunswalde. Ever since the Polish school was opened, the policeman Packmohr has victimised the Polish family Bartnikow for giving the school accommodation in their house.

9. Kôn.-Neudorf. The policeman Prange, and the teacher Gabriel advised Redmer, a Pole, and his wife, not to send their children to the Polish school.

10. Nikolaiken. Jôzef Pakalski, labourer, was dismissed from his job the moment he sent his children to the Polish school.

11. Neu-Kaletke. M. von Briihl, Landrat of Allenstein, advised the villagers Agusta and Anna Surrey, Michal and M arja Grabowska, who had lost their property by fire, not to send their children to the Polish school, promising them in return cheap credits.

12. Skajbotten. In the beginning of February 1931, the teacher Ewald Ludwig dissuaded children, Jadwiga Baranôwna among others, from attending the Polish school and influenced parents (Ap­ pendix 10a.) — e.g., Jan and M arja Gnatowski and Franciszek Makolla — to send their children to the German school. A complaint about this case was made to the Prussian Minister of Education by the Union of Polish School Associations.

13. G rôbenzin. During a school inspection held on December 9th, 1930, when M. Nowak of Biitow, School Inspector, in reply to the question: " W hat kind of child are you ”, received the answer: " A Polish child ”, he ordered the children to reply “ A German child ", since in Germany all children were “ German ” (Appendix 11).

14. On September 8th, 1930, M. Zimmermann, mayor and forestwarden of Oslau-Danterow, at­ tacked Teofil Cysewski a deaf mute, in the street and thrashed him (Cysewski had, he said, insulted Mme. Zimmermann), and only released him when a crowd of people gathered round, attracted by the victim's cries. Proceedings were taken against the Cysewski family for insulting Zimmermann and causing a disturbance. The Lauenburg Court in December 1930 sentenced five people to several weeks' imprisonment. On March 16th, 1931, the Stolp District Court on appeal sentenced the five ac­ cused to three weeks' imprisonment. Actually, this case was intended to compromise the existence of the Polish school in this locality. We cite the above incident as typical of the tactics adopted towards the Polish minority of exag­ gerating essentially trivial incidents to the proportions of a major political process.

15. On September 18th, 1930, bottles and stones were thrown at the premises of the Polish school in G rôbenzin, the windows being smashed and the furniture damaged. The culprits were not discovered.

16. On June 12th, 1931, stones were thrown at the Polish school at B ernsdorf without the culprits being discovered.

17. Bernard Kulas and Michal Bambynek, forest labourers of G rôbenzin, were dismissed from their employment for sending their children to the Polish school (Appendix 12).

18. Pawel Gutzner, of G rôbenzin, struck Feliks Pahlberg, a pupil of the Polish school, for talking Polish to other children (Appendix 12a).

19. On June 12th, 1931, the children of the Polish school at Gross-Friedensberg, district of Flatow, when returning from a party, were attacked by a band of Nationalists. The Flatow Landratsamt dismissed the incident as insignificant.

20. Labourers at K ro ja n ke, district of Flatow, who had expressed the intention of sending their children to the Polish school were dismissed by their employers but when they said they would leave their children in the German school were re-engaged. — II —

21. At the end of 1930, the commune of Steinau, district of Flatow, discharged the village constable pufaJ because he had sent his grandson to the Polish school.

22. A proclamation entitled “ Polish Minority Schools in the District of Bütow ” (Appendix 13), rinted anonymously in , put a false emphasis on the material disadvantages of sending children to Polish schools.

In concluding the above section, we would cite a characteristic statement by the Governor of U pper Silesia in a letter dated April 7th, 1931, No. O.P.3.M.490:

“ Education in a German public elementary school must, in principle, be regarded as the rule and the education of children of German nationals in a private school as the exception. ”

It is perfectly clear from the above that, despite the various claims made for German minorities-— i p th a t German children in any other country, Poland, , Roumania, Yugoslavia, Latvia or Estonia should be taught in their own language—the German authorities refuse to admit that Polish children in Germany have the same right.

Kindergarten Training School at Allenstein. About the end of 1929, the Union of Polish School Associations asked for permission to organise a Polish kindergarten training school at Allenstein. As the result of prolonged negotiations, and after the German authorities had proposed the organisation of a mixed training school under German management, no permit was granted, but a German organisation was allowed to open a German kindergarten training school at Allenstein (Appendix 14).

Extension Schools. On the basis of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention, the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany instructed the School Association of German Silesia to apply for the opening of extension schools (Fordersckulen) (Appendix 15). In letters dated June 20th, 1930, and August 2nd, 1930, the Oppeln Provincial Government refused to permit these schools to be opened. In a letter dated September 2nd, 1930, to the Regierungspràsident at Oppeln the Union of Polish School Associations pointed out that Article 115 of the Geneva Convention authorised the Polish minority in German Silesia to open private Polish extension schools. This letter was submitted to the Oberregierungs- prâsident for a decision. In reply to a reminder dated March 18th, 1931, by the Union of School Associa­ tions the Oberregierungspràsident, after a year’s interval, finally took the view, in a letter dated March 30th, 1931, that Article 115 of the Geneva Convention did authorise the Polish minority in German Silesia to open and conduct private Polish extension schools. Simultaneously, however, he cut down the curriculum of such schools to the level of Fordersckulen, which had already been authorised by the Ministry in districts not covered by the Geneva Convention. In a letter dated April 18th, 1931, the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany refused to agree to the idea of Fordersckulen and stated that in German Silesia it would insist on being allowed to open the private Polish extension schools (Fortbildungsschulen) authorised by Article 115 of the Geneva Convention.

In other parts of Prussia, the Polish minority was even less fortunate in the question of extension classes. On August 31st, 1929, already, the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany had asked for permission to open Polish rural extension classes and subm itted a scheme for theseclasses to the Prussian Ministry of Education and to the Schneidemühl, Kôslin, Allenstein and Marienwerder Provincial Governments (Appendix 15a.). On November 2nd, 1929, a meeting was held at the Pmssian Ministry of Education, attended by representatives of the Prussian Government and the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, at which the question of opening these classes was discussed at length. The Ministry took the view that these classes did not come under the Ordinance, but that permission might be given to conduct Fordersckulen—that is, classes intended to raise the general level of the pupils.

The Union of Polish School Associations in Germany sent further letters on the question, dated October 5th, 1929, to the Ministry of Education, and October 18th, 1929, to the Prussian Ministry of Agriculture.

The Allenstein, Marienwerder and Koslin Provincial Governments refused to permit these classes to be opened on the ground that, without a prior decision by the Ministry, they could not decide the question. In a letter of September 12th, 1930, to the Ministry of Education, the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany complained of the attitude taken by the above authorities, pointing out that the question had been settled at the meeting of November 2nd, 1929, and that no special permit from the Ministry was needed to start these classes.

At a meeting held at the Ministry on March 13th, 1931, the Ministry, with a view to restricting the curriculum of extension schools, asked for a fresh scheme to be submitted, and refused to allow the lessons in these schools to be given by teachers of Polish nationality. The representative of the — 12 —

Union objected, giving reasons for his attitude, and asked for a decision by the Minister. This request was, further, specially conveyed in a letter from the Union to the Prussian Ministry of Education dated April 18th, 1931. The Schneidemühl Provincial Government was the only one to permit these Fordersckulen to be opened, and in that province the classes were started and conducted according to the scheme submitted. As a result of the attitude taken by the Prussian Government representatives at the m eeting of March 13th, 1931, the Provincial Government, however, first suspended the classes an ! then by a letter of September 23rd, 1931, finally closed them down. In amplification of our statem ents we attach No. 7 of the KuUurwehr (Appendix ig ), o n page 2% of which there is an article by M. Jan Skala, entitled " The Minorities’ Policy of the " containing interesting data regarding minority schools, together with the following particulars. According to German statistics (Statistisches Jahrbuch für den Freistaat Preussen, Vol. 27, ig« page 44) the number of Polish children between six and fourteen years of age—that is, of school age— is as follows: U pper S ilesia...... 83,528 E ast P ru s s ia ...... 14,829 W estphalia and R hineland...... 10,740 Grenzmark and ...... 2,787 ...... 591 Prussian L u s a tia ...... 542 Total 112,747 not counting other Prussian districts not specially mentioned. Of these, the numbers attending Polish schools amount to: 1. Upper Silesia, with 83,528 children—341 at Polish public and 82 at private schools, making 423 or 0.5 per cent, as compared with 83,105 or 99.5 per cent of Polish children attending Germaii schools; 2. East Prussia, with 14,829 children—399 or 2.7 per cent attending Polish private schools, as compared with 14,430 or 97.3 per cent of Polish children attending German schools; 3. Grenzmark, with 2,787 children—1,380 or 49.5 per cent attending Polish private schools, as compared with 1,407 or 51.5 per cent of Polish children attending German schools; 4. In W estphalia and the , Lower Silesia and Prussian Lusatia, all the Polish children, that is 100 per cent, attend German schools. The above shows that, of the 112,747 Polish children in the above districts, only 2,202 or 1.9 per cent of the total attend Polish schools, while 98.1 per cent receive no teaching in their native language.

Local Go v e r n m e n t A dministration . It is only natural that, at the communal elections, members of thePolish m inority stand as candidates and are duly elected. The German authorities, accordingly, do their best to diminish the number of seats thus obtained by representatives of the Polish minority by applying legal provisions to the prejudice of the minority. For instance, the elections in German Silesia, about which a complaint was at the time lodged with the President of the Mixed Commission, clearly proved that the Polish minority had been unjustifiably victimised by the German authorities. Trifling excuses were made for not confirming the elections of Polish . At Szychowice, the election of Mayor Krybus was not confirmed, ostensibly because he was mentally deficient. The German doctor discovered this defect by asking him how many kilo­ metres it was from Kowno to Ratibor, a question which the Polish mayor could not answer. At Turze-Wellendorf, the election of Mayor Rôzga was not confirmed for the alleged reason that he was physically unfit (one of his feet was five centimetres too short, he was a disabled ex-serviceman and not a good Catholic). In his place, the authorities nominated a new mayor who was a German and had only one arm. Polish candidates were not confirmed in other cases because they openly admitted their pro- Polish sentiments. Such victimisation on the part of the German authorities obviously reacts undesir­ ably on the life of the m inority, as only a few of the Polish mayors and councillors elected actually take up office; moreover, it greatly weakens the interest taken by the Polish population in the communal electio n s.

T h e Min o r it y a n d E l e c t io n s t o t h e L e g is l a t u r e . The co-ordinated efforts of the German population assisted by the clergy, who are hostile to the Polish minority, greatly hamper Poles from giving free expression to their opinions at election time. Simultaneously with the political and economic pressure directed against the minority, at election time German activist organisations conduct a campaign of terrorism which takes the form of menaces directed against Poles or of actual cases of Poles being more or less severely thrashed. As an illustration, we may describe the attkude observed towards the Polish minority in the other districts populated by it: On September 10th, 1930, an election meeting was to be held by the Polish People's Party in the village of D am sdorf, district of Bütow, at which the Rev. Dr. Domanski was to speak. The meeting — 13 — vas broken up by some dozens of Hitlerites, specially introduced for the occasion. Subsequently, these Hitlerites attacked the Poles on their way home and in the course of the ensuing fight, several individuals were severely wounded. During the meeting, the police stood idly by and the culprits were not subsequently discovered.

G ermanisation o f P e r s o n a l a n d P la c e N a m e s .

In German Silesia it is often very difficult to secure the registration by the civil authorities of polish Christian names. Objections were made to registering the name of Jacek because this was the name of a Polish saint. I n order to transform as quickly as possible the external aspect of German Silesia, the authorities g erm a n ise Polish place names. The fortnightly official organ of the Upper Silesia Provincial Government, D ie Provinz Ober- schlesien, in No. 46 of 1930, inserted an article dealing with the necessity for germanising Polish place names in Upper Silesia. Another article on the same question appeared in No. 2 of the above-mentioned fortnightly for June 15th, 1931, in which the author noted with satisfaction that not only had the article been warmly welcomed by the German Press and by the political leaders of all German parties in Upper Silesia, but that a concrete result had been obtained—the village of “ Przysieka ” (German form “ Przyschetz ”) in the district of Oppeln had been changed to “ Lichtenwalde ”. “Nedza”, a locality in the district of Ratibor had been transformed into “ Buclienau ” and “ Grzegorzowice ” in the same district, transliterated in German as “ Grzegorzowitz ”, had been changed to “ Gregors- dorf In the same article, the writer made a number of proposals for the renaming of other localities with Polish names, and this is being fairly speedily carried out. This of old Polish names is proceeding systematically in other parts of Prussia also. Special energy has recently been shown in East Prussia, especially in the district of Allenstein in localities populated by Poles of the Lutheran faith. For instance, in September 1931, in the single district of Neidenburg, the names of the follow­ ing localities, the Polish appellations of which had already been distorted by a German transliteration, have been changed into purely German words— e.g., “ Wychrowitz ” into “ Windenau ”, "Adlig Kamiontken ” into " Steinfelde ”, " Piotrowitz ” into " Gross-Petersdorf ”, “ Pointken ” into “ Freitagsdorf To show the extent to which German administrative departments will go in eradicat­ ing or removing Polish names, take the case of the attem pt made to germanise the purely Polish name of the village of Zakrzewo, district of Flatow. W hen the Polish population of this village, whose racial consciousness is highly developed, successfully repulsed the attem pt of the authorities to impose on the village a German name, the latter, to punish the population, changed the name of the railway station from “ Zakrzewo '' to “ Buschdorf ”. It is an everyday occurrence also for Poles to have, or to be urged to have, their Polish surnames germanised. Similarly, and for the same purpose, all relics and traces in Silesia of Polish nationality are destroy­ ed. An instance in point, one which caused a great sensation in the Press, was the demolition at Oppeln of the castle of the Piasts, the first royal dynasty to occupy the Polish throne.

Intellectual L i f e .

(a) Hiring of Halls for Polish Meetings. Various kinds of difficulties are encountered in hiring halls for Polish meetings held to promote intellectual activities. The German population threaten to boycott the owners of halls if they lease them for Polish gatherings. In cases where an economic boycott is ineffective, the members of German organisations go so fa r as to th re a te n th e pro p rieto rs of th e halls. N atu rally , such a sta te of affairs seriously handicaps the development of the intellectual life of the Polish minority which is thus unable to hold any meetings. In German Silesia, there are even frequent cases of halls being maliciously refused at the last moment after the Polish organisations have already made all the arrangements for holding their meetings. For instance, on November 21st, 1930, the landlord of the " Gasthaus zur Neuen W elt ”, Gleiwitz, refused to lease a hall to the Polish Union of Choral Societies of German Silesia for a concert, on the pretext that the German societies had threatened to boycott him if he leased it to the Poles. Another case occurred in Cosel, where the landlord of the “ Schiitzenhaus” inn, after first agreeing, later refused to lease a hall for a “ Mothers’ Day His refusal was due to the German organisations and societies threatening that they would boycott him and take direct action if he gave the hall to the members of the Polish minority. The Town Council of Guttentag refused to lease a public hall to the Associa­ tion of Poles for an educational function, on the ground that the hall was intended solely for exhibiting moving pictures. German organisations, nevertheless, use the hall freely for holding concerts. Even the Polish Gymnastic Society " Sokôl ” of , Schôneberg Section, which for nearly ten years had used the gymnasium of the municipal school at 10 to 12 Berchtesgadner Street for ■ts weekly practices, was given notice to leave as from September 12th, 1931, by the Frie- jtenau Bezirksamt. This occurred at a moment when the former rector of the school had been replaced y a new man, called Balik, from Upper Silesia, who belonged to the Nationalist Society “ Bund der , . ,, nw ^ipcior ” All further efforts made by the Committee of the Schôneberg Section the jurisdiction of the Friedenau Town Councü were fruitless^ instance Qf the way in which the German authorities interpret in their own districts the official Government policy about the community of intellectual interests was the banning in Stuhm of the celebration arranged for the anniversary of the ‘ Constitution of May 3rd This, as 11 Vnrvuzn is a national holiday which has no political associations whatsoever. At the last mo­ ment on May 1st 1931, the Gem an police forbade the procession which the Polish minor ty had already organised, basing their action on paragraph 1, section 4, of the Presidential Decree of March 28th IQ31, regarding the suppression of political offences. When the prohibition was issued, articles appeared in the German Press approvmg the act» of the police and containing chauvinist attacks on the Polish minority.

(b) Theatres (Performances, Subsidies, Attacks). The Poles in German Silesia have an innate love for music and song and feel the lack of Polish theatrical performances In view of their material circumstances, however, they can neither found ï e ï own theatre^nor hivite Polish actors very often to give performances The German population receiveslmmense sums from the Government, from the Province and from the communal authorities to subsidise its theatres Only once, after the memorable incidents at Oppeln did the Polish mmonty in ^ rm a n Silesia receive a Government subsidy for theatrical purposes; in spite of the promises given by theTppeln Provincial Government, no further subsidies have been received. The attitude taken by the municipal authorities of GermaniSilesiaV ^ ^ ^ ^ X Ï k W subsidising a Polish theatre is definitely negative. Recently, the School Association wrote asking E S i t L ^

Polish intellectual activities in this sphere also. <( 1 On December 2nd, 1930, a rehearsal was being held by the Polish players of the Community of Mary ” in Zdzui’s Hotel, Boiko. During the rehearsal a couple of individuals burst into the room and ^routec? sothat it was impossible to proceed quietly with the ret»eareaL Subscquer^ly. the assailants told the landlord: “ If you let the Poles use the room, you can look out tor yourseii . On December sth Zdzuj said that he could not let the “ Community of Mary have the room again as the members’ of the “ Landesschützen-Verband ” and the German Choral Society had told S r h e w ouldTboycotted if he did so. He refused to give the names of the members who had threatened him as he feared their vengeance. 2 It might be well to point out that, in the attack on the Polish players at Goslawice Novem­ ber ï th iqio an active and prominent part was taken by the German schoo teacher Ploch who openly told the daughter of the hotel proprietor : “ Why do you let the^Poles m o e roorn^ is a Polish inn evidently. Look out; there won’t be a whole window-pane left to-night. Mme tzecn would have done better to spit on the d - Poles He then commended the landlord of another m for refusing to give the Poles a room.

(c) Use of the and Interference with Manifestations of Religious Sentiment. The Geneva Convention guaranteed the Polish minority the free use of its> ™°ther ch-uSared these provisions have remained a dead letter. Dr. B. Openkowski in a ^"esofarticles w ^ h in the Polish Press in Germany, gave a concise picture of the met^ " a^optf {^ ^cial development judicial authorities to restrict the rights of the Polish minority m ^ n n an y to free raci^ dewiop^ ^ and particularly to the use of their mother tongue in schools in local admmistration^a .fl courts. We annex a series of these articles which appeared in Nos. 72, 73, 74 and 75 of the A Gazette for March 1931 (A ppendix 16 ). . , pntailine In a series of petitions to the League Council, we reported instances of victimisation at the hands of the authorities and the public; we would now cite the followi g >P incidents which have occured recently in this connection. I On October 26th, 1930, at Gross-Strehlitz, a few members of the Polish minority who ’we humming the song" Oj, i w polu jezioro” were assaulted by a group of Nationalists, one of w ?he e x - ^ li“ n ? n Rudolf Rudner L i his brother, as weU as a certain Kopy took. armed wtth a revolver an d forks. 2, On December 9th, 1930, four members of the Polish minority carriage from Beuthen. The fact that they were conversing in Polish attract^ the attent other German passengers to such a degree that at Mikultzschutz Station a crow^ ga ere ^ ouy g0 to as they were leaving and shouted “ D— Polish ‘ hanaks , if you must talk P , y Poland; there’s nothing for you here

V Note by the Secretariat — The petitioners transmitted articles contained in Nos, 71, 72 and 73 — i5 —

O In Ratibor, there is a Polish kindergarten, conducted until recently by Mile. Anna Grze- a szczykowna, whose duties in this connection exposed her to threats and attacks from the Germans. On November 22nd, 1930, having been assailed by a number of youths with shouts of “ W hat does the d— Pole want here? Let her go to ”, Mlle. Grzegoszczykôwna asked the Ratibor police for protection. After hearing the complaint, the police officer replied with a sneer that he could give h e r no help and only on her insisting did he promise to send a policeman from time to time to the kindergarten.

4 . Wilhelm Jarasz, an official of the Guttentag Association of Poles, had gone to Zwoos to in- ypstieate the complaints of subscribers to th eNowiny Codzienny, published in Oppeln, that the news­ paper was not being regularly delivered by the postmaster Leschik in Zwoos. During a conversation i n the post office premises, he was insulted by the postmaster’s wife with the words "Y ou d— Pole, vou’d give orders here and threaten to complain about us, would you! ” She then proceeded to incite Lr husband, saying “ Are you going to stand this nonsense from such a Polish blackguard; why don’t you throw him out? ” Only his tactful behaviour saved M. Jarasz from being assaulted and having his motor-cycle smashed.

The Polish minority in other is similarly treated. As an instance, we wTould revert to past history and cite a case which occurred in 1922 and is highly characteristic, even of present- day sentiment.

In Naglady (Allenstein district) the schoolteacher Kater hung a board with the inscription “ Pol­ lack ” round the neck of children who spoke Polish. It was the duty of a child so decorated to catch another child speaking Polish in school and pass the board to him. Any child who at the end of the week was in possession of the board received corporal punishment, the severity of which depended on the length of time he had carried the board. The authenticity of the above is confirmed in No. 13 of the Amtliches Schulblatt für den Regierungs- hezirk Allenstein, for June 15th, 1926.

The public use of Polish, even in conversations between private individuals, is a risky m atter in other parts of Germany also. In consequence of the systematic agitation of various Nationalist asso­ ciations and the Press, Germans accost people speaking Polish and point out to them, frequently in a brutal manner, that they should not speak Polish. Such incidents occur in public places also, as, for instance, in cafés, trams, trains, etc., in the case of persons reading Polish papers and frequently end in their being assaulted. As an illustration we may mention a typical incident which occurred in 1927 in Wanne-Eickel. A Polish Catholic Young Men’s Sports Club applied to the Town Council for permission to hold a sports practice on one of the local grounds. After a good deal of delay, the Council agreed to the request on condition that the young Poles would not talk Polish on the sports ground. W hen the minority Press took up the question, the Wanne-Eickel Town Council withdrew the stipulation, but some weeks later the young members of the club were dismissed from their employment, the reason given being “ the prevailing industrial depression It is virtually impossible to use the Polish language in Government offices, courts, etc., outside German Silesia, as a request for an interpreter leaves the party open to a reproach of disloyalty.

3. In January 1929, the and Berlin Schulkollegium refused to give permission for Polish singing to be taught in the schools of the Polish Association “ Oswiata ”.

4. On September 13th, 1930, Paul Gutzner, a German of Grôbenzin, struck a Polish child in a field with his stick for singing Polish songs along with other children. The Bütow Court fined Gutzner 20 marks, a verdict which speaks for itself and requires no comment.

The position in regard to our religion is no whit better. One case was the subject of a special petition to the League Council and referred to the obstacles put in the way of pilgrimages to Czesto- chowo (document C. 28. 1929.1, of October 23rd, 1928). We give herewith other still more drastic instances of the extremely brutal form which the hostility towards us assum es:

1. In the Rozbark quarter of Beuthen, some dozen members of German activist associations broke up a religious meeting, mainly attended by unmarried women and children, three of whom fainted under th e ill-treatm en t.

2. In 1929, a religious meeting at Alt-Cosel was disturbed during the course of an address on the life of St. Francis of Assisi.

3- In the church of St. Andrew at Hindenburg, there has been a protracted dispute about remov­ ing an image of the Czestochowa Mother of God, which the population had with great solemnity brought from Czestochowa and placed in the church. The Germans talked sneeringly of the “ black Mother of God and wanted to remove it forcibly from the church, for the sole reason that it came from Poland. They were only prevented from doing so by the determined attitude of the Polish parishioners. This shows the extent to which chauvinism has grown in German Silesia when it dares to interfere even with the most sacred religious sentiments of the Polish population. — i6 —

W e are, in principle, loath to discuss the sorry part played by the clergy in agitating against the Polish minority. We will only state that, entirely oblivious of their pastoral obligations, the local clergy suppress Polish services in the churches and give no religious instruction or preparation for com­ munion in the Polish language. At election times, the clergy take an active part in the campaign' and bitterly oppose, in the pulpit and at election meetings, the Polish political parties. The confidence of the Polish population in the clergy is shattered Mention should be made of the disputes between Polish parishioners and their priests of German nationality, due to the discrimination shown towards the Polish minority in regard to the numbe of services at which a sermon is preached and confession administered in the Polish language. In the parish of St. Sebastian (Berlin-Wedding), for instance, only four Polish services are held yearly. The requests of the Polish parishioners’ group on the Parish Committee to have a Polish­ speaking priest appointed to the Parish led to nothing. Similarly, appeals on the question to the See of Berlin are rejected. In the neighbouring parish of St. Joseph, the last Polish priest held office somi years before the war. In the parish of St. Paul (Berlin-Moabit), services for Poles are only held once a month. After prolonged efforts, the local Poles succeeded in getting the bishop to order Polish services to be held once fortnightly, but the parish priest, Father Kaiser of the , ignores his superior’s order and continues to solemnise the service only once a month, without being called to account. The same priest, in November 1929, refused to dedicate the Kindergarten of the Polish School Association “ Oswiata ”, ostensibly because this body conducted pro-Polish propaganda. On May 18th, 1930, Father Strzybny of Beuthen (Rozbark) refused to bless the flag of the Polish Scouts, intimating his decision at the last moment only, so that the Scouts who had arranged the ser­ vice could not protest to the higher authorities.

E conom ic L i f e . (a) Land Settlement. The ways and means employed by the Prussian authorities to prevent members of the minority purchasing immovable property and the manner in which efforts are made to diminish Polish hold­ ings are described in our petition to the League of Nations dated June 4th, 1929 (document C.491. 1929.I). Our petition resulted in a resolution being adopted by the Council; the Council noted the statement of the German Government that the Decree regarding the purchase of land and immovable property and debarring members of the minority had been altered only so far as German Silesia was concerned. It accordingly remained in force in other parts of Prussia. As regards German Silesia, while a change was made in the wording of the Decree, the actual practice of the authorities continued to coincide with the provisions previously in force. The present aspect of the policy of land settlement is described in an article contained in the attached No. 7 of the Kulturwehr (Appendix2o), fo r J u ly 1931, e n title d “ P ru ssia n C olonisation Policy in Relation to the National Minorities ”, to which we beg to refer. Supplementary to this article, we annex for purposes of illustration a copy of a court verdict (Appendix iy), dated March 13th, 1931, the explanatory part of which gives a typical interpretation of Article 109 of the German Constitution regarding the equality of all subjects in the eyes of the law. The following are the facts of the case: In the autumn of 1929, M. Saenger, inn proprietor and settler, leased his allotment to a Pole, D yw el, of Zakrzewo and applied to the Landratsam t for the transfer to be confirmed. TheFlatow Landrat, in a confidential letter No. 151, of December 30th, 1929, replied that the Prussian M inister of Agriculture, Estates and Forests had ordered the property to be bought up by the Schneidemuhl Colonisation Office. M. Jan Baczewski, former Deputy in the Prussian Diet, acting as Saenger’s attorney, applied to the Flatow Court, which, at its session of March 7th, 1930, dismissed the case. On appeal to the Schneide- miihl D istrict Court on March 13th, 1931, the case was again lost. The ground on which M. Baczewski denied the Schneidemühl Colonisation Office’s right of purchase was that this was a personal pre­ rogative of the defunct Colonisation Commission which had been transferred to no one, that the Law o n Rentengüter was contrary to Article 109 of the German Constitution and to public policy and, on the basis of paragraph 138 of the German Civil Code and Article 152 of the Constitution, should not be applied. The court justified its rejection of the appeal by the argument that, in its opinion, it was the Prus­ sian State which held the right of purchase and, as regards the Constitution, accepted the familiar commentary of Professor Anschtitz to Article 109, that the expression “ All Germans are equal before th e law ” (Allé Deutschen sind v o r dem Gesetze gleich) d id n ot mean that there was a single law for ev ery o n e (gleiches Recht für alle). In the course of the more minute explanations given, the court considered that the Law on Rentengüter d id n ot conflict with Article 109 of the German Constitution. T h e m ost curious and the m ost characteristic of the grounds advanced was that transactions based on the right of purchase were n ot c o n tra ry to public policy, as their purpose was to keep property in German hands. The Prussian court of law thus confirmed that equality of rights, in the sense of the article of the Constitution, did not exist if it were a case of applying the provisions to subjects of other than German race. — 17 —

This policy of land settlem ent is becoming more intense every year. It is carried out by colonis- jn? institutions and organisations of a public character in which the State and the local administration 're represented. Private settlers (allotment holders) merely act as intermediaries, and the whole work d out w ith the collaboration and under the dose direction of the State Land Settlem ent Offices KidturanU). Allotment schemes are drawn up by the Provincial Land Settlement Office (L - jadturamt). The whole movement is openly and undisguisedly anti-Polish in tendency. In districts which are thickly populated by Poles (German Silesia, Flatow, Bomst, Meseritz, Bütow and Lauenbuig) particular energy is displayed. Parcellation is applied first of all to properties in or near villages inhabited by large numbers of Poles. Latterly, for instance, steps have been taken to i vide up the State domains, the general rule observed being that separate properties are allotted to people of one faith and Protestant and Catholic settlements are formed. This does not apply, how­ ever, to the residents of the locality in question who m ay, irrespective of their religious beliefs, purchase .hole settlements or as much land as will enable them to farm their holdings in a rational manner. In actual practice, the Allotment Department informs applicants belonging to the local population and members of the Polish m inority that it can only make allotments to Protestants. This is, of course, merely a pretext, because even in settlements which are intended for Catholics Poles get no land either. For instance, hitherto, not a single Pole has obtained an allotment on any estates in theGrenzmark or Pomerelia Provinces.

Since the bulk of the persons employed in the Government estates in border territory are Poles, allotment is so carried out as to prevent them acquiring property or remaining in that locality. They are thus forced to leave the district and emigrate. The Polish element is, accordingly, doubly weakened ^quantitatively and relatively. Polish families are lost and German settlers come in to take their places. This is bow the policy of land settlement has been applied to the Polish minority for dozens of years past. v There is no provision in the German law and decrees which makes purchases of land conditional on political considerations (e.g., nationality), and yet in the case of all transactions for lots exceeding five hectares the administrative authorities must give permission for the transfer. Obviously, these authorities, on various pretexts, put obstacles in the way of members of the Polish minority and make it impossible for them to purchase land, basing their action on the provisions of the law regarding “ free discretion " and giving no reasons. We may cite in illustration two cases from Northern Prussia. The estate of Grossdammer, district of Meseritz, was parcelled out in the autumn of 1929 by the firm of Levy, of a.W ., which, in due notarial form, sold several hundred acres of land to sixteen Poles, German nationals. The German Press immediately raised the alarm and the authorities (doubtless by methods best known to them) prevailed on the proprietors to have the contracts with the members of the Polish minority cancelled and the land sold to Germans. In the district of Bomst, the Woynovo estate was partially divided up and Poles from the neigh­ bouring Neukramzig bought about two hundred acres. The German Press again raised a great alarm, consultations were held by the authorities and, as a result, the further purchases contemplated were stopped. Woynovo has now been bought, under the pressure of public opinion (presumably on official orders), by the Schneidemtihl Land Settlement Office (Grenzmark Siedlung), which is allotting it to Germans.

(b) Banks. The functioning of economic institutions is also systematically restricted. A whole series of facts proves that, in this sphere also, the Prussian authorities have made it their aim to obstruct develop­ ment by victimising the Polish minority. The hostile section of the German population takes an active part in victimising and terrorising business institutions. We may cite the following examples:

1. At midnight on November 29th, 1930, two large panes of glass and their frames were smashed at the People's Bank, Gross-Strehlitz. As members of the minority ascertained immediately after ;!ie incident, the culprits, numbering about ten, hid in a dark side street and, a highly characteristic feet, they all wore Stahlhelm badges. We also found out that they did not belong to the local group hut had been brought for the purpose from the surrounding district.

2. On December 2nd, 1930, at 12.35 a.m. several window panes in the apartm ent of M. Gadzinski, bank manager, Gleiwitz, were smashed by large stones.

3- On November 30th, 1930, a procession of several thousand proceeded to the People’s Bank at 53. Wilhelmstrasse, Gleiwitz, and with shouts and threats directed at the members of the minority, exclaimed: “ D— Poles, we’ll teach you a lesson shortly

, 4- On November 16th, 1930, while a general meeting of the " Rolnik ” Agricultural Society of Gross-Strehlitz was being held at the People’s Bank, a huge stone was thrown which very nearly wounded Piotr Glowan, a farmer of Centawa. 2 I 5 - On the night of December 24th, 1928, an explosive bomb was placed under the People’s Bank and fired, causing considerable damage and destroying entirely a window and part of the wall. 6. On July 1st, 1929, Dr. Vieweger, the mayor of Rosenberg, called upon M. Rychd, the manager of the Rosenberg People’s Bank, to remove the bank’s signboard with Polish lettering. ' 7. On November 27th, 1930, the People’s Bank, Rosenberg, received a menacing letter ordering the manager to leave Rosenberg within two days. Letters with similar threats were frequently received in previous years also.

8. On November 23rd, 1930, window panes were smashed in the apartm ent of M. Malczewski manager of the People’s Bank, Ratibor.

9. On June 24th, 1930, a certain Maron threw a stone weighing three pounds into the apartment of M. Suchanek, cashier of the People’s Bank, Rosenberg. The Kreuzburg Justices of the Peace fined Maron thirty marks, the verdict stating: “ We could not impose the severe sentence demanded by the Public Prosecutor, seeing that our com patriots in U pper Silesia are suffering from the terrorism practised by the Polish authorities and population and are literally helpless. ”

10. The Polish Hostel in Oppeln has frequently been attacked by Germans. For instance, the illuminated sign containing a Polish inscription was smashed on the first occasion on October 10th, 1930, again on April 29th, 1931, and finally on October 25th, 1931. The window panes of the hostel have also been frequently broken. Furthermore, the director and manager of the Polish Hostel have twice received threatening letters.

11. In January 1930, the Ratibor Agricultural Sodety “ Rolnik ”, which had leased storage premises from M. Skorka, hotd proprietor at Bauerwitz, was at the last moment refused the use of these premises owing to pressure exerted by the mayor of Bauerwitz and the Landrat of the district of Leobschütz. As regards other districts in Prussia, we may cite the following instances: 1. The People's Bank, Flatow, wrote on August 4th, 1931, No. 493/31, to the Schneidemiihl branch of the Reichsbank and asked for permission to buy and sell Polish currency. The branch applied in its turn to the Foreign Exchange Department of the Stettin Landesfinanzamt. In a letter No. 114/31 of August 8th, 1931, the President of this body replied that the Reichsbank should decide the question itself, but that, in view of the political complexion of the Board of the People’s Bank, the application should be refused. Accordingly, the Schneidemiihl branch of the Reichsbank informed the People’s Bank, Flatow, on August 10th, 1931, that it would not give permission for the purchase and sale of Polish currency. Thus, the perm it was refused for the sole reason that the institution making the application was a bank managed by members of the Polish minority. 2. On April 26th, 1930, application was made to the Biitow District Court for registration of the People's Bank at Bernsdorf, opened on April 12th, 1930. A policy of procrastination and delay was adopted in dealing w ith the application. On June 4th, 1930, the court demanded a slight alteration in the Statutes, and, on this being immediately done, demanded, on August 19th, 1930, that another trifling change should be made. The Statutes of the Bank, with the fresh alterations, were submitted on September 2nd to the court, but it was only on October 13th, 1930, or practically six months after making the application, that the court entered the Bank in the Register of Co-operative Associa­ tio n s. In spite of this fact, an im portant registered letter sent in October of that year by the Kattowitz branch of the Bank of the Union of Co-operative Associations to the Bernsdorf People's Bank was returned by the German Post Office with the following endorsement: " No People’s Bank known in Bernsdorf, district of Biitow. " Public loans are not given to members of the Polish minority; on the contrary, German credit institutions call in the loans as soon as any immovable property passes into Polish hands. If the loan cannot be repaid, the property is remorselessly sold by auction. The only exceptions, perhaps, are loans given by the “ Osthüfe ”, the reason being that a debtor accepting such loans is entirdy in the hands of the German institutions making the loans.

P r e s s .

One of the predominant factors in creating an atmosphere of harmonious collaboration between the minority and the majority is the Press. We must confess that the German Press falls short of its duty in this respect; the artides which appear in its Nationalist organs are extremely provocative to the minority. We are perfectly aware that there must be freedom of the Press, but, if nearly all the artides dealing with the Polish minority breathe a spirit of hate, the inference must be drawn that public opinion as represented by the Press is hostile to its compatriots who are not Germans. We are not the only sufferers; the same is true of the other minorities in Germany. The causes of the hostile influence of the Press on public opinion in minority questions, and of public opinion on the Press, must be attributed to the essentially unfavourable way in which this problem is dealt with by the central authorities. — iq —

We do not doubt that there are considerable sections of the German public which are anxious r th e minority problem to be settled in accordance with the lofty principles which have been universally mr!aimed by Germany’s official representatives abroad. It is highly regrettable that the Reichstag *hvivs discusses minority problems on the occasion of the Foreign Ministers report, never on the r'ision of that of the Minister of the Interior. We cannot understand how, in a Parliament which ïïks of the cultural unitv of all Germans, without exception, throughout the world, speeches can also be Tarie which recall pre-war times, when the minorities were at the mercy of the State in which they lived We need only cite as an example the statements of M. Frick, M. von Wmterfeld and other

“ l a r representatives in Parliament. Dr. Frick and his friends, in the second sentence of paragraph 3 nf their motion (Appendix 18), demanded that German subjects who sent their children to Polish s c h o o l s should be prohibited from purchasing farms, forests or m arket gardens, and, m the first sentence nf oaraeraph 5, that the credit facilities and economic help proposed in the preceding paragraphs nf the motion should not be accorded to owners of farms who employed either foreign labourers or labourers who sent their children to Polish schools. On behalf of the German Nationalist Party, Dr. von W m terfeld a deputy in the Prussian Diet, and his friends moved that the Decree regarding Polish minority schools should be revoked (see document No. 5255 of the Prussian Diet, current session).

Simultaneously, when articles appear in the Polish minority papers criticising conditions in Germany, tint onlv is the issue ordered to be confiscated, but the paper is suspended for a prolonged period. For instance, in German Silesia, on July 29th, 1931, the Polish paper K atolik, published m Beuthen, was suspended for a fortnight— i.e., from July 31st to August 13th, 1931. On August 31st 1931, Ziednoczenie, the organ of the Polish Professional Union in Germany, was suspended by an order ol the Oberpràsident Dr. Lukaschek, for a period of three months— i.e., from September ist to October ~0th iqII. The same fate befell the Allenstein Gazette. On August 13th, 1931, for instance, a report of a business meeting held on August 7th, 1931, and quite unconnected, either nominally or really with the Allenstein Gazette, was confiscated in that paper’s printing press. Simultaneously, however, the printing and circulation (under another name) of a German paper which was suspended at the same time, printed in the same press and with the same type, was permitted, which is incontestably contrary to the Press Law.

As an illustration we may cite an article from the Berliner Borsenzeitung, No. 412, of September 4th, m i entitled “ The Danger in the East "—the danger being the existence of a number of Polish private schools for Polish children—as well as an article from the Ostfront, No. 14, of July 15th 1931, entitled “ Sales of Land to Poles ”, drawing special attention to the fact that land had been purchased by German subjects of Polish race, who had been settled there for centuries.

Virtually the whole German Press swarms with such articles, more or less aggressive in tone; for practical reasons, therefore, we will only quote a couple of instances.

Cases frequently occur of newspapers inserting absolutely libellous statements, which presumably have no other object than to create an atmosphere of hostility towards Poles. We m ay instance an article from No. 34 of th e Deutsche Notwehr, of August 23rd, 1931, entitled “ Polish Schools . We would at the same time point out that the name of the teacher of the Polish school at Piasutno is not Maczey, but Lanz; that Maczey, not Lanz, is really the father of a child attending the Polish school, that neither Maczey nor Lanz has a camera or takes photographs, but that one or two persons profess- ing to be representatives of optical firms called on Lanz and advised him to buy the latest type of camera on very advantageous terms. It might be added that the school is supported, not by the German Government, but by the Union of Polish School Associations.

As regards the alleged lines of fortifications which pass through the Piasutno district, it is not for us to say whether these exist or not.

To sum up all that we have written and the examples we have given in support, we may say that, for all our goodwill to co-operate with the majority, such collaboration, far from being welcomed, is bluntly rejected. As loyal subjects of the State, it is not our duty to enquire into the reasons for such an attitude, but merely to invoke the just and sacred rights which are guaranteed us by an inter­ national treaty, by the German Constitution and by the German Government s declaration at the Versailles Conference that, not only would all its subjects enjoy equality before the law, but that there would be one law for all.

The inability of the minority to carry out its function as a link between the two States is due, in our opinion, to the fact that the relevant authorities tolerate, and even encourage, the vanoius Nationalist associations and organisations. So long as the ultra-chauvinist organisations can with impunity attack their countrymen of other than German stock, so long as they can prosecute their pernicious activities, so long as they can impose their credo that Germany is for the real Germans only, and so long as public opinion hesitates to condemn this attitude towards citizens of another race—so long will the state of the relations between the majority and the minority be inconsistent with the interests of the country and with the now universally recognised principle that, within the limits of the State, races have the right to free cultural development. As an illustration, we need only point to the universally notorious activities of the Stahlhelm, Heimatstreue Oberschlesier, Hitlerites, Heimats- dienst and various other movements, which to-day, unfortunately, hold the great bulk of Germans of all grades and classes under their sway. — 20 —

Though it is not our business to approve or disapprove of the general programmes of these organisa­ tions, we are entitled to demand that all anti-minority catchwords should disappear both from the spirit and the letter of those programmes. As we cannot conceive of this equitable demand beir conceded if we apply direct to the authorities, we appeal w ith all confidence, under Article 147 of the Geneva Convention, to the Council of the League of Nations, to secure, as guarantor of the rights of minorities, proper assurances from the German Government that the protection of minorities w ill not be confined to the settlement of individual cases, but that, in substance, the m inority obligations shall genuinely be executed in a spirit consistent with those obligations and with the discussions which have so frequently been held in the Council and, Assembly of the League of Nations. If organisations which are nominally independent of the Government continue to carry on a campaign which is inconsistent with the prin­ ciple of the equality of all citizens before the law, the German Government should, we think, under­ take to disband such organisations. The question of the attitude of Government departments to the minority is simply and solely a m atter for the Government itself. We are convinced that any good­ will shown by the German Government in this m atter will be warmly supported, not only by the minor­ ity, but also by that section of the German public which, tired of the existing state of affairs, discerns, and with perfect reason, the cause of the difficult situation, inter alia, in the ultra-chauvinist agitation of associations and organisations which provoke internal dissension and disorder and prevent the harmonious collaboration of all citizens of one and the same State, whatever their nationality.

(S ig n e d ) S t a n is l a w S p y c h a l a , (S ig n e d ) CZESLAW T a b e r n ACKI, Managing Committee, Section I, Association of Poles in Germany.

[Translation.] Appendix I.

S p e e c h b y t h e Co -p l a in t if f , H e r r B a c z e w s k i.

As I listened to the Public Prosecutor’s speech, I got the impression that he had confused the role of prosecuting with that of defending-counsel. I should now like to give my views on the general juridical position of the Polish m inority in Upper S ilesia. In Upper Silesia, the Geneva Convention is binding and confers very extensive rights on the Polish population. According to the provisions of the Geneva Convention, every kind of school and teaching is authorised in Upper Silesia. Private and continuation schools m ay be opened and private instruction in special subjects of all kinds may be given. In the rest of Prussia, the Prussian Government's Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of Questions relating to Polish schools applies. There is an agreement between the Government and myself by which the provisions of the Ordinance regarding the admission and leaving of pupils on transfer to Polish private schools should be duly applied. According to this arrangement, the teacher of the German school which the child has hitherto been attending must accept as sufficient the notification by the teacher of the Polish private school of the child's transfer to that school. The German schoolteacher may not demand from the child attending his school or from the child’s parents a special declaration that the child proposes to leave the German school and in future attend the Polish school. I consider, moreover, that state minority schools attended by three or five children, which are mere travesties of schools, should not be maintained in Upper Silesia where there is a special raison d’être for a Polish private minority school. After the Oberprâsident of Upper Silesia had publicly spoken in favour of protecting and safeguarding the Polish minority in Upper Silesia and had given me positive assurances on the point at a meeting between us, the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany proceeded to open private minority schools. Further, the regulations issued in execution of the Prussian Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, also distinctly stated that, once the opening of Polish private schools has been officially authorised, such schools should be officially protected in asserting their rights under the State M inistry’s Order, and Government officials and departm ents, and the German population generally, are accordingly expected not to contest or in any way oppose the enforcement of such rights. I beg to quote the relevant passage: ‘ ‘ In order to afford those sections of the community belonging to the Polish race who wish to do so adequate opportunity for cultivating their own particular racial and linguistic traditions in the educational sphere, the Ministry has issued the enclosed Ordinance for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish minority. This has been done in the firm belief that it gives complete satisfaction to all the reasonable claim s of this section of the population. In issuing this Ordinance and simultaneously declaring that Government and other public resources are avail­ able for its execution, the Ministry recognises that any exercise of the rights conferred by this Ordinance is entitled to State protection. It is accordingly presumed that the population gener­ ally will fully realise these facts and, since members of the minority in the exercise of minority rights under this Ordinance are merely availing themselves of their rights as citizens, it is assumed that they will not be placed at a disadvantage in any respect for that reason or hampered in the exercise of such rights. ” — 21 —

!,l,ftï S a yg ^ S f r f S teacher? tL ugh a number of persons are being tam ed for the purpose 5i the Beuthen Teachers’ Training College.

, r a t Æ sr. ^s^ationTin Gern^ry^and tVre PmKÛm^Mnùstty^Edu^t^^as^weU^as^be^^n tl^Unlon^aJid

t a S ï ï S ? S S £ ® schoolteachers under my orders, from which I also quote the following passage for your information:

" With renard to ' German Associations the tern, is to be interpreted “ “ «am g ^ ia tù m s

» c w y Œrf tzz sssi B=EE^r5BÈH5|S

his duty is to educate children of the Polish minority who are German subjects.

;w h o i Sher-tongue 5 î is fGeman. j We æ refuse to ' purchase ^ Polish souls. ® £

from political activity.

How do we obtain our teachers ?

Thp TTnion of Polish School Associations tries to secure suitable teachers. Applicants must submit their^pers such a s birth certificate, certificate of teaching qualifications, police certificate of personal character and the like When these documents have been examined, they are forwarded by the Union to th e authorities of ^he district in which the teacher is to be employed, with an applicationt f o a

SÏltaVeSÎsly T o Z Z d S t o t i S e ^ S t e

reside in P ruâa. There was nothing therefore against Herr Karaskiewicz. The permit ot residence was issued by the Regierungspràsident at Oppeln.

on German territory of Polish minority schoolteachers are dated Ma^ ^ 3 th , 193^ The meetmg was held from s to 8 10 n m The resolution passed by the Commune of W e n d z rn agamst the ronsn minority school there bears the same date-namely March 1 3 th ,^ I^akeit W t o c o m ^ meeting which adopted the resolution against the Polish minon y sc , u: i was drafted at the same hour I can find no suitable expression for describing this document, which was dratted and written by theG ^an head teacher ofWendzin M^ZyUa, acting as secretary d f e - - A document such as this, inciting to action against the Polish minority school,.can, m ^ century, only be qualified as infamous. While, at headquarters, officiate are^ ^ “ " ^ ^ t v negotiating for hours, to promote harmonious co-operation between the minority and the majority, — 22 — the very opposite is simultaneously taking place at a communal meeting in Wendzin. W hat would be said if the document were reproduced and placarded with the title: “ Barbarous document of the twentieth century, composed and committed to writing by Herr Zylla, Prussian head teacher of W e n d z in ” ?

W ho is Karaskiewicz ? Herr Karaskiewicz had already been a Prussian schoolteacher before the war. He served four and a-half years during the great war on the western front as a Prussian soldier. He was wounded, and lost two brothers in the war, who are buried on French soil. W hat must have been H err Karaskiewicz'sfeelings in these circumstances when, on March 26th, 1931, he was forcibly taken out of his House by a mob of individuals, dragged over a distance of six kilometres, and finally packed off in a train?

W hat was the real charge against him ? The whole m atter resolves itself into a " sweetie fight ” —he had given sweets to the children ! There is nothing very peculiar about that. It is natural, or at least usual, th at when you pay a call, particularly on friends, where there are small children, you bring sweets for the latter. W hen a relative comes into such a house, the children even search his pockets' it is regarded as an insult or an offence if uncle brings nothing with him. Karaskiewicz is also said to have distributed clothing among the villagers. This has not been corroborated in the proceedings. That is why I intentionally put questions on this point in examining the witnesses, since the charge has been specifically made against Karaskiewicz in a letter from the Oberprasident to myself. Further, h e is sa id to h a v e p ro m ised lo an s a n d o th e r m a te ria l a d v a n ta g e s in o rd e r to a ttr a c t ch ild re n to th e Polish minority school or for political considerations. This, however, is not corroborated by the evidence. I hardly think either that the Court will believe that he is in the habit of enticing children between four weeks and one and a-half years old to join the Polish minority school! I mention this merely to illustrate the unreliability of the witnesses on^the other side.

There is no proof, either, that he agitated against the German population. On the contrary, several witnesses have testified that he never made political speeches, but exhorted the people, instead, to be loyal citizens of Germany. He is said to have brought children, or to have had them brought, to school against their parents' wishes. That is also untrue. The evidence specifically shows that a child once came to his landlord, or to the landlord's daughter, and was brought by the latter to the Polish school.

He is alleged to have promised employment, if parents sent their children to the Polish school. This is also untrue, for the very good reason that M. Karaskiewicz had no more to do with thedistribution of employment than the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. As regards the building of the Polish minority school, the facts are as follows: the Wendzin school building and the school itself will be built by a Berlin firm, which is responsible for the distribution of the employment involved, though it will always be possible to comply with any special wishes which the Union of Polish School Associations m ay express. Incidentally, some of the constructional work on the Polish minority school has, in point of fact, been given to people who send their children to the German school— e.g., to Oper- kalski and Wrobel. H err Karaskiewicz is alleged to have worked against Germany. In proof, opposing counsel cites the evidence of people who were not sworn, whereas the sworn witnesses have positively contradicted such evidence and given Karaskiewicz an excellent character in this respect. The Ober­ prasident also charges Karaskiewicz with disloyalty on the strength of information supplied by Herr Pazulla, Superintendent of the Criminal Police, as the latter himself states. W here did Herr Pazulla get his information ? He obtained it solely from German partisans, and, as he himself admits, based his own objective impression on these reports. Audiatur et altera pars. If Herr Pazulla's opinion was to be really unbiased, the Polish minority should surely have been given a hearing. I think that the Oberprasident’s delegate, after the evidence he has heard, will now give the Oberprasident the real facts of the case. Herr Pazulla’s report to the Oberprasident was bound to be one-sided in stating, as it did, that the action taken on March 26th, 1931, was aimed not at the Polish school, but at Herr Karaskiewicz. W itnesses like Oblong and Grutza, on the other hand, have categorically sworn on oath that, in their view, the object aimed at was the Polish school. Once the Polish school was removed, naturally, Karaskiewicz had to be removed also.

W hat has been proved?

It has been proved that all the accusations against Herr Karaskiewicz are false a n d unfounded. It has also been proved that, on the contrary, the whole blame for the incidents of March 26th, 1931, lies with the German partisans and the German subordinate officials. The communal resolution of March 13th, 1931, could not but influence the population against the Polish school and against the school­ teacher Karaskiewicz, and, similarly, the collection of signatures throughout the commune. Another provocation was the fact that, at the instance of the mayor of the commune, or in consequence of the advice given by the official of the Landrat’s office, it was decided that the commune would have to defray the cost of the minority school if the number of children amounted to at least 20. There is also evidence to prove that the action taken on March 26th, 1931, was directed, not against the schoolteacher Karaskiewicz, but against the Polish minority school.

The incidents of March 26th, 1931, have certainly been fully described in the course of the proceed­ ings and are therefore known. The accused also admit the offences of which they are accused. — 23 —

['rly in the morning a large crowd of villagers assembled at Lelonek’s and, led by the mayor f the commune, proceeded to Rosalia’s farm, where Karaskiewicz lived. Here, after forcing an trance into the room, the mayor ordered Raraskiewicz to leave the village. Several other people en\moanied the mayor into the house, while the others stood in the yard or in the hall outside. Loud Jwats were heard, and there was even some talk of shooting. As a great favour the mayor gave Herr Karaskiewicz three hours’ grace to put his affairs in order and then leave the village. W hen the mayor A : he others returned after three hours, Karaskiewicz had already escaped through a back-door and avMen off on his bicycle. In the circumstances, he could not be blamed. Unfortunately,his bicycle broke x] on the way, so that he could proceed no farther and was overtaken by his pursuers, who then Aràe*ed him to the boundary of the commune and from there to the station, where, being refused mtection by the Landjâger Schwiebe, he was forced to take the train and leave. All these incidents Pvpre part of a deliberately concerted plan of action. March 26th, 1931, had been specifically fixed beforehand as the date for the action to be taken. From the very moment of his arrival in Wendzin, Herr Karaskiewicz began to be victimised and molested. Difficulties were raised regarding his police registration and taxation formalities. From the very beginning, too, the Landrat, and his officials, worked against the school and instilled racial hatred into the population. On January 15th, 1931, the Landrat of Guttentag was in Wendzin and the Polish school was discussed in an unfavourable sense The same official also raised obstacles to the purchase of land and to the grant of a permit for building the Polish school. The German auxiliary school was built just at the very moment when the Polish minority school was to be erected. The idea of this was to prevent children from attending the Polish school. Feeling was inflamed against the Polish minority school by the Landrat’s representative declaring that, if there was an attendance of 20 pupils, the commune would have to defray the cost of the school. This statement with regard to the additional expenditure was bound to have an unfavourable effect on the German population and influence them against the Polish school. The anti-Polish attitude of the Landrat is proved by his declaration in court: “ If the Polish minority build a Pohsh school, I can also build a German school The Landrat also failed in his duty in not taking immediate action on the communal resolution, and in not sending the resolution to the Oppeln authorities until later He should have taken immediate steps and communicated by telephone with the Oppeln authorities. Not until April were orders issued to the Amtsvorsteher in Schierokau.

What orders ?

He was told to take steps to ascertain whether children had been forced to attend the Polish school against their parents' wishes.

Let me now take the statement of Lelonek.

What did Lelonek mean by enquiring at the Landrat’s office whether he should provide a room for the Polish school, and what was the Landrat’s reply ? He said: " If you don’t want to let, you don’t need to ” ,

Then there is Stanitzok. First he denied on oath that there had been a meeting of the commune. Later he sprang to his feet, when another witness admitted the fact, and declared, without being asked, that there had indeed been a meeting of the commune. The complaint was made that Raraskiewicz distributed the newspaper Nowiny Codzienne in the village and booked subscriptions. I maintain that the Nowiny Codzienne was circulating before Raraskiewicz arrived in Wendzin. Stanitzok is the postmaster, and I know for a fact that irregularities have occurred in the delivery of the newspaper in Wendzin. I also know now to what these irregularities are to be attributed. Grutza made the statement: “ If we are going to be locked up, the Landrat will have to be locked up too ”. That is a serious accusation and a grave affront to the Landrat.

As a matter of criminal law, I regard the action of the accused as incitement to class conflict, breach of the peace, coercion and incitement to violence. On this point, I disagree with the Public Prosecutor.

I leave it to the Court to decide the exact sentence to be meted out. I differ, though, from the Public Prosecutor in believing that a money fine would be inappropriate, as in any case a fine will not be paid by the accused. I believe, further, that the accused should not all be punished alike. First of all, the mayor must receive a particularly heavy sentence. He is primarily responsible for the whole affair. As mayor of the commune, he knew what he was about. Heavier sentences should be passed on Gbur, the tax-collector, and Giesa, the post-office official. Furthermore, Theodor Giesa had already been sentenced to three months’ imprisonment for coercion and was let out on probation until October ist : his probation should be immediately terminated. The real offenders are not in the dock, they are to be found in Wendzin and elsewhere. I will not mention their names. The position is aggravated by the fact that the action of the accused has gravely prejudiced Germany’s reputation. At the very moment when the League of Nations is meeting in Geneva, such action must be particularly damaging to Germany. The late Foreign Minister, Stresemann, endeavoured in Geneva to secure privileges for the minorities. While the higher authorities are working to promote co-operation between the minority and the majority, their efforts should not be stultified by the action of individuals and petty officials. It is only natural that such an incident should react unfavourably on opinion abroad. — 24 —

An extenuating circumstance is the fact that the accused acted under the misleading influence of other people, particularly, as has already been said, under a certain pressure exerted by petty official, and authorities. I am convinced that the Court, by pronouncing a just sentence on the accused, win help to establish harmonious relations between the minority and the majority. The accused would certainly not be sitting in the dock here, if they had attended the Polish school.

[Translation.] Appendix 2.

T h e Oberprasident ,

P r o v in c e o f U p p e r S il e s ia

* Oppeln, September 16th, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations, ' Berlin, .

W ith reference to my letter of April 4th, 1931, 1 have the honour to inform you that the judicial proceedings against a number of inhabitants of Wendzin have shown that, though the teacher Karas­ kiewicz did not give articles of clothing to children, he nevertheless gave them sweets, books and copy-books. It has not been established that Karaêkiewicz brought children, or caused them to be brought, against their parents' wishes, to the Polish private school; nor has any directly depreciatory comment on the German State been proved against him. The inquiry has, however, shown that the other charges brought against him in my letter of April 4th, 1931, were correct and that, in particular, he has been guilty of tactless and tasteless observations which were bound to give rise to mis­ understandings. The inspecting authority cannot therefore be expected to allow Karaêkiewicz to remain any longer in the country. I therefore request you not to retain Karaêkiewicz any longer on the staff of the Polish private school in the province of Upper Silesia, and to cause him to quit German territory.

(S ig n e d ) L u k a s c h e k .

[Translation.] Appendix 3.

G o v e r n m e n t o f O p p e l n

A dministrative D is t r ic t D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l ic W o r s h ip a n d E d u c a t io n

Oppeln, August 28th, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Union, Oppeln.

August Wagner, private teacher of Gross Strehlitz, has subm itted to the Departm ent an application for the issue of a teacher’s licence. We cannot see our way to give effect to the application. Wagner spoke at a public meeting in Gross Strehlitz on June 7th, 1931, at which he made special reference to the Polish schools. He criticised the methods of education of the German teachers, alleging that they endeavoured to induce the Polish children to believe that the Polish language was an inferior tongue, He attacked with particular severity this form of Germanisation, and described the teachers in question as devils and not teachers of youth. We request you to forward this communication to the applicant.

(S ig n ed ) D r. W e ig e l . — 25 —

[Translation.] September 3rd, 1931. jo fa Oberprasident, Province of Upper Silesia, Oppeln.

At our instance, AugustWagner, private teacher in the service of the Polish Catholic Schools Union aiding in Gross Strehlitz, submitted an application to the District Administration Department nf Pubhc Worship and Education, for the issue of a teacher’s licence. The licence was refused by letter f 4ueust 28th, 1931, copy of which is attached. Under Article 15 of the Ministerial Instructio D ecem b er 31st, 1839, teachers’ licences are required by teachers. Refusal to issue a licence to our ndvate teacher August Wagner constitutes an infringement of Articles 98 and 100 of the Geneva fonvention. Article 98 expressly says that private teaching may be given to nationals of a minority and that where permission is required for such teachmg, it is to be granted. Herr Wagner is a resident of Upper Silesia and has not abused his calling by taking part in activities hostile to the States The rhar^e brought against him of criticising the methods of education m German schools is dispute , but °even if it were true, such criticism is not an activity hostile to the State. Every Prussian citizen is entitled to criticise the system of State education, and members of the Polish minority are equally entitled to criticise, especially when they are attackmg the alleged policy of German teachers, whic consists in depreciating the Polish language in the eyes of Polish-speakmg children. We have the honour to request you to give instructions to the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, immediately to issue a teachers licence to Herr Wagner. W eshoukl be sorry to be compelled to have recourse to the procedure for which the Geneva Convention provides.

(Signed) B a c z e w s k i, President.

[Translation.] Appendix 4.

May 30th, 1931.

Cr im in a l P r o c e e d in g s a g a i n s t B a u e r .

(From conversation of this day’s date with R.A. Lewinski.)

On Mav 23rd, 1031, J a n Bauer was arrested at Bütow and taken to prison at Lauenberg. He was accused of perjury. The preliminary judicial enquiry has been opened against him on suspicion o perjury and is being conducted by the Examining Magistrate Muller at Stolp. Bauer is accused of having committed perjury before the Stolp court in the penal proceedings against Cysewski and others at the court’s sitting of March 16th, 1931. The court asked him when he was being examined as a witness, what his occupation was and whether he engaged in Polish nationalist activities. Bauer thereupon declared on oath that he did not. Counsel for theiother side, von Koehnen, then said to him (von Koehnen is said to be a member of the Stal^elm ).^ \\ h a t, you h a v e not engaged in Polish nationalist activities? Did you not say m February 1930 atAdam czyks mn at Oslau-Damerow, on the occasion of a Polish theatrical performance AH the countiy up to the will become Polish’ ? ” Bauer denied this. Counælthen said: I will caU w itness to prove it”, and he called the innkeeper Sylwester Adamczyk and his brother Walentyn Adamczyk of Oslau- Damerow, who asserted that Bauer had used this expression. Other witnesses on the same1 side m the proceedings against Bauer were a certain Johann von Cyrson and Bernhard Kulas, both Oslau- Damerow. These witnesses stated that Bauer, on the occasion of the Polish theatrical performance in February 1930 at Adamczyk’s inn, delivered a speech m Polish to the audience ,mthe course of which he made the following remarks : All the country up to the Oder will become Polish. Our frontier reaches as far as the Oder and even further as far as Berlin; the time is coming when it will once again be Polish.” Apparently the witnesses against Bauer were not well acquainted with Polish and the advocate Lewinski is of the opinion that Bauer’s speech was misunderstood by them. Bauer, who spoke about the matter to the advocate Lewinski during his two v isits on May 28th and 29th, 1931, emphatically denies having said anythmg of the kind. He told Lewmski that, t occasion of the theatrical performance in question, he made a speech to the audience m Polish, m whic he said that he was glad to hear Polish spoken and to see a Polish theatrical performance there. He was also glad that the Polish parents sent their children to the Polish minority school. He urged — 26 —

the audience to continue to do this and not to forget the Polish language. They were of Polish origin and had not immigrated to their present homes, but had been there for centuries. The land on which they were now living had once been Polish. He asks that the following should be called as witnesses in support of his statem ent: August von Chamier-Gliszczynski, Leo von Chamier-Gliszczynski, Fràulein Rosa Gruba, MarceU Labon Stanislaw Ledochowski, Jaschinski Jozef, Jaschinski, sen., Gorlik, Franz Ringwalski (of Bemsdorfj and Landjàger Walski.

[Translation.] Appendix 5.

July 16th, 1931.

To the Prussian Minister of the Interior, Berlin.

We respectfully beg to submit the following: Our minority-school teacher KiyeUa was formerly engaged as a teacher in Glummen with a permit of residence for the Kreis of Flatow, In April 1931, he was transferred by us to the Kreis of Bütow in Pomerania to take over a Polish minority school in Klonschau. He then resided in the town of Bütow pending the official authorisation for the school to be opened, for which application had been made, and he had also applied for a permit of 'residence in the Kreis of Bütow, but was informed by the Bütow police that, in accordance with an order issued by the Regierungsprasident of Kôslin, he would have to leave the territory of the Reich by 3 p.m. on July 15th. We respectfully request you to have the expulsion order cancelled, to enable the teacher Kwella, who has in the meantime returned to Poland, to take up his duties in the Kreis of Bütow. We should be very grateful if the m atter could be settled as soon as possible, in view of the urgency of the case. (S ig n e d ) Acting President.

[Translation.] Appendix 6.

Ref.: Letter of January 23rd, 1931.

January 30th, 1931. To the Regierungsprasident, Oppeln.

Article 100, paragraph 2, of the Geneva Convention does not mention ex istin g m inority schools. It states that the provisions relating to the admission of aliens to act as teachers in private schools shall be so applied that the private schools of a minority can recruit some of the members of their teaching staff from abroad. As under the existing Prussian provisions (Ministerial Instructions of December 31st, 1839, and M inisterial Order U. 11540 [Zentralblatt,page 303] of AprüSth, 1872) permission for the establishment and conduct of a private school may not be accorded to an association but only to a qualified person, the teacher m ust have been in Upper Silesia before the private minority primary school is opened, since the person responsible for m aintaining the school, when subm itting his application for the school to be opened, has not only to give the name of the teacher in question as his agent, but also to attach to the application the documents attesting the latter’s qualifications: A minority school cannot be set up without, or remain without, teachers, and the words " the private schools of a minority ” occurring in Article 100, paragraph 2, cannot possibly be interpreted as referring to already existing minority schools. Such an interpretation, taken in conjunction with existing Prussian regulations, amounts to an infringement, not only of the spirit, but also of the letter of the Geneva Convention. We should be sorry to be obliged to have recourse to the legal channels o f re d re ss provided in the Geneva Convention. We ourselves m uch regret that the teachers Rufin Sieron, Marjan Karaskiewicz, Jan M archm cki, a n d Anton Kazik have not yet been able to obtain employment at private minority elementary schools. We have given instructions for four more private minority primary schools to be opened without delay, so that there may be no need to send these four teachers back to Poland. If, in the interval, no further minority primary schools are opened, we can unfortunately only lay the blame for this at the door of th e Oppeln District Administration, the Department for Public W orship and Education and other Government authorities, who are clearly endeavouring in every conceivable way to prevent the opening of private minority elementary schools. We may cite the following instances in support of our accusation: — 27 —

In Jendnn in the Kreis of Gross-Strehlitz, there had not previously been any State elementary *j F or years the efforts of the inhabitants to have a State elementary school opened were rejected sch°?p prUssian authorities, who denied that there was any need for such a school On April 24th by th , n nrivate minority elementary school opened there, which was immediately attended I93°s rh ildren or approximately 92 per cent of all the chUdren of school age in Jendnn. Curiously by 3 O rm an State elementary school was opened on January 22nd, 1931, and a special school f °5 „ was erected for five children at the most, who were previously attending the elementary school bf S S S a w S is situated somewhat farther away. Undoubtedly, this German elementary school I f erected only because the school authorities desired to counteract the influence of the existing ,11 v successful private minority school. This campaign, which is against the spirit of the Gene pn Jmn h S ^ready had some measure of success, as nine chüdren have now left our private Ünritv elementary school for the German State elementary school. We wiü not now go mto the S uS ce of all kinds which has been brought to bear by official persons on those entitled to receive a Polish education.

2 A t Wollentschin, in the Kreis of Rosenberg, there had not previously been any Germar1 State ipmentarv school On October 20th, 1930, the Polish Catholic Schools Association for Upper Silesia, S atedY o us, submitted an application for a private minority elementary school to be opened at Wollentschin. Every kind of pretext was, however, made to postpone indefinitely the granting o Ücessarv permission, and, in particular, unfair conditions were imposed with regard to school accommoda '■ n^G eneva Convention lays down no rules for school accommodation, and it must therefore be concluded that other regulations which are not binding are being applied mutatis mutandis.

The Prussian Ministerial Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of SchoolQuestions r thp p0iish Minority Article II, paragraph 5, states that school buildings must satisfy reasonable Lmirements regard being had to the number of children to receive instruction, but that the conditions 1 n ,ir,vvn for’a State school are not normally to be insisted upon. Yet our school buildmgs are required fÆ Tstricter^ œ n S s San Æose laid down in the case of State schools, as we shall prove. After application had been made for a private m inonty elementary school to be opened in XX oUentschin ouï school premises had already been fitted up, steps were taken by the Prussian educational authorities to set up a German State elementary school in Wollentschin. On December n th 1930, a nrivate schoolroom was rented from the householder Cichos temporarily for seven months at a rent nf to marks a month for this German State elementary school. The schoolroom is 4.80 metres wide, 5 20 metres long and 2.54 metres high, has two windows, onefacing south and one west, the entranc being through the yard and through the common entrance hall of the building.

There is no playground. This schoolroom in no way fulfils even the reasonable requirements of the existing regulations, and is certainly unsuitable in every way for use as a room for a S ta te Nevertheless while this room was regarded by the educational authorities as suitable for a State elementary school, we were compelled to heighten our private class-room from 2.54 me res ■ metres to broaden it to 7.5 metres and to shut off the entrance to the school and the approach from the yard. In spite, however, of the fact that our class-room had been altered to fulfil theærigorous requirements by December 9th, 1930, we were still unable to obtain permission to open the school. It was not until after the German State school was opened on the morning of December 22n^ 9 6 that is before the beginning of the holidays, that we were told-at 5 p.m. m the attemoon “ tsame d a y thaTÜÎ might open our school, with the result that we could not ■? p ." / “ the Christmas holidays—that is to say, at the beginning of January 1931. The a ttitu d e adopted by the Prussian authorities is in this case particularly clearly directed against the settmg; up of£ur^pnrate minority elementary school and consequently against the spirit of the Gen®v* ^ there are in Wollentschin only 21 children of school age, about half of whom attend the State schoo , the o ther half attending the private Polish minonty school.

3 We are also forced to attribute the delay in opening our private minority elementary school in Radian to the educational authorities. This application was also postponed time after time and permission to open the school was not granted until 5 p.m. on December 22nd, 1930, ^ e ^ long period elapsing between the submission and the granting of the application was used by vanous official persons in Radlau to cany on propaganda against the settmg up of bound to say that undue influence was brought to bear upon those entitled to a Polish education. Herr Jan Marchwicki is to be the teacher in Radlau.

4. The circumstances are similar in the case of the setting up of our private minority elementary school in Klein-Lagiewnik, in the Kreis of Guttentag, where the teacher Anton Kazik was to be employ e ^ Not only were unreasonable demands made m respect of the school accommodation, clearly foi sake of procrastination (in this connection, we would mention the conespondence on the subject which shows that the alleged absence of attic and cellar stairs was made a pretext for permission for the school to be opened, although such stairs have nothing o o \\i as the children would not be taught in the attic or m the cellar!), but everything was done by the: office of the Landrat in Guttentag to influence those entitled to a Polish education against the private mmonty school.

5. T he teacher Karaskiewicz is to be employed in the private minority elementary school to be set up in W endzin, in the Kowie settlement in the Kreis of Guttentag. It was our mtention to re a class-room here from the landlord, Karl Chutsche; but our purpose was frustrated, so that the only 28 —

alternative was to make arrangements for the erection of a building to house the school. After the application for permission to build the house had been submitted to the competent authorities, the owner of the neighbouring site was induced to lodge an objection to the building being erected, although such objection was absolutely unfounded, as the building in question was to be 9 metres away fr0ni the boundary of his land. His objection was indeed disallowed, but—obviously at the special instigation of others—he lodged a further objection with the Kreis Committe The Landrat, as chairman of this body, sent the papers relating to the case to the Goven ment as, so it is alleged, he learned that the question at issue was the building of a school and that the m atter was therefore one for the Government. We may point out that the building in question was expressly described as the extension of a dwelling-house, and as such it was entirely within the discretion of the owner of the dwelling to what use the extension should subsequently be put. This is nothing more nor less than wilful procrastination ! The Land Survey Office is also procrastinating in the m atter of the measuring of the site. On January 15th, 1931, the Landrat of the Kreis of Guttentag applied to the mayor of the commune, Thomas Kosalla, to rent a room from the above- mentioned Karl Chutsche for a German State elementary school. Until then, there had been no German State elementary school in Wendzin in the Kowie settlement. W hile the Landrat was in Kowie, Kosalla went to the landlord, Gorzolka, from whom we had purchased the site, and told him that he had come from the Landrat to tell him that he should apply for a credit from the Eastern Provinces Relief Fund (Osthilfe) immediately, as the next day was the last possible date. In the course of further conversation, he told him that the Landrat was negotiating for the renting of a class-room in Kowie, as he had ascertained that it was too far for the children to go to Wendzin, and that the school was to be opened on February 1st, 1931; he also asked him why he had sold the site for a Polish school and said that, if he had done so on account of pecuniary embarrassments, he should go to the Landrat, who would certainly grant him credit. If, therefore, the Landrat had not acted contrary to the spirit of the Geneva Convention, the teacher Karaskiewicz would long ago have been able to take up his duties. We would rather avoid a discussion as to whether the facts described above constitute a deliberate infringement—if not of the letter, at least of the'spirit—of the Geneva Convention, and whether they are in any way reconcilable with the statem ents made by the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Curtius, at the last session of the Council of the League of Nations, with regard to the treatment of the Polish minority by the Prussian authorities in the m atter of schools in Upper Silesia. In order that, in future, when other private minority elementary schools are set up, teachers of Polish nationality may not have to remain in Upper Silesia for long periods without employment, we beg to request that, whenever applications are submitted by us for permission for such teachers to enter the country, wc should first be informed whether, on general grounds, permission for the teachers in question to enter and reside in the country will be granted. W e propose to ask the competent German Consulate in Poland on each occasion not to grant the teacher in question a visa until we request it to do so, at the same time giving the date and place of employment. This will prevent the possibility of teachers arriving in Upper Silesia more than a fortnight before they take over their duties. We would also respectfully point out that we have been led to adopt this course by the competent Prussian authorities. We return the documents relating to the teachers Alfons Liczbariski, Henryk Falkowski a n d Michal Tobolewski, and would request that, in view of the above, we may be informed whether permission to enter and reside in the country will in principle be accorded in the case of these teachers. It is our intention not to ask them to come to Upper Silesia until the establishment of the private minority elementary schools in question has advanced so far as to make it probable that they will shortly be o pened. (S ig n ed ) P resident.

[Translation.] Appendix 6a.

P o l is h Ca t h o l ic S c h o o l s A sso c ia t io n f o r U p p e r S il e s ia

Oppeln, July 7th, 1931.

To the Oberprasident, Province of Upper Silesia, O p p eln .

W ith reference to our conversation of to-day’s date with Oberregierungsrat Count von Matuschka, we venture respectfully to lodge the following complaint: 1. On May 5th, 1931, we applied to the Oppeln District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, for authorisation to open a private minority school at K u tzo b e n in the Kreis of Rosenberg. Two rooms in the house of Joseph Kick, houseowner, were rented as school premises. Plans for the partial alteration and renovation of these rooms were later submitted to the competent Amtsvorsteher. Permission to carry out the work of 29 —

renovation was not granted, however. The plans were submitted by the Amtsvorsteher to Ii,e B u ild in g Office at Rosenberg, and were sent from there to the Landrat at Rosenberg for inspection. In reply to repeated enquiries addressed to the Building Office at Rosenberg and the office of the Landrat there, Herr Rychel, the head of our Kreis organisation, was informed th a t th e plans had been sent for by the Regierungsprâsident in Oppeln for his examination and inspection. The information furnished by the competent building authorities and by the office of the Landrat at Rosenberg seemed to us to be unsatisfactory and indeed scarcely credible, as, first, the alterations to the rooms had been stated to be for d w e llin g purposes and not for a school and, secondly, it can hardly be supposed that the Regierungsprâsident would exercise his right of intervention and inspection in any ordinary application for permission to make alterations in a building. We therefore requested the Regierungsprâsident in our letter of June 26th, 1931, to be good enough to ascertain the quarter responsible for what was, in our opinion, deliberate procrastination in the m atter of granting permission for the alterations to the premises for the minority school in Kutzoben. We have not yet received an answer, nor has the permission been granted. The attitude of the official building authorities is making a particularly bad impression, as the President of the Union of Polish School Associations of Germany Herr Baczewski, in his letter of January 30th, 1931, drew the attention of the Regierungsprâsident at Oppeln to similar abuses, which the Oberprâsident, in a personal conversation, promised to remove. The District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, gives us repeated assurances that the demands of the Polish minority for the establishment of private schools are being fairly and expeditiously dealt with. We are, however, bound to say that it is precisely here in Upper Silesia, where the minority is guaranteed the widest rights with regard to the development of its own culture and national genius under the Geneva Convention, that the greatest difficulties are encountered in official quarters. While in the Administrative Districts of Schneidemiihl, Marienwerder and Allenstein, where there are most private schools, an application for permission to undertake building alterations is granted in eight days, and an application for the opening of a private school is settled in four weeks at the most, the same applications in Upper Silesia usually take three to six months. Again, in the above-mentioned Adm inistrative Districts, no proposal with regard to the erection of a school building has so far been called in question. I t is sufficient in every case if the premises fulfil reasonable requirements within the meaning of the Ordinance for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish M inority in Prussia. Here, the attitude of the District Administration, Department fot Public Worship and Education, is so severely criticised that the preparation of a schoolroom involves in almost every case heavy additional expense and loss of time. We venture to draw your attention to these abuses, solely in order that we may be enabled to fulfil our duty as a m inority school organisation to parents belonging to the Polish m inority who are apprehensive of the delays and consider that they are being placed at a disadvantage, and overwhelm us with perpetual enquiries accordingly. Moreover, we are constantly being requested by representatives of the Press to publish material with regard to the delays involved and the difficulties placed in our way by the authorities in connection with the organisation of every private school and infants’ school. We have always in principle declined to do so, in the firm belief that you would rectify these defects and abuses in accordance with the fair and loyal attitude to the Polish minority which you have so often evinced. 2. Occasion for further irritation at the attitude of the authorities is given by the Order of June 23rd, 1931, issued by the Regierungsprâsident at Oppeln for the expulsion of Frâulein Amalie Wertfein. Frâulein W ertfein was engaged and appointed to the post of headmistress of the infants’ school at Gross Borek in the Kreis of Rosenberg. She is a Czechoslovak subject. The application for the issue of the teaching permit and the permit of residence for Frâulein W ertfein was submitted to the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, on April 2nd, 1931. Permission for the school to be opened was given on May 22nd; but the teacher’s perm it for the headmistress was not accorded. In reply to our application to the Regierungsprâsident on June 19th, 1931, we were to our surprise informed that the permit of residence could not be granted, as Frâulein W ertfein had, it was alleged, engaged in unpermissible political activities. We investigated the m atter there and then and found that, according to the evidence of the parents concerned and of the teacher Wesolowski, and the assertions of Frâulein W ertfein herself, she had engaged in no political activities at all, but had quietly and unobstrusively awaited the decision of the autihorities. We venture to request you to reconsider this particular case, as it may well be made a precedent for the future. The fact that in one case the class-room for the infants’ school was declared to be unsuitable, and in the other case the headmistress was refused a teacher’s perm it and perm it of residence, gives rise to the suspicion that it is deliberately being made impossible for the minority to organise infants' schools. At least that is how it is interpreted by the minority. Oberregierungsrat Count von M atuschka has promised us that he will suspend the order for the expulsion of Frâulein W ertfein until your decision has been given. — 30 —

We confidently await this decision in the firm conviction that it will take equitable account of the cultural aspirations of the minority. 3. In our application of April 2nd of this year, we submitted to the Oppeln District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, applications for the issue of the teacher’s permit for the following teachers of Prussian nationality employed in an admi­ nistrative capacity in our Association: Rychel, Wagner, Walasiak a n d von Styp-Rekowski, The applications have not yet been dealt with, as the District Administration, Department for Public Worship" and Education will only grant teacher's permits for particular districts. We have drawn the attention of those concerned to the conference held on March 13th 1931, at the Ministry of Science, Arts and Public Instruction, in the course of which Geheimrat Gxirich clearly stated that: “ The perm it for the erection of a school is restricted to a particular place, but the teacher’s perm it is valid for the whole country ” and referred to the Ministerial Order of July 29th, 1911 {Zentralblatt der Untenichtsverwaltung, 1911, pages 506 fi). We respectfully request you to give a decision in principle in regard to this case also.

(S ig n e d ) J . S z r e ib e r , D irector.

[ Translation .] Appendix 7.

T ie t z e , Sw o r n L a n d S u r v e y o r

Land Measurement in Oslau-Damerow

. Darsekow, August 23rd, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Berlin-Charlottenburg.

W ith reference to my letter of the 10th instant, I have now to inform you of the following fa c ts : In reply to my proposal, the Mayor of Oslau-Damerow informed me by registered post­ card dated the 12th instant (copy of which is enclosed) that the arrangement made to take the boundary measurements at 4 p.m. on the 15th was not convenient to him, and he asked me to change the time to 9 a.m. This I was unable to do in view of my official engagements; but I informed the Mayor by telephone that I would endeavour to be there at 6 p.m. on the same day. Later, I agreed to change the time again, and said I was prepared to arrange to be at Oslau-Damerow on Sunday, August 16th, at 5 p. m. in order to make an end of the matter, and so I expressly stated to the Mayor. I should have thought he would have appreciated such a considerable concession on my part, as it is a good deal to expect me, in view of the heavy pressure of my work, to give up my only free day in the week. Instead of this, when I went to Oslau-Damerow on Sunday afternoon, it was only to find that the Mayor had already left in his car at 4 p.m. I am particularly indignant at the Mayor’s behaviour, the more so as he had asked the son of the householder von Cyrson the same afternoon to remind his father that the surveyor was coming at 5 p.m. to take the boundary measurements. I waited until 6.40 p.m. —more than an hour and a-half—for the Mayor to come back, after I had in vain attempted with the help of his wife to reach him on the telephone. It is no part of my duties to compel the Mayor to keep his appointm ents; but as I am working for you in the matter, and as you have suffered moral and material loss owing to the Mayor’s behaviour, you have the right and the power to bring an action in order to compel him, on pain of a heavy fine by the court, to fulfil his duties as a neighbour in connection with land measure­ ment registration. I should be glad if you would inform me by return of post what you propose to do in the m atter. Maybe a further application to the Landrat in Bütow would be successful, as the excuse given by the Amtsvorsteher of Oslau-Damerow that no suitable representative was to be found to sign the results of the boundary negotiations can hardly be accepted. Under the Prussian administrative regulations, when the Mayor connot be present, the first sheriff automatically takes his place. I have waited a week for Herr Zimmermann to apologise to me for his indefensible behaviour. As a Prussian land surveyor sworn by the State, I do not consider I should be treated as a pawn in a political game. Having done all that is in m y power in a friendly way to settle your affair, I can only advise you to place your case in the hands of a Bütow lawyer with a view to summary proceedings on behalf of your rights. Herr Zimmermann has, of course, to bear any unnecessary expenditure which you have had to incur to date. 31 —

My fee for attendance at the proceedings on the 16th instant is 97.20 M. I shall be obliged if you will pay this amount into my account, No. 596, at the Stolp Kreis Savings Bank at your earliest possible convenience. e (Signed) T ie t z e , Sworn Land Surveyor. x Enclosure.

[Translation.]

The Mayor, Oslau-Damerow.

Oslau-Damerow, August 12th, 1931.

To Herr Tietze, Land Surveyor, Darsekow.

It is very inconvenient for me to take the boundary measurements at Robert von Cyrson's on August 15th, 1931, at 4 p.m. There is no suitable substitute for me available. I should be very much obliged if you could make the time 9 a.m. on August 15th, 1931. Please reply by return. (Signed) Zimmermann, Mayor of Oslau-Damerow, Kreis of BUtoui. Registered.

[ Translation.] Appendix S.

Polish Catholic Schools Association for the V istula D istrict.

Stuhm, January 21st, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

On December 1st, 1930, we sent a registered letter to the Marienwerder District Admi­ nistration applying for permission to open a. Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, but have unfor­ tunately so far received no reply. We would beg the Union of Polish Schools Association to bring influence to bear on the Marienwerder District Administration with a view to a speedier settlement of the application. (Signed) G o lis z . * * *

Union o f P o l is h S chool Associations in Ge r m a n y .

Charlottenburg, January 29th, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Association for the District, Stuhm . In reply to your letter of the 21st inst., regarding permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, we would ask you to make a further application, if possible in person, to the District Administration without whose reply we cannot take the necessary action. ( Signed) D r. M ic h a le k , Director of Department.

I — 32 —

P o l i s h Ca t h o l i c Sc h o o l s A ssociation f o r t h e V i s t u l a D istrict

Stuhm, February 5th, 1931, To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. Following our personal interview with the Marienwerder District Administration authorities regarding permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, we have been informed thai as soon as certain formalities have been complied with, the question will be immediately s e ttle d . (S ig n e d ) G o l is z . * * *

P r u s s ia n D is t r ic t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l ic W o r s h ip a n d E d u c a t io n

Reference: Your letter of February 12th, 1931, regarding the establishment of a kindergarten for the Polish minority at Tiefenau, in the Kreis of Marienwerder.

Marienwerder, February 26th, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Association for the Vistula District, S tu h m . We beg to point out that the preliminary condition for authorisation to establish a kinder­ g a rte n is inter a lia that there should be suitable premises and the equipment necessary for the accommodation, health and education of children. In order to make sure that the premises are really suitable, we would ask you to indicate the house in which the kindergarten is to be accommodated. This information is required for our report to the Minister for Public Welfare who, under a recent Order, has the right to decide on applications of this kind.

(S ig n ed ) D r. B u d d in g .

P o l is h Ca t h o l ic Sc h o o ls A sso c ia tio n f o r t h e V is t u l a D is t r ic t

Stuhm, March 14th, 1931. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. We enclose copy of a letter received from the Marienwerder District Administration regarding he opening of a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, from which it appears that the application will have to be submitted to the Minister. We would therefore ask you to expedite the m atter at the Ministry. (S ig n e d ) G o l isz .

U n io n o f P o l is h School A ssociations in Ge r m a n y

Charlottenburg, March 17th, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Association for the Vistula District, Stu h m . Replying to your letter of 14th inst. regarding the opening of a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, we beg to report that, on December 9th, 1930, the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare issued a special Order concerning kindergartens which was forwarded to you by our letter of February 13th. Please conform strictly to the said Order. We might point out that kindergartens are supervised by the District Administration or the Jugendamt and not by the Ministry. ( Signed) D r. Mic h a l e k , Director of Department. * * * — 33 —

Polish Ca t h o l i c Sc h o o l s A sso c i a t i o n f o r t h e V i s t u l a D istrict

Stuhm, June 18th, 1931.

fo the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

On December 1st, 1930, we forwarded by registered post a letter to the Marienwerder District Administration, containing an application from Madame Helena Polomska of Straszew, together with documents, for permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau. We wrote a second time to the Administration on January 20th, 1931, asking for the application to be dealt with. We have made several personal appeals for a decision to be taken on the question of permission to open a kindergarten at Tiefenau, but have always been put off with the excuse that th e application has been refered to the Schulrat or the Landrat for a decision. To this day, we have not received permission to open the kindergarten (a delay of more than six months). We would point out, on the other hand, that the Germans have meanwhile received permission to open, and have opened a German kindergarten at Tiefenau. It will now be more difficult to establish a Polish kindergarten, as a large number of children are already attending the existing German kindergarten. We would ask the head office to take the necessary action in this connection.

(S ig n e d ) Go l is z .

Union o f P o l is h Sc h o o l Associations in Ge r m a n y

Charlottenburg, July 1st, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Association for the Vistula District, S tu h m . Referring to your letter of the 18th inst., we beg to inform you that the Ordinance concerning Minority Schools in Germany does not apply to kindergartens. We would therefore ask you to try, through the appropriate channels, to obtain permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau. Perhaps a personal application by the Director of your local school association to the Marienwerder District Administration would have the necessary effect (the general regulations apply to kindergartens also). (S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i, C hairm an.

U nion o f P o l is h S chool

Associations i n Ge r m a n y

Charlottenburg, August 5th, 1931.

To the Polish Catholic Schools Association for the Vistula District, Stu h m .

Referring to our letter of July 1st last, please inform us immediately as to what steps your Association has taken with reference to the Marienwerder District Administration to obtain permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau. (S ig n e d ) B a c z e w sk i, C hairm an. — 34 —

P o l i s h C a t h o l i c Sc h o o l s A s s o ciati on f o r t h e V i s t u l a D istrict

Stuhm, August 6th, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. With regard to obtaining permission to open a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau, we beg to state that, as the result of personal enquiries at the Administration offices, the Schulrat informed us that the application had been forwarded to the Ministry for approval. The Administration is also impatiently awaiting a final settlement of the question.

( S ig n ed ) G o l is z .

[Translation.] Appendix 9.

P o l is h Ca t h o l ic S c h o o ls A sso c ia t io n

f o r U p p e r S il e s ia

Urgent. Oppeln, July 21st, 1931.

To the Provincial Police Criminal Investigation Department, O ppeln.

During the night of the igth-2oth instant, at about 3.15 a.m., a shot was fired into the farm of Johann Dziadek at Müllmen (Polnisch Miillmen) in the Kreis of Neustadt. To judge from the bullet found in the room, it must have come from a military carbine, and the direction from which the bullet came shows that it was fired from the road leading to the village. The shot was fired into the room which Dziadek has placed at the disposal of the Polish private school to be set up at Miillmen. It was undoubtedly meant to be an act of terrorism, especially as frequent threats had been current to the effect that “ the Polish private school would be attacked by a ' storm detachment’ ”. The owner, Dziadek, will give further details. The competent Landjâger in Deutsch Miillmen was immediately informed by Herr Dziadek and requested to investigate at once; but by Sunday evening he had not complied with this request, as we are informed by Herr Dziadek. We regard the attitude of the rural constable as neglect of duty, especially as the traces, footprints, etc., which might lead to the detection of the offender could easily have been obliterated during the Sunday. We beg to bring this to your notice, and to request you to investigate this case on the spot at the earliest opportunity. We hereby lodge a complaint against the attitude of the Landjâger concerned, and reserve the right to take any further steps with a view to disciplinary action against him.

(S ig n e d ) J. S z r e ib e r , Director.

St a t e m e n t m a d e b y t h e F a r m e r D z ia d e k

Miillmen, July 21st, 1931. To Oberlandjàger Schucht, Deutsch Miillmen. The suspicion entertained against Georg Chrzaszcz, farmer, of having fired into my house in the morning in question is strengthened by the following circumstances: This afternoon (20th instant) the mason Josef Clemens told me that Georg Chrzaszcz had been drinking the night before, and had been seen in the village all through the night. He also states that Georg Chrzaszcz certainly possesses a military rifle. Josef Chrzaszcz made the butt of it, and he has at least 150 cartridges. In the course of a quarrel with Paul M ichalik and Chrzaszcz, Paul Michalik shouted at him: " Just wait, you cursed * weapon king’, I’U report you one of these days for having that rifle of yours and the other weapons Josef Clemens says that, apart from the rifle in question, he has a number of pistols and revolvers. — 35 —

flemens pointed out to Chrzaszcz that it was dangerous to be in possession of a military „nnn etc. whereupon Chrzaszcz answered : “ Don’t you worry ! I have told constable Stron- j 6]9 all about it, and nothing can happen to me. ” Clemens also says that, while he was in the fïtn rv Chrzaszcz fired a shot through the lavatory window from a military nfle and it was rnprcv he was not hit. Clemens’ father wanted to report the matter. On another occasion, TïYan7 Przvklenk, junior, was hoeing potatoes when Georg Chrzaszcz fired just over Przyklenk s jjead and on another occasion Georg Chrzaszcz fired off shots at night from his farm for no reaSOGeorgaChrzaszcz’s father, who is the actual owner of the property, once broke Georg r>ir/aszcz's rifle on a windlass and hid the barrel. Georg Chrzaszcz came in at that moment and S c another rifle, and aiming it at his father said, “ I’ll shoot you dead”, and his father had .run away. Georg Chrzaszcz shot all the dogs and cats in the distnct; he shot two cats and Hog belonging to Clemens and a dog belonging to Johann Solloch. He also put a bullet throug a new watering-can at Clemens’ house, and rendered it useless. His wife Marie née Gosek, once fetched him from the inn at Hoinowitz; naturally he did not want to go with her, and when she insisted he fetched a horse-whip from the innkeeper T a risch and gave her a sound thrashing in the street. . . , When a labourer named Nossol upbraided Georg Chrzaszcz for his brutality, the latter turned from his wife and set upon him, so that Nossol had to escape into the inn. As a result nf his brutality his wife was in bed for a fortnight, and such incidents occur quite often at their house. After one exhibition of this kind, Josef Clemens went to Chrzaszcz s where his father, his mother and his wife were all crying and had all been knocked about, while Georg Chrzaszcz himself lay on his bed unconscious, foaming at the mouth. When Josef Clemens left to go home, Franz Przyklenk, junior, told me that he ought to be present when the house was searched, as he would be able to find everything, and that T onlv needed to drop a hint to the constable about what Georg Chrzaszcz had told me during he procession on St Mark’s day as to what he would do to the Polish school and the Polish schoolmaster, that the suspicion against Chrzaszcz had deepened and that they would take him into custody whether he was the culprit or not. . Again on St. Mark’s day, I left the church at Deutsch Mullmen with the wheelwright Franz Chrzaszcz, who also threatened that it would be worse for the Polish school than during the time of the insurrection, and that I should have no time to get away. The son, Josef Chrzaszcz is also a handy man with a gun and makes guns; and, as the two —Josef and’ Georg Chrzaszcz—are very close friends, I suspect that the former also has a

fingC£ beg ^vou L

[Translation.]

Union o f P o l is h School Associations in Germany

Charlottenburg, August 6th, 1931.

To the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Provincial Court, Neisse, Upper Silesia. A complaint is hereby lodged and application made for prosecution on the strength of the following incidents : During the night of July 20th, 1931 (Saturday to Sunday), at about 3.15 a.m^ a shot was fired into the farmhouse of Johann Dziadek at Miillmen in the Kreis of Neustadt. To judge from the bullet found in the farmhouse, it must have come from a military carbine, and the direction from which the bullet came shows that it was fired from the road leading to the village. The shot was fired into the room which Dziadek has placed at the disposal of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany (Head Office in Berlin) for the use of the Polish Minority School to be established at Miillmen. The double window-panes in the schoolroom have been broken, and there is a bullet hole in the opposite wall. The competent Landjâger at Deutsch Miillmen was immediately informed of the incident by Herr Dziadek and requested to investigate without delay; but the police did not arrive to investigate the circumstances until Monday afternoon, July 21st. They took the bullet away with them. The offender is unknown, and application for the prosecution of a person or persons unknown has therefore been made. Never­ theless, among the inhabitants of the commune suspicion has fallen upon a certain Georg Chrzaszcz, of Miillmen, who is said to be in possession of rifles and ammunition. Attention is drawn in this connection to the statem ent of Johann Dziadek of Miillmen on July 2ist, 1 9 3 1 » to Oberlandjàger Schucha at Deutsch Miillmen. — 36 —

The following may be named as witnesses of the occurrence : (1) Johann Dziadek and his wife, (2) Clemens Dziadek and his mother Franziska, (3) Johann Hemmerle and his wife, (4) The night watchman, Theodor Pudelek—all of Miillmen. These witnesses did not see or recognise the offender, but heard the shot from close quarters and noted the circumstances of the incident. It is clear from the whole circumstances that this is an act undertaken against the Polish minority school, especially as frequent threats have been current on the part of hostile elements to the effect that the Polish private school would be attacked by a “ storm detachment ”. The owner, Dziadek, is prepared to make further depositions. The Union of Polish School Associations is the body responsible for the maintenance of the Polish minority schools throughout Germany including the Polish minority school at Miillmen, and is therefore the “ injured party " within the meaning of the Criminal Code, and as such is entitled to have the offender prosecuted The following are the criminal offences involved: Damage to personal property (Articles 30-; et seq. of the Criminal Code), breach of the peace (Article 360, No. 11, of the Criminal Code), unlawful use of firearms in an inhabited place (Article 367, No. 8, of the Criminal Code) and infringement of the Firearms Law of April 12th, 1928. The proceedings are a m atter of public interest, and a public prosecution is accordingly requested. The title of the undersigned as the legal representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany is proved by the enclosed extract from the Register of Associations. At the same time, full powers are given to the President, Herr Jan Baczewski, of Kurfürsten- strasse 125, Berlin W. (who is one of the undersigned), to act henceforth as the legal representative of the Union in the case and especially to express and receive opinions on behalf of the Union and to depute powers to others.

(S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i, (S ig n e d ) D r. K a c z m a r e k , President. Secretary-General.

Ch i e f P u b l ic P r o s e c u t o r

Neisse, September 30th, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Berlin-Charlottenburg.

W ith reference to the complaint of August 6th, 1931, lodged against Georg Chrzaszcz, of Miillmen, for illegal possession of weapons, breach of the peace, damage to property and infringement of Article 367, No. 8, of the Criminal Code, I have quashed the proceedings. The offender has not been found and the suspicion expressed against Chrzaszcz has not been confirmed. Chrzaszcz denies having committed the offence, and states that he was at home from 1 a.m. to 6 a.m. during the night in question. His home was searched for weapons without result. The fact that the accused, as he himself admits, was formerly in possession of weapons is not sufficient proof of his having committed the offences of which he is now accused.

[Signature.]

[ Translation.] Appendix 10.

P o l i s h Sc h o o l A s s o c ia t io n f o r t h e A dministrative D is t r ic t o f K O s l in

Bütow, September 9th, 1930. To the Landrat at Bütow.

We have obtained the following information and request you to take the necessary action : On Sunday, September 7th last, the Polish minority schools of Oslau-Damerow, B ernsdor and Grobenzin organised a children’s festival at Oslau-Damerow. The schools of Bemsdorf and Grobenzin arrived at about 3 o'clock in the afternoon. As it was raining, the children assembled in the house of Basilius Wensierski. At the same time a number of motor-cars filled with members of the Stahlhelm entered the village. The members of the Stahlhelm m arched — 37 —

in close order through the village and then came back and took up their position in front of the house where the children were. The teacher Labon lives opposite Wensierski in the house belonging to Franz von Cysewski. At the time, the teacher Wysiecki of Bernsdorf was also in the house. A member of the Stahlhelm made a provocative speech in the space between these houses, nd it was this speech which gave rise to the outrages which followed. A t the end of his speech the speaker gave the order: “ A party will go and pull down the decorations ”. The Stahlhelmers broke their ranks and a num ber of them rushed into von Cysewski’s house where the Polish teacher lived. They shouted: " W here is the Polish teacher, where is the Polish dog, let us get at him ?” At the same time, several people climbed on to the roof of von Cysewski’s house and waved two black, white and red flags on the roof. When the wife of the owner, von Cysewski, told them that they had no business to do this, they said : “ Keep quiet, if you do not want bombs to be thrown into the house ”.

Witnesses : The owner, Franz von Cysewski, and Frau Leokadie von Cysewski, Marta von Cysewski, Franz von Palubicki and the Klawitter band from Bütow. Later on, some twenty to thirty men entered the dwelling belonging to Josef von Palubicki and forced their way into the classroom of the Polish minority school. Two pictures were torn down from the wall, two maps were damaged (one apparently with a knife and the other by scribbling), the timetable was torn up and the thermometer has completely disappeared. The chalk was thrown on to the ground and stamped on. The blackboard was sent over to the inn and only sent back later. The Stahlhelmers later came back into the schoolroom and this time insulted the owner’s son, Teofil von Palubicki. The leader of the second group shouted to Teofil von Palubicki: “ You 21-year-old cub, take your pipe out of your mouth when you speak to me, or are those your Polish manners ? ” When Teofil von Palubicki answered that he was 31 years old and had served in the war, the leader said: " Well you ought to be ashamed of letting the school to the Poles ”, and spat on the ground in front of him. The other Stahlhelmers followed his example.

Witnesses : Josef von Palubicki and his wife, Teofil von Palubicki and the owner, Robert von Cyrson. Stahlhelmers also entered Basilius Wensierski’s house and tried to force their way into the room where the children were having coffee under the supervision of the teacher Gabrych of Grobenzin. The Stahlhelmers wanted to drag the teacher out. The children were so frightened and intimidated that they were all in tears.

Witnesses : Basilius Wensierski and his wife, and Câcilie von Cysewski. Some twenty Stahlhelmers burst into the house of the workman Johann Saborowski and of Thomas Cieszynski and shouted to the inmates : “ Where is the Polish schoolmaster ? We want to kill the dog. ” Johann Saborowski’s son was seized by the collar and shaken and was told he would be hanged if he did not say where the Polish teacher was. The Stahlhelmers searched the whole house and visited the attics and the cellar, where they broke two bottles of syrup. When Saborowski protested against this extraordinary search of his house, the Stahlhelmers answered: “ This is a German house and to-day it has been handed over to us to do what we like with: we might blow it up. After the elections we will come back and smash you up, every m other’s son of you. ” At the same time a black, white and red flag was taken up on the roof of this house. One member of the Stahlhelmers spat in the face of Maria von Palubicki, who was staying in the house as a visitor. After a time, another group of men came into the house on the pretext that somebody had " made a long nose ” at the Stahlhelmers as they left. They suspected the inhabitants of the house of having done this, although, as has been ascertained, they had done nothing of the kind. During the second visit, the workman Johann Saborowski and Anton Cieszynski were actually assaulted. Expressions such as: “ We’ll do you in, you Polish rabble ”, were freely used.

Witnesses : Johann Saborowski and his wife, Agathe Saborowski, August Schulz, Thomas Cieszynski and his wife, Pelagia, Anton and Albert Cieszynski, Maria von Palubicki (all of Oslau-Damerow) ; Albert Strominski and his wife, and Frau Pahlberg, of G ro b en zin . From the remarks: “ We will teach you to hold Polish school feasts ”, it must be concluded that the Stahlhelmers had come specially to break up the children’s feast and to intimidate the population and the children by the actions and demeanour of the Stahlhelmers. The members of the Stahlhelm, who numbered about 300, surrounded the farms of those known to have Polish sympathies and prevented the inmates from getting out so that they were unable to attend to the cattle. If anyone ventured into the street, he was grossly insulted. A particularly outrageous instance was that of Frau Pela, who was in an advanced state of pregnancy and was insulted in the coarsest and grossest manner. The expressions used against Frau Pela cannot be repeated here, but they will be recorded when the witnesses (Frau Wensierski and Anton von Cysewski) are examined. Meanwhile, another group of Stahlhelmers pulled down the decorations, marched ostentatiously with them to the lake and threw them into the water. We must place on record that the police protection was inadequate. The only officers present were the Landjagermeister Musahl and Oberlandjàger Scherwart. The inadequacy of the police protection is shown by the fact that the above-mentioned outrages were allowed

I - 3 8 - to take place. As, in spite of the critical situation, the police called in no assistance, we were obliged to give up the children’s festival we had planned. In order to protect the children from interference and attacks, they had to be taken home in spite of the rain. As they went they were booed by the Stahlhelmers. In view of these circumstances, we are obliged to lodge an emphatic protest. We would request the Landrat to undertake an immediate enquiry and to be good enough to inform us of the result. (S ig n e d ) B a u e r , Secretary.

U n io n o f P o l i s h Sc h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Registered. Charlottenburg, September 19th, 1930, To the Prussian Minister of the Interior, Berlin. We have the honour to enclose for your information a copy of the complaint we have lodged with the Chief Public Prosecutor at Stolp, and request you to take the necessary proceedings against the two police officials. Both officials—viz., Landjagermeister Musahl a n d Oberlandjàger Scherwart—were present during the outrages. The Polish-speaking population received no protection from these officials. They regard it as strange that, if the officials felt unable to cope with the outrages themselves, they did not immediately ask for police reinforcements. The behaviour of the two officials gives the impression that they viewed the outrages with tolerance, especially as they seemed to take no steps whatever : they did not even take the names of the participants; nor, as far as we know, has any police report been made by the two officials.

(S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i, P resident. 1 enclosure.

U n io n o f P o l i s h

Sc h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, September 19th, 1930. To the Chief Public Prosecutor, Stolp. On September 7th, 1930, a school treat was to be held in Oslau-Damerow, in the Kreis of Bütow, for the pupils of the Polish minority schools of Oslau-Damerow, Bemsdorf and Grobenzin. The competent police authorities were duly informed that the function would be held, with the direct intention that they would supply the necessary police protection to ensure the function passing off in an orderly fashion. The schoolteachers Wysiecki, of Bernsdorf, and Gabrych, of Grobenzin, had already arrived with their pupils in Oslau-Damerow and, in company with the local schoolteacher Labon and his pupils, were preparing to march out to the field where the treat was to be held, when —about 3 p.m.—300 members of the Stahlhelm, some in motor-cars and some in lorries, entered the village and broke up the celebrations. Six hundred members of the Stahlhelm had assembled at Grossrakitt—among them, Major von Wolff, the Divisional Commandant (Herr Zander), the Divisional Deputy Commandant (Herr Albrecht), Herr Mrozek, Herr Schiers (of Bütow), Herr Pieper, and two shop assistants in the employ of Herr Tesch, or Tosch, of Bütow. In Grossrakitt, the above-mentioned detachment of the Stahlhelm, 300 strong, received orders to march to Oslau-Damerow and break up the school treat. The operation of dispersing the school celebration proceeded substantially as follows, in the presence of Landjagermeister Müsahl and Oberlandjàger Scherwart. The Stahlhelm detachment marched in military formation through the village, turned, and took up position on the village street, particularly between the property of Basilius Wensierski, in whose house the children were assembled, and the property of Franz Cysewski, where the local schoolteacher Labon lodges. A member of the Stahlhelm made a speech, an order was given, and the detachment broke up into groups and started to take liberties in the village. The festoons stretched across the street were tom down and thrown into one of the two village ponds. It should here be observed that these decorations were supplied by Herr and Frau Bola, of Oslau-Damerow, and that Frau Maria Bola personally saw men in the Stahlhelm uniform tear the festoons down and throw them into the pond. — 39 —

A section of the Stahlhelm burst into Franz Cysewski’s house, and occupied the yard, the hall and the living-rooms of the latter. They asked Frau Cysewski if that was the Polish school, and indulged in such invectives as: “ W hy don't the Poles go back to Poland? W hat do they mean by keeping Polish schools? Where is the Polish dog of a teacher? He should be killed! ” Some of the invaders climbed on to the roof of the house, from which they waved a black, white and red flag. When Frau Cysewski warned them not to smash in the roof, she ;vas commanded to keep quiet or " the house would be blown up ”, She was also pushed out into the hall, and the door banged behind her. Witnesses : F, Cysewski and his wife, M arta Cysewski, Franz Palubicki and the Klawitter Band from Bütow.

Another section of the Stahlhelm burst into Josef Palubicki's house, near Cysewski’s, forced an entrance into the schoolroom, tore a couple of pictures from the wall, took the black­ board away to the inn and brought it back again, scattered the chalk about and trampled on it, tore down the officially authorised timetable, and damaged two maps, one obviously by a gash with a knife, and the other by crossing out two Polish names with a copying pencil and writing the German names on top; the school thermometer has not since been found. Bursting in again into the schoolroom, they molested Theophil, the son of Josef Palubicki, shouting at him: " You 21-year-old cub! Take your pipe out of your mouth when you talk to us! Or are these Polish manners ? ” When Palubicki replied that he was 31 years of age and had fought in the great war, his assailants told him: " You ought to be ashamed of yourself, letting the school to Poles ”, and spat on the ground at his feet. Witnesses : J. Palubicki and his wife, Theophil Palubicki, Robert Cyrson.

The members of the Stahlhelm forced their way also into Basilius Wensierski’s house, where the school-children were gathered. The children were terribly frightened and started to cry. To the accompaniment of threats and curses a search was made for the schoolteacher. Witnesses : B. Wensierski and his wife, Cecilia Cysewski.

Other members of the Stahlhelm forced their way into Johann Zaborowski's and Thomas Cieszynski’s houses. Curses and threats that they would murder the teacher were again heard. Young Zaborowski was seized by the collar and threatened that he would be hung if he did not say where the teacher was. A thorough search was made of the Zaborowski house, from cellar to garret, in the course of which two bottles of syrup were smashed. When Herr Zabo­ rowski protested against the search, he was told: " This is a German house. It has been handed over to us to-day to do what we like with it: we m ig h t blow it up. W e'll come back and smash• you up, every mother’s son of you. " Here also the members of the Stahlhelm climbed on to the roof of the dwelling-house and waved a black, white and red flag. One of them spat in the face of Frau Maria Palubicki, who was in Zaborowski’s house. In the end, the Stahlhelm withdrew, when the school treat had been abandoned and the Klawitter Band from Bütow had been sent home. On the way, some of the Stahlhelm broke into Zaborowski’s house again on the pretext that they had been jeered at, and assaulted Johann Zaborowski and Anton Cieszynski, threaten­ ing them with the words: *' We'll do you in, you Polish rabble! " Witnesses : J. Zaborowski and his wife, August Schulz, Thomas Cieszynski and wife, Maria Palubicki, and Strominski and wife, Frau Pahlberg (the latter three from Grobenzin). About 6 p.m., the Stahlhelm detachment formed up and left Oslau-Damerow for Gross­ rakitt, where they rejoined the other Stahlhelm detachments which were waiting for them there. Special mention should be made of one of the insulting expressions used, which was levelled at Frau Pela, a woman in the last stages of pregnancy. The witnesses Anton Cysewski, Frau Wensierski, and Frau Pela herself can repeat the expressions which were used. In drawing your attention to the foregoing, we beg to refer to the following articles, copies of which are annexed : “ Stahlhelm compelled by Polish provocation to take action ”, from the Bütower Anzeiger, No. 209, of September 8th, 1930, and “ Will it be a lesson? Incredible Polish provocation at Oslau-Damerow. The Stahlhelm tidies up ", from the Grenztnark, No. 214, of September 12th, 1930. We beg to request you to prosecute the m atter further and, in particular, to investigate whether, in addition to the circumstantial evidence of material dam age, breach of domestic peace, insults, criminal threats and coercion, there has not also been incitation to class conflict (Article 130) and breach of the peace of the realm (Article 125 of the Criminal Code). So far as the offences are of the kind which necessitate the lodging of an application, we apply herewith for criminal proceedings to be taken and request that the case should be regarded as affecting the interests of the State, and that we should be admitted as co-plaintiffs. You will note that we are the owners of the articles of school equipment which were damaged, and are the persons statutorily responsible for the maintenance of the three Polish minority schools in question, at Oslau-Damerow, Bemsdorf and Grobenzin.

(Signed) B a c z e w s k i , President. 2 enclosures.

I — 40 —

(F ro m th e Bütower Anzeiger, No. 209, of September 8th, 1930.)

“ St a h l h e l m c o m p e l l e d b y P o l is h P r o v o c a t io n t o t a k e A c t io n .

“ Disgraceful Conduct of the Polish Section of the Population in the Frontier District of Bütow Polish School Festivities in the German Locality of Oslau-Damerow : Polish Schoolteacher Labon of Oslau-Damerow ordered in the Presence of Two German Police Official spersonally to remove ' Emblems ' with Polish Wording. "W e have received the following communication: ‘ Citizens, Peasants and Labourers ! W hat is going on in your native Pomerania ? Last Sunday a Polish school function was provocatively celebrated on German national soil. Festoons decorated with the Polish colours and bearing the Polish inscription " A Hearty Welcome ” were put up in the German village of Oslau-Damerow. The music was supplied by the Klawitter band from Bütow, as it was impossible to get the Polish band from Berent for the occasion. The Polish Government’s representative M. Jean Bauer appeared in person to carry out his duties. Large numbers of presents for the children were generously supplied by the Polish State. All this was to proceed in the presence of the German population, which naturally begged for protection and support as it could not, and would not, believe that it would be abandoned to the arbitrary mercies of the Poles. At the last moment this appeal reached the Stahlhelm Bund der Frontsoldaten which had organised a German function in the frontier village of Grossrakitt and Schwarz damerkow. There they learnt of what was going on in Oslau-Damerow : the call of their kin was heard, and as one man they exclaimed : " We must go there; our native German soil shall not be polluted ”. The command went forth, and forty motor cars and lorries with 300 members of the Stahlhelm on board prepared to leave for Oslau-Damerow. In an hour they travelled a distance of forty kilometres, and the detachment appeared at the entrance to the village. Preceded by the Stahlhelm band which had accompanied them and by a band playing German marching songs, they marched through the village, to the amazement of the pro-Polish Kassubes, who by dint of promises and inducements have lately been won over to the Polish cause. The officers in charge had great difficulty in restraining the rank and file from giving vent to their irritation, particularly when, during the singing of the German national anthem in the yard of the house inhabited by the Polish schoolteacher Labon, several pro-Poles gave vent to loud and unmistakable jeers. The Polish women of the village even went so far as to flutter their skirts and put out their tongues when the Stahlhelm contingent was marching off. Could anything be more provocative ? We give this last-hour warning, there­ fore, to all concerned. Have done with this Polish arrogance; or the German frontier population e will be forced to take matters into its own hands.’ " Frontier folk, do you realise now the dangers which threaten you ? Do you know that the Poles are collecting names in order to submit lists to the League of Nations with a view to a plebiscite ? Are you aware that every family which sends a child to the Polish minority school is given 600 , and that when a child leaves the Polish minority school it is promised a watch ? Do you know that at the elections for the Kreis Diet in November 1925, 384 (and, in November 1929, 787) Polish votes were recorded in the Kreis of Bütow? In four years, therefore, the number of the pro-Polish population entitled to vote has doubled. Do you realise that at this very moment Polish employees and labourers are earning a living in our native country, while Germans are compelled to stand idle ? Are you aware also that the Poles maintain an extensive espionage system in our frontier territory which penetrates even as far as Government Departments ? Wake up, frontier folk, and beware! “ The Polish school and national festival was to be celebrated on this occasion in a parti­ cularly spectacular way. Special arrangements had been made to use a meadow belonging to M. Bresa for the festivities. Polish harvesters were actually to be brought in from abroad, and members of the Polish Sejm were even expected in Oslau-Damerow yesterday. Polish schoolchildren from the neighbouring districts were also to be present, so that for once Oslau- Damerow would really have been gay with the Polish colours. Just when everything was about to begin, ' the heavens opened ’ and the people arrived in Oslau-Damerow soaked to the skin, particularly the Bernsdorf school party, which had to wait in the pouring rain in an open carriage at Bernsdorf for almost half an hour for a conveyance which ultimately did not appear at all. As the Poles, however, still proposed to proceed with the function in spite of the rain, the Stahlhelm made an appearance also, and the Poles have now lost all further interest in festivities.”

(F ro m Die Grenzmark, No. 214, of September 12th, 1930.)

“W i l l it b e a L e s s o n ? I n c r e d ib l e P o l i s h P r o v o c a t io n a t O s l a u D a m e r o w : T h e S t a h l h e l m t i d i e s u p .

“ On Sunday, a Polish school and national holiday, which was to be attended by all the Poles in the district of Bütow and by a number of Polish harvesters, was to be held in Oslau­ Damerow, where, for the last twelve months, a Polish school has been making itself at home. — 41 —

“ On Sunday, therefore, the whole of Oslau-Damerow was ostentatiously monopohsed bv the PoUsh element, whose conduct in this neighbourhood becomes more and more truculent. “ The Polish colours were conspicuous on all the houses and in the streets, and the Polish schoolteacher Labon and his accomplices had even put up emblems with Polish inscriptions. A t the very moment when the Poles were organising the festival procession, the East Pomeranian detachment of the Stahlhelm, with forty to fifty lorries and 400 men, had assembled for a border excursion at Schwarzdamerkow, where the Oslau-Damerow Germans’ appeal for help reached them. Orders were immediately given to proceed to the threatened village. W ithin an horn: 400 of the Stahlhelm were at the gates of Oslau-Damerow, and marched through it in procession preceded by musicians and the band of the Stahlhelm. The Polish schoolteacher Labon was -impelled, in the presence of two German rural constables, to remove the notices with Polish inscriptions; the Polish national insignia had also to disappear, and the Polish national holiday, besides being effectively spoiled by a downpour kindly provided by good St. Peter, was cancelled. An hour later, the Stahlhelm detachments withdrew and the officers found it very difficult to restrain their men from punishing the Poles for the provocation offered. “ The appearance of the Stahlhelm in Oslau-Damerow aroused great satisfaction and enthusiasm among the local German population and effectively damped the self-conceit of the Poles.”

In this connection the Schlawer Zeitung writes: " The need for German speech on the Polish frontier is shown— e.g., by the fact that, in the Kreis of Bütow, the Polish Government pays 600 marks to every person who sends his child to the Polish school. Traitors go round with lists and canvass. And to think that this is tolerated by the authorities ! "

The L a n d r a t No. 7257/1

R ef.: Your letter of the gth instant. Bütow, September 22nd, 1930.

To the Polish School Association of the Koslin Administrative District, under cover to H. Bauer, B ütow . Official investigations made into the incidents which occurred at the Polish school festival in Oslau-Damerow show that no police action on my part is required. Should you, nevertheless, consider yourselves compelled to take proceedings against individuals involved in the incidents, I would recommend you to bring a civil action against them in the competent court of justice.

(S ig n e d ) B a ro n v o n W o l f f .

Un io n o f P o l is h S c h o o l

Associations i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, September 30th, 1930. To the L a n d ra t, B ütow .

Our associate member, the Bütow School Association, has forwarded us your reply of September 22nd, 1930. If you see no justification for police action in connection with the incidents which occurred at the Polish school festival at Oslau-Damerow, we can only, to our regret, conclude that you tolerate the action of the local Stahlhelm, and do not disapprove either of the order given by the local Stahlhelm Commandant, von Wolff. Being thus unable to count on our functions being adequately protected by the competent authorities in the Kreis of Bütow, we shall be compelled to organise our own protection, regardless of the political conse­ quences which this may involve. As soon as the criminal proceedings which we have asked the Chief Public Prosecutor at Stolp to take against the Stahlhelm for their " heroic " perfor­ mances at Oslau-Damerow are concluded, we shall make the necessary arrangements. (Signed) B a c z e w s k i , President. * * * — 42 —

Registered. Oslau-Damerow, October, 1930.

To the Chief Public Prosecutor, Stol-p. Referring to the letter addressed to you on September 19th, 1930, by the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany regarding the breaking up of the school treat at Oslau-Damerow on September 7th, we, the undersigned, beg to request the Public Prosecutor’s department to initiate legal proceedings. [Signatures.]

T h e Ch ie f P u b l ic P r o se c u t o r

Ref. : Your communication of September 19th, 1930. Stolp, Pomerania, November 21st, 1930. As a result of the evidence furnished at a judicial hearing of the witnesses referred to in your communication, and of the reports of the two officials of the rural constabulary who were tfesent on September 7th, 1930, in Oslau-Damerow, and also of the facts established by the {ocal police officials of Oslau-Damerow, the following facts would appear to be established. It is confirmed that on September 7th, 1930, the Stahlhelm arrived in Oslau-Damerow to protest against the Polish minority schools holding a celebration. They had been informed that the village was festooned with white and red flowers and placarded with Polish inscriptions. The latter had already been removed at the instance of the local police before the arrival of the Stahlhelm. The two festoons which still remained were taken down by a group of members of the Stahlhelm and damaged in the process. On the orders, however, of the officers commanding the Stahlhelm, no other acts of violence were committed against persons or property, particularly as the two members of the local police present would otherwise have intervened at once. I am compelled therefore to deny that there was any breach of the peace of the realm (Criminal Code, Article 125)— to wit, that a crowd of individuals riotously assembled a n d combined to commit acts of violence against persons or property. The Stahlhelm marched into the village in close formation, and the officers had exhortedt heir men to observe the strictest discipline and not to commit any acts of violence. The same applies to Article 124 of the Criminal Code. In so far as criminal offences in the shape of breaches of domestic peace, molestation, threats or material damage were committed, only those persons guilty of the acts can be held respon­ sible. It has not proved possible to trace the individuals. The persons attacked have deposed that their assailants were strangers of whom they knew nothing. They failed, moreover, to supply any serviceable information which would enable the parties to be traced. I have also considered whether there was any breach of Article 107a of the Criminal Code. Again the answer appears to be in the negative. When the Stahlhelm entered Oslau-Damerow, no steps had yet been taken either to assemble on the field where the fête was to be held or to march in procession thither. Owing to the heavy rain, the participants were still indoors, and they were not prevented from going out either by force or by criminal threats in the sense of Article 1 of the Criminal Code. No attem pt in fact was made to proceed with the festivities. There was thus not even any question of coercion (Criminal Code, Article 240). None of the witnesses was able to show that there had been open incitement— e.g., by any particular individual (Criminal Code, Article 130) — to commit acts of violence against the Polish-speaking section of the population. As regards the material damages done to the two festoons, the owners who prepared the festoons stated that they would not sue for the material damages sustained. There is thus no necessity for the Public Prosecutor to proceed against the persons—who in any case have not been identified—who destroyed the festoons or against the Stahlhelm officers who are said to have given the order for such destruction (Criminal Code, Articles 303 and 61). Nothing has been ascertained as to the whereabouts of the thermometer which disappeared from the schoolroom. I have accordingly quashed the proceedings. (Signed) F a b ia n .

* * *

U n io n o f P o l ish School A ssociations

in Ge r m a n y

Charlottenburg, November 29th, 1930. To the Public Prosecutor General, Stettin. We beg to appeal herewith against the decision of the Chief Public Prosecutor in Stolp, dated November 21st, 1930, in the m atter of the application of September 19th, 1930. — 43 —

We cannot accept the view taken by the Chief Public Prosecutor in the decision against which we are appealing. _ Tn our view, the question as to whether the Stahlhelm authorities are criminally responsible {or the various offences committed at Oslau-Damerow is to be answered in the affirmative. ° Were it the fact that the Stahlhelm command had merely ordered the festoons to be removed, , tjie festoons would have been removed. The 300 members of the Stahlhelm were certainly 011 f ieft to their own devices in Oslau-Damerow. They had an officer who was instructed by ”h° stahlhelm command to carry out their orders in Oslau-Damerow. How can it therefore Z explained that, in spite of the presence of this officer and in spite, as we need hardly emphasise, f the presence of his subordinate officers, the Stahlhelm was not content merely to remove the festoons ? Where was this officer or his subordinates when, at the close of the speech, the Stahlhelm detachment dispersed, burst into the various houses, crowded the yards, made themselves at home in the living-quarters, conducted domiciliary searches, climbed up on the roofs from which they waved the black, white and red flag, searched for the schoolteacher ttered—and not merely uttered—threats to kill, wrecked the schoolroom, and the rest? Did anv witness testify that the officer commanding or his subordinates took any steps to prevent the above proceedings? If the order of the Stahlhelm command was limited to what the Chief Public Prosecutor assumes, why did the officer not withdraw his detachment from Oslau­ Damerow when the festoons had been taken down ? Why did the Stahlhelm remain a moment longer in Oslau-Damerow ? It is clear from what has been said that, if the orders concerned merely the removal of the festoons, th ey were only a pretence. B oth th e Stahlhelm com m and and their subordinates were, and must have been, quite clear that there was more than this afoot. That the orders of the Stahlhelm command went farther, that they went even so far as to embrace the acts committed by the various members of the Stahlhelm in Oslau-Damerow, is proved not only by the attitude of the officer in charge and his subordinates, but above all bv the conduct of the members of the Stahlhelm themselves — conduct which proves that there had been a detailed discussion beforehand of what they meant to do and what they meant not to do. Even less convincing is the Chief Public Prosecutor’s argument in support of his view in regard to the extent of the criminal responsibility of the Stahlhelm command. He contends that the reason why the latter confined themselves to ordering the removal of the festoons was th a t otherwise the two police officials present would have immediately intervened. If it is asked why the two police officials did not take action, the reply, according to the Chief Public Prosecutor, is: " Because the Stahlhelm command had only given orders for the removal of the festoons ”. Were the police aware of this? If they were, why did they not take effective action immediately they became aware of the various incidents ? Our view, based on consideration of the whole proceedings, is that the Stahlhelm command must be held entirely responsible under the criminal law for what happened in Oslau-Damerow. First, as regards the offence of breach of the peace of the realm. It was a clear and obvious case of a crowd of people publicly holding a riotous assembly. We would request that an investigation be made as to whether, en route to Oslau-Damerow or in Oslau-Damerow itself, the detachment of 300 men was joined by other persons not members of the detachment, who took part in the proceedings. The circumstance that the Stahlhelm marched into the village in close formation definitely marks the action as a breach of the peace of the realm. The evidence shows that there was also a breach of the provisions of the Criminal Code, Articles 124 an d 130. We desire, in conclusion, to refer to the Chief Public Prosecutor’s view that there was no breach of Articles 107Æ and 240 of the Criminal Code on the ground that, when the Stahlhelm detachment arrived in Oslau-Damerow, the school treat had not yet begun, the participants having been forced by heavy rain to remain indoors, and that no attempt was made to proceed with the function. But the schoolchildren from Grobenzin and Bernsdorf had already gathered in Oslau­ Damerow. The fact that, in spite of the rain, parents came from other villages with their children shows they were emphatically determined to proceed with the celebrations. If, however, a function is so interfered with by outsiders as to make it preferable to cancel the arrangements, no one should be allowed to assert that the function had not yet started and that no attempt was made to proceed with it. We would therefore ask for a fresh study to be made, both in respect of the facts and in respect of the law, of the results of the investigation to date. We would ask, in especial, that it should be ascertained which members of the Polish minority were expressly forbidden by the Stahlhelm to quit their houses, and were thus unable to go into their own farmyards even, and had to leave their livestock unattended during the whole proceedings. We would further ask you to take the deposition of Mme. Agatha Cysewski of Oslau-Damerow, as to whether and how she was jostled in the passage by the policeman Musahl, and whether the door of the house was slammed in her face when she wanted to forbid the members of the Stahlhelm in the yard from climbing on to the roof of her house. (Signed) B a c z e w s k i, President.

* * * — 44 —

P u b l i c P r o s e c u t o r G e n e r a l .

Ref.: Appeal dated November 29th, 1930, in re com­ plaint against von Wolff and others, concerning breach of the peace of the realm, etc. Stettin, January 5th, 1931,

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Berlin-Charlottenburg.

On examining the facts of the case, I find no justification for instructing the Chief Public Prosecutor to initiate a State prosecution or to resume the investigations. The result of the investigations made shows that the arguments contained in the Chief Public Prosecutor’s decision of November 21st, 1930, to the effect that there has been no breach of Articles 107a, 124,130 and 240 of the Criminal Code, are exact. The representations contained in your plea for appeal do not justify any other finding. Further evidence on these points is not required, as the facts of the case are sufficiently clear. The impossibility of identifying the persons guilty of breaches of domestic peace, molestation, material damages and menaces, is in part du» to the fact that the members of the Stahlhelm all wore their uniforms and caps! To identify beyond any possibility of doubt the individual offenders, even if the members of the Stahlhelm who were present on the occasion in Oslau-Damerow were assembled and confronted with the witnesses, would, in view of the large number of participants, be impracticable. It cannot under the circumstances be shown that the Stahlhelm command can be held responsible for the action of individual members. The statement of the officer commanding the detachment that he exhorted his men to observe the strictest discipline and warned them against indiscretions, and that he also immediately recalled them on learning of the excesses committed by certain individuals, cannot be refuted. He maintains that the only instructions he gave were to remove the festoons. In the case of the festoon belonging to the farmer KuUas, this was done without inflicting any damage, and Kullas, for this reason, did not bring an action. The fact that, in response to the order for rem oval, the festoons belonging to Stefan Bohla were dam aged does not imply that the officer commanding the Stahlhelm committed a criminal offence. He cannot be sued for instigation to material damage even if—despite Bohla’s contradictory statements in regard to an action for material damage—such an action were held to lie. As regards the incident referred to in the concluding paragraph of your appeal, Cysewski and his wife have testified that she was " hustled ” into the kitchen by the police officer Musahl with the words: " Go in there ”. The policeman's intention was to separate Mme. Cysewski from the members of the Stahlhelm facing her, with whom she had been having an altercation, in order to prevent any possible incidents. The fact that in doing so he may have handled the woman roughly does not, in the circumstances, justify his action being regarded as a punishable offence. I cannot, therefore, allow the appeal. [Signature.]

P r u s s i a n M i n i s t e r f o r t h e I n t e r i o r .

Ref.: Complaint dated September 19th, 1930.

Berlin, January 12th, 1931.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

As enquiries show that the subordinate authorities have not yet given a decision in regard to the complaint made against the two local police officials, your communication has been forwarded to the Kôslin Regierungsprâsident for further action.

On behalf of the Minister: (S ig n e d ) D r. K l a u s e n e r .

* * * — 45 — iHU regterungsprâsident .

With reference to your complaint of September 19th, 0 regarding the conduct of Landj âgermeister M u sa h l and Oberlandjager Scherwart on the occasion f the Polish school festivities at Oslau-Damerow on S e p te m b e r 7th, 1930, referred to me for my decision by the Prussian Minister of the Interior. Kostin, March 12th, 1931. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

The Public Prosecutor General in Stolp, by a decision dated November 21st, 1930, has quashed the proceedings opened on the basis of your complaint of September 19th, 1930. The conclusions contained in the above decision, and the special enquiries made by me, show that the two local police officials took the necessary action called for in the circumstances to maintain public tranquillity, security and order, and to protect the parties involved, including the Polish minority, with the result that no persons were injured in the course of the incidents and no substantial material damage sustained. Both the police officials have thus done their duty.

(S ig n e d ) Cr o n a u .

[Translation.] Appendix 10a.

Prussian Min is t e r o f S c ie n c e , Arts and P u b l ic I n s t r u c t io n .

Ref.: With reference to the petition of February 9th, 1931, regarding Herr Ludwig, of Skaibotten, probationary school-teacher. Berlin, May 9th, 1931. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

The m atter has been considered. In so far as the teacher's behaviour required correction, I have taken the necessary steps. B y o rd e r: (S ig n e d ) K a e s t n e r . * * «

Union o f P o l ish School A ssociations in Ge r m a n y .

Charlottenburg, February 9th, 1931. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B erlin . We feel obliged to complain of the behaviour of the teacher Ewald Ludwig, of Skaibotten in the Kreis of Allenstein. Ludwig, by his behaviour, has continually offended in the grossest manner against No. 1, paragraph 2, of the Executive Order of February 21st, 1929, issued in connection with the “ Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority ". On the mornings of February 2nd, 3rd and 4th, at the hour when the children were going to school, he walked about in front of the building of the private Polish minority school at Skaibotten in order to see which children went to the Polish school, so that the children were afraid to go into the school. In particular, he spoke for some time to the schoolgirl Hedwig Barabasz, at 7.40 a.m. on February 3rd last, and seized her by the hand, with the result that next day Hedwig Barabasz went back to the State elementary school. As will be seen from the annexed recorded statem ents of Maria Gnatowski, Johann Gnatowski and Franz Makolla, Ewald Ludwig visited the parents in order to induce them to send their children to the State elementary school. From the officially recorded statement of Juljan Malewski, bank manager, of Allenstein, Joachimstr. 8, it appears that Ludwig does not hesitate to reproach the Ludowy bank and its manager with engaging in a “ traffic in children " and slanders Gnatowski and Makolla, inhabitants of Skaibotten of unblemished character, by reproaching them with squandering their money and drinking to excess. Both the bank manager Malewski and Makolla and Gnatowski propose, we are told, to take penal proceedings against Ludwig. — 46 —

In our opinion, the teacher Ewald Ludwig has proved himself, by his actions and by his behaviour both to the parents and to the children, to be unfit for further employment in a mixed- language area. We have the honour to request you to take the necessary steps against the teacher Ewald Ludwig. ______(Signed) Chairman.

[Translation.] Appendix 11.

P o l ish Ca th o lic School, Gr e n z in

(K r e is o f B ü to w ), P o m e r a n ia .

Ref.: Your letter of December 19th, 1930. Grôbenzin, December 22nd, 1930. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. On December 9th, 1930, Dr. Nowak, Schulrat, accompanied by Headmaster Mialke of Biitow and the schoolteacher Stephan, of Polschen, in the Kreis of Bütow, arrived at this school at 9.30 a.m. to carry out an inspection. On entering the schoolroom, Dr. Nowak asked M. Mialke to inspect the fourth class. It was the hour (9 to 10 a.m.) during which I give this class a Polish lesson, and I was making them read for the first time the lesson on “ Christmas* ” from page 142 of the second reader In reply to an observation by M. Mialke, I pointed out that the children were just about to read this lesson for the first time. M. Mialke ordered the children to read in turn. Dr. Nowak, meanwhile, asked me for a list of the books in the “ Popular Library ”, which I duly handed to him. He immediately instructed M. Stephan to copy the list. This was done, and the list returned to me. In the interval, Dr. Nowak asked me whether I knew anything about the thrashing of the pupil Pahlberg, and, on my replying in the affirmative, asked whether the boy in question had sung " Jeszcze Polska ” (“ ”) and whether the pupils knew the song. I denied this and said that I had not taught the song and the children certainly did not know it. Dr. Nowak then asked whether the parents knew the song; I replied that the parents probably did not know the song either. I was then asked to describe the incident in the course of which the boy Pahlberg was thrashed. I related it in accordance with the accounts which I had heard from the children. Dr. Nowak then called the boy Pahlberg up to him and said: “ Do you know the song ‘ Jeszcze Polska ' ? Tell the truth now The boy repeatedly denied that he knew the song. The Schulrat then “ ordered ” me to join the children and M. Mialke, who during the whole of this time had been hearing the children read the above-mentioned lesson. M. Mialke and Dr. Nowak addressed both me and the children in German, but I spoke to the children in Polish. M. Mialke asked me to make the children tell the story first in Polish and then in German (the children were unable to do this, as the lesson was a new one and had not yet been prepared; Dr. Nowak was examining Pahlberg). When Dr. Nowak had finished, he told M. Mialke that he would go to the other school (German) and asked M. Mialke to continue the inspection together with M. Stephan, who had not interfered or asked any questions. He then took leave of me and went out. M. Mialke “ ordered ” me to give the children of the same class questions on the numbers above 1,000, mental multiplication and other sums. The children could not give quite correct answers, as I had only gone as far as 1,000 with them, and they had not mastered the subject sufficiently at the German school for me to be able to progress further. M. Mialke then asked me to question the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth classes on arithmetic. I gave them sums in reduction to decimal fractions and simple fractions. M. Mialke also made remarks, but always in German. (In this case M. Mialke was satisfied.) He next asked me to examine them in geography. I asked the class to give the configuration of southern Germany. One child drew the southern frontier on the blackboard slightly incorrectly, which did not please M. Mialke. He then ordered me to put questions to the children on the chief rivers of Germany, their tributaries, the towns situated on them and the countries through which they flowed. As the children were starting to reply, Dr. Nowak entered, accom­ panied by M. Cisielski, the German schoolteacher, and immediately in a loud voice ordered the Ringwelski children (three in number) to get up from their desks and come to him. In a very unpedagogical manner, he scolded them in loud tones for throwing stones at a girl, a pupil of the German school at Waldorf, who, as a result, had a stiff hand. The Ringwelskis’ mother, he added, had herself admitted that it was one of the three boys who had thrown the stone. The children burst into tears and stoutly denied that they were the culprits. I then asked what was the matter, as I had heard nothing of the incident. Dr. Nowak explained that the week before one of the three boys had struck a girl with a stone so severely that she could not raise her hand; the mother herself confirmed this and the children at the other school had seen it. I had no reply to make, and kept quiet; but Dr. Nowak then started to shout at the children and threatened that he would take them with him and hand them over to the Public Welfare Authorities. As he was scolding the other children also, I pointed out that they were well- behaved and could not really be blamed. Dr. Nowak cooled down and asked the boy, Ludwi Stolpman : “ W hat kind of a child are you ? ” The boy’s reply, “ A Polish child ”, so irritated the Schulrat that he repeated the question several times, until the boy in a barely audible voice — 47 —

m tnered out: “ A German ”, and was made to repeat the reply. Dr. Nowak then asked 1 of the elder children in turn: “ What kind if a child are you ? ” receiving from each the lv- “ A G erm an ” , He then explained to the children that they were all German children red that all children in Germany were really German: the children in the other school were rvrman but the native language of the children in this school was Kassube, though they were ^ h t Polish. They were, nevertheless, all German children and there should be harmony ,ltween them and the children in the German school. For this once he would excuse the three ? „ as they were young and small : but if he ever again heard a complaint about them he would hand them over to the Public Welfare Authorities. In reply, I pointed out that my mroils were well-behaved, and never quarrelled with the other schoolchildren. Dr. Nowak interrupted me with the remark that he had finished, and asked me to go out into the hall, -o th a t M. Mialke could inform me of his observations and remarks. ^ At about ii a.m. the party left in the direction of Oslau-Damerow. As I afterwards ascertained, the Ringwelski children had never thrown any stones at all; the culprit was a six-year-old boy, Bambinek, who does not yet attend school, though his brothers and sisters are pupils at the German school. Bambinek threw a small stone which struck the window-frame. The injured girl was running about the village the next day. The girl's mother alone went and complained to M. Cisielski. The child s father noticed that she had a barely discernible red bruise on her arm. It is, at any rate, certain that the children in my school did not throw stones at the pupils of the German school.

[Translation.] Appendix 12.

U nion o f P o l is h Sc h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y .

Berlin, November 8th, 1929. To the Regierungsprasident, Koslin. We have the honour to forward copy of a petition by Bernhard Kullas and Michael Bambenek, hitherto employed as woodmen, with the request that you will be good enough to take steps for the continued employment of these two men in the forest estate of Grünhof, in the Kreis of Bütow. We refer in this connection to the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regula­ tion of School Questions for the Polish Minority, and to the Executive Regulations thereto dated February 21st, 1929, in which the Prussian State Ministry places the exercise of rights for which the Ordinance provides under the protection of the State and, since members of minorities, in the exercise of minority rights under the Decree in question, are merely availing themselves of their rights as citizens, assumes that they will not be placed at a disadvantage in any respect for that reason or hampered in the exercise of such rights. We should greatly appreciate rapid action in the matter and information as to the steps taken. (Signed) J a n B a c z e w s k i.

* * *

Union o f P o l i s h Sc h o o l A ssociations

in G e r m a n y .

Berlin, November 8th, 1929. To the Chief Forester, Zerrin. We have the honour to forward copy of a petition by Bernhard Kullas and Michael Bambenek, h it h e r t o employed as woodmen, with the request that you will be good enough to take steps for t h e continued employment of these two men in the forest estate of Grünhof, in the Bütow D i v is io n . We refer in this connection to the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regula­ tion of School Questions for the Polish Minority, and to the Executive Regulations thereto d a te d February 21st, 1929, in which the Prussian State Ministry places the exercise of rights for which the Ordinance provides under the protection of the State and, since members of minorities, in the exercise of minority rights under the Decree in question, are merely availing themselves of their rights as citizens, assumes that they will not be placed at a disadvantage in a n y respect for that reason or hampered in the exercise of such rights. We should greatly appreciate rapid action in the matter and information as to the steps taken. (Signed) J a n B a c z e w s k i. - 4 8 -

[iC opy.] We, the undersigned woodmen of Grobenzin, in the Kreis of Bütow, employed in the forest estate of Grünhof, forming part of the Chief Forester’s district of Zerrin, in the Kreis of Bütow were given verbal notice of dismissal on October 30th, 1929, by woodman-foreman Lieder, and informed that we should not be employed further. He gave us no ground for our dismissal Forester Borchardt, whom we approached on October 31st, 1929, in the m atter of our dismissal also gave us no ground. On the certificate for the Labour Office he made the entry: “ Lack of work ". If it is really a case of lack of work, it is not we who should be the first to be dismissed since I, Bernhard KuUas, have now been a woodman for nearly thirty years and have received a good service bonus, and have a family of seven to support. Similarly, the undersigned Michael Bambenek has been employed as a woodman for nearly thirty years and has a family of eight to support. If lack of work is the ground of our dismissal, others who have not worked for so long in the forest and are unmarried and without families to support should be dismissed first on social grounds. Such workers are, however, being kept on in the forest estate of Grünhof, while we have been dismissed. Another reason why there cannot be anything in the alleged ground of lack of work is the fact that there is just as much work this year as previously. The real ground for our dismissal is connected with the Polish minority school, for the establishment of which application has been made to the Administration. We have stated that we were prepared to send our children to this school, and it is our opinion that this is the reason why we have lost our employment, as may also be gathered from the following incident. On Sunday, October last, the head of the Polish School Union, the teacher Bauer, was in Grobenzin in order to ascertain the number of children for the Polish minority school Bauer talked to us on the subject. On the following Saturday the teacher Cieselski, of Grobenzin, said to the wife of the undersigned Bambenek : " You’ve again done something very foolish. The Chief Forester has rung up and knows all about it. I have often warned your husband; but he’s always getting into trouble. ” This remark was made with reference to the Polish minority school. Some days afterwards we were dismissed. We are convinced that the only ground for our dismissal was in connection with the said Polish minority school. Grobenzin, Kreis of Bütow, November 2nd, 1929. (S ig n e d ) B e rn h a rd K u lla s , M ichael B am b en ek .

U n io n o f P o l is h School A ssociations in Ge r m a n y

Berlin, November 9th, 1929. To the Prussian Minister of Agriculture, Domains and Forests, B erlin. We have the honour to forward copy of a petition by B ernhard K u lla s a n d Michael Bambenek, hitherto employed as woodmen, with the request that you will be good enough to take steps for the continued employment of these two men in the forest estate of Grünhof, in the Kreis of Bütow. We refer in this connection to the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, and to the Executive Regulations thereto dated February 21st, 1929, in which the Prussian State Ministry places the exercise of rights for which the Ordinance provides under the protection of the State and, since members of minorities, in the exercise of minority rights under the Decree in question, are merely availing themselves of their rights as citizens, assumes that they will not be placed at a disadvantage in any respect for that reason or hampered in the exercise of such rights. We should greatly appreciate rapid action in the m atter and information as to the steps ta k e n . (S ig n e d ) J a n B a c z e w sk i. * * *

D ist r ic t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r D ir e c t T a x e s , D o m a in s a n d F o r e s t s Koslin, December 10th, 1929. To the Union of Polish School Associations. I n re p ly to letter No. 3426/29, of November 8th, 1929, we beg to inform you that the alle­ gations of the workers Bambenek and Kullas, in so far as they relate to matters of labour legislation, are subject to re-examination and decision, if decision is required, by the authorities competent for th e purpose under the law. There is no truth whatever in the political motives — 49 —

suggested by Bambenek and Kullas. The Chief Forester at Zerrin is not, for example, acquainted at all with the teacher Cieselski, and has no knowledge of the remarks he is alleged to have made. You must be well aware that many of the woodmen employed in the forest send their children to the Polish m inority schools without encountering any difficulties or disadvantages of any kind in their position as workers. W e cannot undertake to refute in detail these inaccurate assertions, and beg you in future to refer such disputes in regard to legal aspects of labour to the decision of the competent authorities. Copy of the petition sent us is returned herewith. ( Signed) C r o n a u .

Pr u ssian M in is t e r f o r A g r ic u l t u r e , D o m a in s a n d F o r e s t s

Ref.: Woodmen Kullas and Bambenek (letter of November 9th, 1929). Berlin, January 30th, 1930. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. I beg to refer to the reply from the Koslin District Administration of December 16th, 1929, in which I c o n cu r. I have to add that Bambenek is continuing to be employed in 1930 as a non-permanent woodman in the Chief Forester's district of Zerrin, but Kullas could not be taken back owing to lack of w o rk . B y o rd e r: [Signature.]

[Translation.] Appendix 18*.

To the Chief Public Prosecutor, Stolp.

Application b y t h e F a t h e r o f t h e S c h o o l b o y F e l i x P a h l b e r g , r e s id e n t a t Gr o benzin , i n t h e K r e i s o f B ü t o w , f o r t h e Cr im in a l P r o se c u t io n o f H e r r P a u l Gutzmer, r e s id e n t i n t h e Sa m e Lo c a l it y , f o r A s s a u l t (Ar t ic l e s 223 a n d 2 2 3 (e) o f t h e Cr im in a l Co d e ) co m m itted o n F e l i x P a h l b e r g o n S e p t e m b e r 13TH, 1930, in t h e F ie l d s o f G r o b e n z in . Grôbenzin, September 25th, 1930. On September 13th, 1930, my son Felix and the schoolchildren Anna Jazdzewski, Helene Struminski and Gertrud Zibulla were keeping the cows in the fields at Grobenzin. The children were sitting together and singing Polish songs. The above-named Paul Gutzmer, a man of 40 years of age, was looking after his goats near a t h a n d . He came up to the children and forbade them to sing in Polish. When the children went on singing he attacked my son Felix with his stick, so that the latter fell down, while the other children ran away. This occurred at about 6 p.m. In view of the fact that this is a case of a schoolchild receiving bodily ill-treatment from an adult man, I request that public proceedings should be taken in the matter. In any case, I hereby make application for a criminal prosecution under Articles 223 and 223 (a) of th e Criminal Code.

[Translation.] Appendix 13.

TO ALL HOUSEHOLDS

P o l is h Min o r it y Sc h o o l s i n t h e K r e i s O f B ü t o w . An Explanation and a Warning to all Parents who are being asked to send their Children to the Polish Minority School. Parents! For some months past those of you here in the frontier localities whose mother tongue is Kassube have been hearing the slogan: “ We must have a Polish minority school in this village too.” Secretaries and agents acting on behalf of the Polish School Union are travelling about from village to Village to collect your signatures on behalf of the Polish school. * 1 — 50 —

There are also people in your village who are fond of calling themselves your leaders and who make you all kinds of promises in order to win you over to the founding of such schools. In the home, during work in the fields, on the way to church, everywhere we hear talk of the Polish school. Parents are asking each other, “ W hat are we to do? ” Let us go thoroughly into the question whether these Polish minority schools can really be of any use to your children or whether in after-life they will do them harm. We shall speak fairly and frankly and without any attem pt at mutual deception. W hat is your position to-day in the Kreis of Bütow ? The Kassube tongue is your mother tongue. No one can deny that. Your children learn this tongue from you in the family home. The clergy give them religious instruction and prepare them for confession and Holy Communion in your own mother tongue. In the churches you listen to sermons in Polish. You pray and sing in Polish. Everywhere in our Kreis and throughout Germany you are at liberty to speak your own tongue. No one prevents you. Think of all the German Catholics who live in all the villages in this neighbourhood. They do not understand Polish. In many churches there are no German services and very few German sermons. And yet they are God's children and ought to have frequent opportunities of having the Catholic religion preached to them by the clergy in their own tongue. Have you never thought of that? And now the second point. How do you stand in Germany to-day ? It is common knowledge that here in the frontier villages the land is poor. To many people, particularly the workers, agriculture in this neighbourhood does not afford a livelihood. That is why you in this district receive more in the way of grants and assistance than anywhere else. The old folk receive old-age pensions, widows are assisted and receive additional allowances for their children. Ex-servicemen are paid army pensions, the unemployed receive unemployment pay and allowances to tide them over the present period of depression. In places where the land is particularly bad, taxes have been reduced or entirely remitted. In places where the inhabitants are poor the schools are maintained by the State. Large families and poor children receive their school-books free from the teachers, and the children get plenty of holidays. If, then, it is maintained on the Polish side that Poles living in Germany are badly treated or oppressed, you yourselves know that such talk is just a tissue of im pudent Ues. Of course, it m ust be admitted that anyone who steals, cheats or commits perjury will be punished in the German Reich, irrespective of whether he speaks Polish or German. Even the Polish Statehas no use for criminals and inflicts penalties of a severity quite unknown amongst us. Now, if we are to go i,nto the m atter further, and especially if we are to discuss the Polish minority schools, it is well to bear in mind this fact - you live in Germany. You are German citizens. All that is asked of you is that your children should learn to speak and to write the in the German schools. Now, is that a misfortune for them? If you talk to old people whose knowledge of German is poor, you will hear them say: “ W hat a pity I can’t read or write German ! Of course, I can read Polish and even write a bit, but that is no use to me in Germany. In the courts, at the revenue office, at the Landrat’s, at the relief authorities’ office, I always have to get somebody else to go for me, because I cannot speak German properly. If I want to apply for assistance, somebody else must write for me because I never learned to write German. But the people who do the writing expect money or work in return, which I could save if I only did it myself. ” Other people say : " But we’ve got schools in our village. The teacher is good, he gives plenty of holidays and gives the children a good education. W hat do we want with a Polish school ? ’’ I think these people are right, for that is how things really are. When your children leave school, most of them go out into the world. It is not in Poland that they earn their living, but in Germany. They go into the brickyards, to the asparagus plantations or on to the estates; many take employment as servant girls or artisans. Employers, inspectors and foremen speak to them in German. Insurance cards, identity cards, certificates, references are printed or written in the German language. If your children go out into the world, buy a railway ticket, go into the railway station to catch a train or ask about the trains, they will always use the German language and script. Anyone who cannot speak German properly does not get on. He gets the worst jobs, does not know how to behave. Then along comes the contractor and says: " No need to worry, I'll look after everything for you.” Of course he puts the money into his own pockets and only gives the “ ninny ” as much as he thinks fit. At present you are pleased because your children can find their way about the world, and the young people themselves are glad of the sound general information which they have picked up in the German schools. With great trouble and patience the teachers have done everything possible to help your children to grow up into efficient and knowledgable men and women. And so, if anyone tries to tell you that the teachers and schools you have had up to now are bad, no sensible man will believe it. But how will things work out in the Polish minority school ? There, too, your children will.be obliged to learn. The Kreis school inspector (who is also the superior official of the teachers in the Polish minority school) will see to that. Your children will also have to remain at school as lo n g as before. The great difference will be that they will be taught principally in the Polish language. But what good can that do them ? If, of course, the young people were afterwards going to earn their living in Poland, I, too, should advise their going to such a school; but, as you yourselves know, every year thousands and thousands of people leave Poland in order to gain a livelihood in Germany, because there is no work to be had in Poland. In the Polish schools there are no more than five hours' German teathing in the whole week; whereas in th e German schools there are thirty. In the first two years children in the Polish schools are taught no German at all, and we have, therefore, the best of reasons for maintaining that your children will not learn any proper German. W hat a handicap that will be to them in after-life. No doubt the — 51 — children at present attending Polish minority schools intend to emigrate to Poland later on, to earn their living there. That is the only explanation possible; but, supposing they do, who will pay them unemployment relief and the other grants ? The young people who have already gone out into the world know better what it is to have something at their fingers’ ends. Many of them have already written home, and this is what they say: “ We have heard that you are thinking of opening a Polish school at home. If you do We shall come and knock a little sense into you. We earn our money in Germany, and if we haven’t a good knowledge of German, both for reading and writing, we are nothing but a set of stupid louts of whom nobody can make use.” That is why all those of you who are parents must think, not once, but a thousand times, before signing any petition in favour of the Polish school. Your children are the best thing that God has given you. Sooner or later God will call you to account and ask you whether you have had them taught something really worth while, or whether they have been pushed about from pillar to post because of their parents’ mistakes. Or it will be the children themselves who will curse and revile the folly into which vour stupidity or ignorance has betrayed you. It would not be the first time such a thing has happened. The father’s blessing buildeth up houses unto his children, but the curse of the mother destroyeth them. That is why, parents, I am sending you this appeal. For twenty- five years now I have known conditions in the Kreis of Bütow, and anxiety as to what will become of your children lies heavy on my heart. Many people here in the frontier villages do not seem to know whether they belong to Poland or to Germany. They run about the villages turning people’s heads, and promising them all kinds of things; but they put the money into their own pockets and leave the care and anxiety to you. Or do you people believe that they do everything for nothing ? The truth is that it is always the same people who come round. And who is it finds the money for the Polish minority schools ? The law expressly provides that all Polish schools with less than forty children must be paid for by the parents of the children who are sent there. It is only when it is proved that such schools have had forty pupils for three years running that the German Government contributes 60 per cent towards the salary of the Polish teacher ; the rest has to be found by the parents themselves. To start with, you will be told that you will have nothing to pay ; but what will happen later on ? That is something which we shall learn by experience ! And what good will it do your children to hold a certificate from a Polish minority school ? Where round here are they to find Polish tradesmen and craftsmen to take them on as apprentices ? Where are the Polish landowners who will employ them to work on the land ? So my opinion is this: The Church teaches you in Polish, sees that you live like respectable men and women and prepares you for the life hereafter. The German schools will see that you are able to get on in Germany, and that you learn something really worth while, something that will keep want away. This, surely, is the right road for your children to follow. And so, once again, fathers and mothers, think of yourselves. Think of the future of your children, when the time comes to decide: " Do we want a Polish minority school in our village, or are we satisfied with our good old schools and teachers ? ”

[Translation.] Appendix 14.

U n io n o f P o l is h School A ssociations in G e r m a n y

Registered. Charlottenburg, August 16th, 1929.

1. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B erlin . 2. To the Provincial School Board, Kônigsberg (East Prussia). 3. To the Government District Department for Public Worship and Education, Allenstein (East Prussia). With reference to Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, in conjunction with No. 6 of the relevant E xecutive Order of February 21st, 1929, we hereby apply for authorisation to conduct a private training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses at Allenstein as from October 1st, 1929. There is no such institution in Prussia in which the language of instruction is Polish, and th e lack of suitable kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses is deeply felt among the Polish minority in Prussia. The institution is to be called : Polskie Seminar jum Ochroniarskie w Olsztynie-Allenstein. It is to be situated at Allenstein (East Prussia), Joachimstrasse, 8, ground floor on , in the premises previously occupied by the Allenstein Agricultural School, which had oyer eighty students. The premises have been entirely renovated, and, in particular, new lavatories have been installed. A sketch is attached. — 52 —

The undersigned Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Berlin, will be responsible for the school. Seventeen incorporated school associations, with over 20,000 members, belong to the Union. The teachers will be paid on the principles laid down in the Prussian Law regarding schoolteachers’ salaries. The school is up to date, and provided with the necessary modem teaching apparatus The object of the school is to train kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses whose native language is* Polish. The entire instruction (apart from the German language) will be given in Polish. The curriculum is enclosed. In principle, the training will occupy four half-years; but, at the beginning, this period may be reduced in the case of specially talented candidates, in order to some extent to relieve urgent needs. In such case the candidates must pass an additional examination within three years. Respectable girls who have completed their seventeenth year will be accepted, provided they can prove by an entrance examination held by the board of teachers of the institution that they possess an adequate education. New students will be admitted on October 1st and April 1st in each year. Every half-year, the students will receive a certificate, and, after finishing their course in the institution, a leaving certificate (a diploma as kindergarten teacher or children’s nurse a specimen of which is enclosed). The fees will amount to 75 Reichsmarks per half-year. In the case of needy students the fees may, on application, be reduced, entirely waived, or postponed. In addition, there is a registration fee of 5 Reichsmarks on admission, and an examination fee of 5 Reichsmarks. An infants' school will be organised in the institute. As it is proposed that the institute should be opened on October 1st of this year, and the negotiations with the competent authorities for permission for the superintendent and teachers to enter Germany — namely, teachers of Polish nationality and with Polish teaching certificates — have not yet been concluded, the names of the teachers will be furnished later, together with their curriculum vitœ, qualifications, and police certificates. The object of the present letter is to request that the application may be examined and approved in principle, in particular as regards the curriculum. ( Signed ) Baczewski. Enclosures1

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c W o r s h i p

a n d E d u c a t i o n Allenstein, September 30th, 1929. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. It has been impossible, up to the present, to reach a decision on your application for permission to open a private seminary for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses as the necessary negotiations with other Departments have not yet been concluded. [Signature.]

U n i o n o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, October 18th, 1929. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B erlin. In our letter of August 16th of this year we applied for permission to open a private Polish seminary for kindergarten teachers and children's nurses. We venture to remind you of this application, and request you to hasten the decision as far as possible. We would add that the object of this application is, in the first place, to obtain permission in principle to open the institute, and approval in principle of the curriculum. Until this permission has been given in principle, we cannot take steps for the provision of suitable teachers.

( Signed ) Baczewski.

1 Note by the Secretariat. — These enclosures have not been communicated. — 53 —

Union o f P o l ish S c hool A ssociations in G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, January 31st, 1930. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B erlin . In the Conference held on the 23rd of this month, Geheimrat Giirich, the representative of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, in opposition to his previous attitude, stated that private seminaries for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses were vocational schools and therefore did not come under the provisions of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority. We cannot agree with this view. Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority entitles the minority in principle to open private schools of any kind with Polish as the language of instruction. We are convinced that the text of this paragraph was purposely not restricted. It was for this reason that the representatives of the Polish minority did not adopt a critical attitude towards the text of this paragraph of the Ordinance at the Conference on October 2nd, 1928, and January 25th, 1929. At the Conference on November 2nd, 1929, the representatives of the Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction referred to Article 115 of the Geneva Convention in proof of their contention that vocational and continuation schools do not come under the Ordinance. To this we can only reply — apart from the point to which our representatives directed attention at the Conference that vocational and continuation schools also come under Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance — that private training colleges for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses are not vocational schools in the sense of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. Article 115 of that Convention expressly mentions State vocational and continuation schools, and lays down that persons belonging to a minority who receive adequate private vocational and continua- tional training are exempt from the obligation to attend similar State schools. It follows that the schools in question are obligatory schools and that the term “ vocational and continuation schools ” includes all schools which young people who are no longer under compulsion to attend elementary schools are obliged to attend under special legislation. As training colleges for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses are private institutions which no one can be obliged to attend, they cannot be regarded, any more than academies of music, as State vocational and continuation schools in the sense of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. This is also clear from Chapter IV, First Section, Article 97, of the Geneva Convention: “ For the purposes of the present chapter, the term private education includes the teaching given by private schools and private educational establishments, whether they take the place of State schools or whether they do not, as in the case of popular universities, academies of music, etc., as well as private teaching given out of school or at home. ” Moreover, training colleges for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses give a general education. Under the Prussian regulations, a woman who has studied at a training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses may, after a practical test, be trained to become a “ youth instructress ” ( Jugendleiterin). A woman who has passed through a training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses will not always elect to become a kindergarten teacher, but will frequently choose some other profession, as in the case of persons passing through a teachers’ training college. In this connection, we again venture to remind you of our application of August 16th, 1929, for permission to open at Allenstein a private seminary for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses, with Polish as the language of instruction. In view of the fact that the necessary school premises and fittings have been ready for a considerable time, we would request that the m atter should be given urgent attention. (S ig n ed ) B a c z e w sk i, P resident. * * *

Report of the Discussion on January 29TH, 1930, in the M inistry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction with the Representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations regarding the Establishment of a Polish Seminary for Kindergarten Teachers and Children’s Nurses at Allenstein.

The following took part in the discussion : Geheimer Regierungsrat Giirich, Oberregierungsrâtin Ermler, Herr Baczewski \ ^ the Polish School Association, Dr. Michalek J Herr Wienken 1 j)jrectors Qf the Catholic Caritas Association. Herr Steinki J — 54 —

At the beginning of the discussion Oberregierungsrâtin Ermler referred to the previous negotiations, and pointed out that the seminary for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurse proposed by the Polish Association was an institution for vocational and professional training In reply, Herr Baczewski remarked that, in his opinion, it was an establishment for general education, and therefore came under the provisions of the ordinance regarding minority schools. Subject to this view, he agreed to discuss in what manner the legitimate interests of the Polish minority in respect of the training of kindergarten teachers could be satisfied by the training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses which the Caritas Association proposed to open at Allenstein. In the discussion on the co-operation with the Caritas Association, the representatives of both parties agreed first to consider separately whether and in what manner the interests of the Polish School Association could be met. The parties agreed that, after considering the m atter—that is to say, about the middle of February—they would meet again in the Ministry at a time to be agreed upon. ( Signed) G ü r ic h , Geheimer Regierungsrat.

Berlin, March ist, 1931.

R e p o r t .

In pursuance of the discussion which took place on Tuesday, February n th, in the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction regarding the establishment of a training college for kindergarten teachers at Allenstein, a further discussion was held to-day in the premises of the German Caritas Association at which the following persons took part : From the Polish School Union: Frâulein Szuman, of Warsaw, Herr Baczewski, Dr. Michalek. From the German Caritas Association: Frâulein Kiene, of , Herr Steinki, of Braunsberg I D t f th Caritas Association Herr Wienken, of B e rlin / L)irectors ot the Lantas Association.

Herr Baczewski opened the discussion on the following question: “ Is it possible to train kindergarten teachers of Polish and German race in a common training college for kindergarten teachers on German lines on the one hand, and on Polish lines on the other hand? ” After a thorough discussion, both Frâulein Szuman and Frâulein Kiene stated that this was impossible for technical and pedagogical reasons. The plan formerly discussed in the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction to open a training college in Allenstein with a common superintendent for separate German and Polish departments, was also considered by the above-mentioned ladies to be impracticable, if only for the reason that the superintendent would not be able to take the responsibility for the training in both departments. The Caritas Association stated that it was prepared and in a position to introduce in the Allenstein seminary instruction in the Polish language for two hours per week, in conjunction with instruction in Polish national culture, and separate religious instruction in the two languages, and also to give opportunity for practical training in a Polish establishment to be opened for the purpose : but this proposal did not satisfy the desires of the Polish minority. (S ig n e d ) W a n d a Szum an. (S ig n e d ) Marie Kiene. (S ig n e d ) S t e in k i. (S ig n e d ) J . B a c z e w s k i.

P r o v in c ia l School B o a r d

Kônigsberg, October 16th, 1931. To the Union of Polish School Associations, Charlottenburg. The Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction has authorised us by Order of October 12th, 1931, to inform the Union of Polish School Associations, in reply to its petition of August 16th, 1929, that the application to open a private Polish training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses at Allenstein cannot be granted. A training college for — 55

kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses is not to be regarded as an establishment of general education but as an institution for vocational and professional training. As such, it does not come under the provision of the Ordinance for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minorities. Moreover, there is no necessity for such an institution, as optional Polish instruction is given at the Catholic training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses at Allenstein. (S ig n e d ) S c h u l z .

[Translation.] Appendix 15.

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c W o r s h i p

a n d E d u c a t i o n

In reply to the application of May 22nd, 1930. Oppeln, June 20th, 1930.

To the Polish Catholic School Association for Upper Silesia, O ppeln. With regard to the opening of Polish continuation schools, we refer to the discussion which M. J. Baczewski, President of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, had with the competent officials of the M inistry of Education on November 2nd, 1929, Section 4, paragraphs 1 to 4. We are unable to accede to the application in its present form as it does not fulfil the necessary conditions. (S ig n e d ) D r. W e i g e l .

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l i c W o r s h i p

a n d E d u c a t i o n

Ref.: In reply to the letter of July 26th, 1930. Oppeln, August 2nd, 1930.

To the Polish Catholic School Association for Upper Silesia, Opj>ein. In our opinion, the proposed schools, which should be called " extension schools ” (Fôrder- schulen), may only be attended by scholars who have been taught the various subjects in the Polish language at an elementary school. ( S ig n ed ) D r. W e i g e l .

* * *

U n io n o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Registered. Charlottenburg, September 2nd, 1930. To the Regierungsprâsident, Oppeln. We beg to bring the following facts to your notice : The Polish Catholic School Association for the Province of Upper Silesia, which is affiliated to our Union, applied on May 22nd of this year, under Article 115 of the Geneva Convention, to the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education at Oppeln to open private, vocational and continuation schools (-private Fach- und Fortbildungsschulen) with Polish as the language of instruction at Gross Borek and Wyssoka in the Kreis of Rosenberg. The applications were all accompanied by the enclosures prescribed in the regulations on the subject. In its reply of June 20th of this year, the District Administration refers to the discussion of November 2nd, 1929, between our President, Jan Baczewski, and the competent officials the Prussian Ministry of Education, and states that it cannot accede to the applications in their present form, as they do not fulfil the necessary conditions. No details are, however, given as to what these necessary conditions are. The Polish Catholic Association, in its reply - 56 - of July 26th of this year, states that it is incorrect to refer to the discussion of November 2nd 1929, since that discussion related only to the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regula­ tion of School Questions for the Polish Minority and not to the Geneva Convention, which is binding in Upper Silesia only and on which the applications were based. W ithout going into this question, the District Administration, in its reply of August 2nd of this year, wishes the proposed schools to be called “ extension schools ” (Fôrderschulen) and even stipulated that these schools should only be attended by scholars who have been taught the various subjects in the Polish language at an elementary school. Although the District Administration refrains from adopting a definite attitude in its reply, the reply must nevertheless be regarded as a refusal of the applications. M. Baczewski, in the discussion on November 2nd, 1929, which dealt solely with the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, agreed that the continuation schools (Fortbildungsschulen) to be opened under the Ordinance should provisionally be called " extension schools ” (Fôrderschulen) in order to give the Polish youth a possibility of higher education under the Ordinance. This agreement, however did not refer to the Prussian territories dealt with in the Geneva Convention—namely, Upper Silesia—since the Ordinance expressly excludes the province of Upper Silesia so long as the Geneva Convention is binding in that territory. In addition, M. Baczewski expressly reserved the right to revert to the question of extension schools after the opening of private vocational and continuation schools in Upper Silesia under Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. There are, therefore, no grounds for the District Administration’s reference to that discussion, and such reference is calculated to create the impression that there is a desire to delay the grant of permits to open continuation schools. As stated above, the only legal basis for settling minority school questions in Upper Silesia is the Geneva Convention. The article relating to vocational and continuation schools reads as follows: " Les Parties contractantes ne sont pas tenues de créer des écoles professionnelles ou des écoles complémentaires pour une minorité. Mais, s’il existe des cours privés où les membres d’une minorité peuvent recevoir un enseignement professionnel et complé­ m entaire suffisant, la participation à ces cours les dispensera de l’obligation de fréquenter, le cas échéant, les écoles publiques correspondantes. ” “ Ukladajace sie strony nie m aja obowiazku zakladania szkol zawodowych i uzupel- niajacych dla mniejszosci. Jezeli jednak istniec beda kursy prywatne, na ktorych osoby, nalezace do mniejszossi, pobierac moga wystarczajaca prywatna nauke zawodowa lub uzupelniajaca, to uczestniczenie w tych kursach uwolni je od obowiazku uczeszcze nia do odpowiednich szkol publicznych. ” “ Zur Errichtung ôffentlicher Each- und Fortbildungsschulen für die Angehôrigen einer Minderheit sind die vertragsschliessende Teile nicht verpflichtet. Erhalten die Angehôrigen der Minderheit indessen ausreichend privaten Fach-und Fortbildungsunter- richt, so sind sie von einer Verpflichtung zum Besuche entsprechender ôffentlicher Schulen b e fre it. ” “ The Contracting Parties shall not be obliged to create vocational or continuation schools for a minority. If, however, private classes exist, at which the members of a minority can receive adequate vocational and supplementary training, attendance at these classes shall free them from any obligation to attend the corresponding State schools. ” This article makes it quite clear that, though the contracting parties are not obliged to c re a te State vocational or continuation schools for the minorities, the latter have the right to o rg an ise private vocational or continuation schools and that such schools have been granted certain rights from the outset. If, therefore, it is possible to open private vocational and continuation schools, the com­ petent school authority in question is under obligation to grant permission to open such private institutions. Otherwise this provisions of Article 115 would be illusory and would have no practical value. It is out of the question that the authors of the Geneva Convention should have included articles which, according to the meaning and text, grant certain rights to the minority but are intended from the outset to have no practical effect. It is hardly possible to give more positive expression to the right to open private vocational and continuation schools than by granting to such schools before they are opened the most important rights which a private school can obtain—namely, the rights of a State school. Article 104 also refers to the possibility of opening private vocational and continuation schools. It says: “ The special provisions relating to private vocational and supplementary instruction will be found in Article 115. ” This article intentionally refers only to private schools of this kind, since it is agreed that there should be a possibility of opening such schools; the fact that, on the other hand, State vocational and continuation schools are not referred to emphasises the intention of the contract­ ing parties not to undertake any obligation to open such schools. A rtic le 115 is interpreted in the same manner by M. Szwemin who took part, as a representa­ tiv e of th e Polish Government, in drawing up the articles of the Geneva Convention relating to schools. In reply to our enquiry, he gives the following opinion : The interpretation of the provisions of the Geneva Convention regarding vocational and continuation schools must be based, in the first place, on the text of Article 115. The French text is authentic. It must be pointed out that, while the Polish text is an exact — 57

translation of the French original, the German translation is inaccurate, in particular in the passage which is decisive in this case—namely, the beginning of the second sentence.

“ I t is quite clear from Article 115 of the Geneva Convention :

“ (1) That the Polish and German Governments are not obliged to open State vocational and continuation schools for the minority, but,

“ (2) That p riva te vocational and continuation schools may exist (‘s’il existe des cours p riv é s, où les membres d’une minorité peuvent recevoir un enseignement profes­ sionnel et complémentaire suffisant ’) 1.

“ It is therefore obvious that the Geneva Convention provided for the possibility of p riva te vocational and continuation schools. Since the Geneva Convention admits the existence of such schools, the com petent school authorities cannot base a refusal of permission to open such schools on the provisions of that Convention.

" The considerations by which the contracting parties were guided in adopting the final text of the provisions of the Convention are of secondary importance. I may state that, in the delegation for the Upper Silesian negotiations, the German representatives and I fully agreed that, when considering the cultural needs of a minority, the question of vocational and continuation schools must be treated separately from schools for general education. This agreement, however, only resulted in the decision that the contracting parties did not undertake to open S ta te vocational and continuation schools, though an obligation to open general educational schools was definitely accepted. The minorities were, however, granted the definite right to create p riva te vocational and continuation schools, and this is made clear in the Geneva Convention. There was no intention on the part either of the Polish or the German authorities to deprive the minorities of this right. It is of no importance for the rights granted by the Geneva Convention to the minorities whether the decisions regarding vocational and continuation schools were taken at the request of teachers or for other reasons.

" Consequently, the view of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany that the Polish minority in Germany has the right to open p riva te vocational and continua­ tion schools is, in my opinion, in entire agreement with the provisions of the Geneva Convention. On the other hand, there are no grounds for the opinion of the District Administration at Oppeln, or for the similar opinion of Geheimrat Giirich, that the Geneva Convention did not provide for the opening of private vocational and continuation schools.”

The Union of Polish School Associations in Germany adopted this attitude in its previous memorandum entitled: “ Do Vocational and Continuation Schools come under the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority ”, which was handed on May 17th of this year to the Prussian Prime Minister and the Minister for Science, Art and Education. We enclose a copy of this memorandum *.

The above statements refute the opinion of the District Administration at Oppeln that the private vocational and continuation schools to be opened should be called “ extension schools " (Fôrderschulen), and that these schools may only be attended by scholars who have been taught all subjects in the Polish language at the elementary school. The expression “ extension schools ” is not stipulated by the Geneva Convention. On the contrary, Article 115 mentions expressly vocational and continuation schools, so that this is the only name which is justified. Moreover, the name of a school is a m atter for the party responsible for the school. The Geneva Convention does not provide for any restrictions in the admission of scholars to vocational and continuation schools. The District Administration has therefore no right to subject the scholars to special conditions. Article 115 refers in general to members of a minority, who are entitled to attend all schools. Again, Articles 97 to 104, which deal with the private education of minorities in general, contain no restrictions regarding the admission of pupils. In the same way, the articles regarding elementary and secondary education contain no provisions such as those which the District Administration would like to introduce for the admission of pupils. Children entitled to attend minority schools may at any time leave the m ajority school and enter the minority school and vice versa. As therefore it is possible to leave a majority elementary school and enter a minority elementary school unconditionally at any time, there is all the more reason for allowing transfer at any time from a State continuation school to a private minority continuation school, since attendance at such schools is not everywhere compulsory.

We must therefore state that the Polish Catholic School Association for the Province of Upper Silesia, in applying for permission to open private vocational and continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction, was justified in basing its application on Article 115

1 “ If, however, private classes exist, at which the members of a minority can receive adequate vocational and supplementary training. ” 1 This memorandum has not been enclosed by the petitioners (Note by the Secretary-General). - 5 8 - of the Geneva Convention. The District Administration’s refusal to grant the applications is contrary to the definite provisions and spirit of the Geneva Convention and to the principle on which it is based; the manner in which the applications have been handled by the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, may be regarded as due to a desire to procrastinate. We venture to draw your attention to this interpretation placed on the Geneva Convention by the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education at Oppeln, and request you to ijse your good offices to enable the Polish Catholic School Association for the Province of Upper Silesia, which is affiliated to our Union, to obtain permission to open the schools in question as soon as possible, as provided in Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. We should be very sorry if we were compelled, by a refusal of the applications or by further delay, to have recourse to the legal measures laid down in the Geneva Convention. (S ig n e d ) Baczewski, P resident.

D istrict A dministration

D epa r tm en t of P ublic W o r sh ip a n d E ducation Oppeln, September 20th, 1930.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

We have received the letter of September 2nd, 1930, addressed to the Regierungspràsident regarding private vocational and continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction. We have communicated with the Oberpràsident on this subject and will inform you in due course of the result of our negotiations. (S ig n e d ) Dr. W e ig e l.

U n io n of P o lish School A ssociations in Germ any

Berlin, March 18th, 1931.

To the Oberpràsident of the Province of Upper Silesia, Oppeln.

On May 22nd, 1930, the Polish Catholic School Association for the Province of Upper Silesia at Oppeln made an application under Article 115 of the Geneva Convention to open private vocational and continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction. In its reply of June 20th, 1930, the District Administration, Department of Public W orship and Education, gave an evasive reply. In view of this reply, we wrote to the Regierungspràsident on September 2nd, 1930, enclosing a detailed memorandum, which was forwarded for further action to the District Administration, Departm ent of Public W orship and Education. In its letter of September 20th, 1930, the District Administration informed us that it had communicated with the Ober- prâsident on this subject. Up to the present we have received no reply. As the final decision has now been protracted for nearly a year, we are compelled to request a final decision by April 1st, 1931. In this connection, we venture to point out that we regard the failure to grant permission to open the vocational and continuation schools in question as deliberate violation of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. The delay in coming to a final decision cannot be reconciled with the spirit of the Geneva Convention. If we do not receive a final decision by April 1st, 1931, we shall be reluctantly compelled to submit this m atter direct to the Council of the League o f Nations at Geneva through the organisation at our disposal for this purpose.

(Signed) Jan B a c z e w s k i , Président. * * * — 59 —

-pHE O berpràsident of th e

Province of Upper Silesia

Oppeln, March 30th, 1931. jo the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

We beg to send the following reply to your letter of the 18th instant: The fact that the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, has not yet taken a decision on the detailed memorandum forwarded by the Union of Polish School Associations on September 2nd, 1930, to the Regierungspràsident, must not be regarded a s due to a desire to procrastinate for political reasons. The District Administration was bound carefully to consider this question, which, in view of the text of the Geneva Convention is to say the least, open to doubt. It involves questions of principle of more far-reaching importance than the opening of two private minority vocational schools in accordance with the application m ad e b y the Union of Polish School Associations on May 22nd, 1930.

It is not obvious from the text of the Geneva Convention that schools of the kind mentioned by the Polish School Association in its application of May 22nd, 1930, to the District Adminis­ tration, Department of Public Worship and Education, must be permitted. While Article 98 of the Geneva Convention clearly stipulates that private schools— from which continuation schools are expressly differentiated by Article 105 of the Geneva Convention—must be perm itted, provided certain conditions are fulfilled, the Geneva Convention contains no provision to the effect that schools, such as those which the Polish School Association describes as vocational and continuation schools but which in the light of careful examination from an educational point of view by the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, can only be described, in view of their curriculum and objects, as extension schools, must be perm itted on the conditions laid down in Article 98 for private elementary schools. This question obviously places the District Administration before a totally new problem, as both extension schools and vocational and continuation schools have hitherto been a m atter exclusively for the State, there being no private German extension, vocational or continuation schools or much likelihood of any being established in the future.

The problem of private extension schools and private vocational and continuation schools must therefore be examined from the two —namely from the point of view of minorities law in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention, and from the educational point of view—in order to decide in what category of schools those applied for by the Polish School Association should be included. The memorandum of the Union of Polish School Associations of September 2nd, 1930, together with the letter of March 18th, 1931, only raises the question of permission for such schools from the point of view of minorities legislation. I will therefore confine myself to dealing in detail with the legal side of the question, and will only touch on the educational problem in so far as this is necessary for clearing up the legal question.

It must be admitted that Article 115 of the Geneva Convention provides that members of a minority may receive private training in vocational and continuation schools. I therefore agree with the view expressed by the Union of Polish School Association in the memorandum of September 2nd, 1930, page 3, that the question of principle as to whether such instruction is to be permitted or not can only be decided on the basis of the provisions of the Geneva Convention. I also agree with the Union that the provisions of Article 115 would be without foundation if the minority could be deprived of the right to organise private vocational and continuation schools. The District Administration, Departm ent of Public Worship and Education, in its letter of June 20th, 1930, referred to the conference of the President of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany with the competent officials of the Ministry of Education on November 2nd, 1929, for the sole reason that it was found, on examining the application of the Union of Polish School Associations from an educational point of view, that, in view of the curriculum and proposed objects of the schools, they were to be regarded not as vocational and continuation schools but as extension schools. This gave rise to the above-mentioned legal question as to whether permission for such extension schools should be granted or not under the provisions of the Geneva Convention. The question was whether Article 115 of the Geneva Convention presupposes that, before permission can be granted, an enquiry must be made from an educational point of view as to whether or not the schools in question are to be regarded as schools with “ adequate ” private vocational or continuations! training; in other words, whether the minority is entitled to organise private schools which, while having the elements of vocational and continuational training, have nevertheless such a curriculum and such objects as to make them from an educational point of view merely extension schools, to which no express reference is made in the Geneva Convention.

This question cannot be decisively answered from the text of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. — 6 o —

The text, however, permits of an interpretation in the sense that the enquiry from th educational point of view must give a positive result before permission can be granted for such schools as are referred to in the application of the Union of Polish School Associations. The District Administration, Department of Public W orship and Education at Oppeln, in its reply of August 2nd, 1930, based its decision on the latter interpretation of Article 115. b ' W ithout expressing an opinion in either sense on the legal question of the interpretation of Article 115 of the Geneva Convention, it is my desire, notwithstanding the absence of a clear text in the Convention, to give the greatest possible consideration to the cultural aspirations of the minority, and not to withhold from it the right to open extension schools in accordance with the minority’s application of May 22nd, 1930. I have therefore requested the District Administration at Oppeln to revise its attitude of August 2nd, 1930, and to accede to the application to open the schools without laying down special conditions in respect of pupils wishing to attend those schools. In view of their educational character, these schools should be called “ extension schools” (Fôrderschulen) As I have already pointed out, the educational question as to whether these schools should be regarded as vocational or continuation schools, or as extension schools, does not arise in your letters of September 2nd, 1930, and March 18th, 1931. The District Administration Department of Public W orship and Education, has already decided that these schools are to be regarded as extension schools. It is therefore obvious that attendance at the extension schools to be opened by the Polish Catholic School Association in virtue of the District Administration’s permit does not relieve the pupils of the obligation to attend State vocational and continuation schools in places where there is a legal obligation to attend such schools.

(S ig n e d ) L u k a sc h ek .

* * *

U n io n o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

I n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, April 18th, 1931.

To the Oberpràsident of the Province of Upper Silesia, O ppeln.

We have the honour to reply as follows to your letter of March 30th. We note with satisfaction that you approve the point of view expressed in the memorandum of September 2nd, 1930, that private vocational and continuation schools come under Article 115 of the Geneva Convention, and that consequently the minority must be granted the right to open private vocational and continuation schools. We cannot, however, agree with your view that, in the light of their curriculum and their objects, the continuation schools for which application was made on May 22nd, 1930, by the Polish Catholic School Association for Upper Silesia can only be described as “ extension schools ” (Fôrderschulen). The curriculum enclosed with the applications was admitted a t the recent conference on March 13th, 1931, between representatives of the State Ministry and representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations to be a regular continuation school curriculum. Fundamental changes in it are demanded for the reason that it cannot be used for the existing “ extension schools ” in the Kreis of Flatow. Moreover, the Polish Catholic School Association for Upper Silesia, in applying for permission to open private continuation schools, expressly referred to Article 115 of the Geneva Convention. If it had ap p lied for “ extension schools ”, it could only have referred to Article 97 of the Geneva Convention, which gives the right to open private schools and private educational establishments, whether they take the place of State schools or not, as in the case of university extension courses, academ ies of music, etc., as well as private teaching given out of school or at home. We have therefore the honour again to point out that the Polish School Association for Upper Silesia, which is affiliated to our Union, applied for permission to open private continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction and based its application on the curriculum approved by the representatives of the Ministry of State. We therefore request you to instruct the District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, to grant applications which have been made and which may be made in the future to open private continuation schools of the kind above described.

(Signed) J . Baczewski, President. — 6i —

^Translation.] Appendix 15a.

Union o f P o l is h Sc h o o l A ssociations

in G e r m a n y

„ ' Application for establishment of Polish Con­ tinuation Schools.

Charlottenburg, August 31st, 1929.

j. To the Prussian M inister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, Berlin. 2i To the Schneidemühl District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education. To the Koslin District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education. j To the Allenstein District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, j To the Marienwerder District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education. With reference to Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority in conjunction with No. 6 of the relevant Executive Order of February 21st, 1929, we hereby apply for authorisation to conduct rural continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction. The schools will be called: Polska W iejska Szkola Doksztalcajaca (Polish rural continuation school), with the addition of the name of the locality in question. I t is proposed to establish these schools in all places where Polish private minority elementary schools exist; the teaching staff, buildings and educational equipment will be the same as in the minority elementary schools. The body responsible for maintenance of the schools will in all cases be the undersigned Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. The teaching staff will not in principle receive special pay; but in particular cases appropriate allowances will be granted. The purpose, duration and curriculum of the school are further explained in the annex. We would beg to be informed of any objections to this proposal, in order that the schools may be opened, if possible, by October 1st, 1929. The curriculum, etc., closely follow the existing curricula for German continuation schools. Members of the Polish minority who are over the compulsory school-age will be admitted. Existing recreational, musical and young persons’ associations may, if occasion arises, be incorporated en bloc as special classes in the Polish continuation schools. In this case, it will be the special endeavour of the Boards of the associations in question to assist the teacher, especially in the maintenance of order and discipline. Where attendance at continuation schools is compulsory, attendance at Polish rural continuation schools shall count for the purpose. No special school fees shall be charged to pupils. (S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i.

Union o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, October 5th, 1929.

To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B e rlin .

On August 31st, 1929, we made an application for the establishment of Polish rural continua­ tion schools. In order to avoid misunderstanding, we would point out that the rural continuation schools w h ich w e h a v e in v iew a re n o t te c h n ic a l c o n tin u a tio n schools (Fortbildungsschulen) a«d therefore would not be vocational schools (Fachschulen) in the ordinary sense of the word, but ex ten sio n sch o o ls (Fôrderschulen) for the improvement of the general education of our young people who have left school. Where however attendance at continuation schools has <«en made compulsory by the Kreis diet, it is proposed that the obligation should be fulfilled *>y attendance at our private continuation (extension) schools. The object of our application to the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruc­ tion is to obtain a decision on principle and an approval in principle of the proposed curriculum. It is evident that special application will still be made to the competent local authority for each private Polish rural continuation (extension) school to be established. — 62 —

In view of the fact that the continuation schools are to open immediately after the autumn holidays of the State elementary schools, and that the elementary school term begins as early as October 14th, we beg the favour of a speedy decision on the point of principle, especiallv as separate applications will still have to be made after this has been given.

(S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i.

U n i o n o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, October 18th, 1929.

To the Prussian Minister for Agriculture, Domains and Forests, B erlin . In our letter of August 31st, 1929, we made an application to the Allenstein District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education, for the establishment of Polish rural continuation schools. The Regierungspràsident of Allenstein informs us in his letter of September 27th, 1929, that he has placed our proposal before the Prussian Minister for Agriculture, Domains and Forests. We beg to draw attention to our application and respectfully ask for a speedy decision. In order to avoid misunderstanding, we would point out that the rural continuation schools which we have in view are not technical continuation sch o o ls (Fortbildungsschulen) and are not, therefore, vocational schools (Fachschulen) in the proper sense of the word, but extension schools (Fôrderschulen) for the im provem ent of the general education of our young people who have left school. Where, however, attendance at continuation schools has been made compulsory by the Kreis Diet, it is proposed that attendance at our private continuation (extension) schools should count for the purpose. The object of our present application is to obtain, in principle, authorisation for the establishment of the schools and approval of the proposed curriculum. We can then, when the extension schools are being established, make separate applications through the regular channel.

(S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i.

D is t r ic t A dministration .

D e p a r t m e n t o f P ü b l ic W o r s h i p a n d E d u c a t io n

R e f . : In reply to your letter of 15th ultimo. Allenstein, August 9th, 1930. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. No action has so far been possible in regard to the applications for establishing extension schools with Polish as the language of instruction, for the reason that the necessary decision of the Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction has not yet been given. We have again applied for his decision in the matter. (S ig n e d ) v o n R u p e r t i .

P r u s s i a n D i s t r ic t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t o f P u b l ic W o r s h i p

a n d E d u c a t io n Marienwerder,j August 22nd, 1930.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

In reply to your letter of August 19th, 1930, we beg to inform you that we shall give a decision as to the proposal for the establishment of extension schools as soon as instructions are received from the Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, to whom the matter has been submitted. (S ig n e d ) D r. B u d d in g . - 6 3 -

D is t r ic t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t of Public W orship and Education

R et.: In reply to your applications of July 15th and August 19th, 1930. Koslin, September 2nd, 1930. fo the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

We cannot approve the above-mentioned proposals, as according to your application of August 4th, 1930, the m atter in question concerns continuation schools. The authorisation given by the District of Schneidemühl for the establishment of Polish extension schools is not binding on us. We have not yet received instructions in the matter from th e c o m p e te n t M in ister. (S ig n e d ) C r o n a u .

Union o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, September 12th, 1930.

To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, Berlin.

In our letter of August 31st, 1929, we applied, under Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority in con­ junction with No. 6 of the relevant Executive Order of February 21st, 1929, for authorisation to establish rural continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction. In a further letter, of October 5th, 1929, we further pointed out that the rural continuation schools contemplated would not be technical (i.e., vocational) schools in the strict sense of the term , b u t extension schools (Fôrderschulen) for the improvement of the general education of young Polish persons who have completed their school course. This point was again made in the conversation between the representatives of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction and our Chairman, M. Baczewski, on November 2nd, 1929. In the record of the conversation, which record was explicitly approved by the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction in an Order of M ardi 3rd, 1930, these schools are recognised (in Section IV) as coming under the terms of the ordinance and authorised as such. Similar applications for the opening of extension schools with the necessary particulars (in regard to curriculum, plan of school premises, list of equipment and educational apparatus) attached were also lodged with the Allenstein, Marienwerder, Kôslin and Schneidemühl District Administrations for the localities in question. The replies received on various occasions from the District Administrations maintain that permission to open such schools can only be given after a decision by the Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction. Although we have pointed out in reply that it is superfluous for the Minister to reiterate his decision, seeing that the question of principle has already been settled by the Order of March 3rd, 1930, the Schneidemühl district is so far the only one which has given permission for the opening of extension schools w ith Polish as the language of instruction, i he Marienwerder and Allenstein districts adhere to their view that, pending a new decision by the Minister, which they say has not yet been given, no permission can be given for the opening of the extension schools in question. We enclose herewith copies of the above communications from the Allenstein district dated August 9th, and from the Marienwerder district dated August 22nd. T he K o s lin District Administration, on the other hand, in a letter of September 2nd, refuses our applications for the opening of extension schools. We attach copy of the refusal herewith. The reason given is that in our letter of August 4th to the Administration the expression continuation school " (Fortbildungsschule) was used by mistake instead of " extension school ” (Fôrderschule). The letter in question dealt, not with extension schools, but solely with the Polish private elementary minority school of Oslau-Damerow. In our letters to the Koslin District Adm inistration on the subject of extension schools (letters of October 30th, 1929, March 10th, 1930, July 15th, 1930, August 19th, 1930, and November 6th, 1930), the reference 18 always to “ extension schools ” and the expression “ continuation schools " is never once !5ed. In a further letter, of September 2nd, 1930, the D istrict Administration refuses on principle ” authorise the opening of Polish continuation schools. We are anxious to place on record the fact that we have made it dear, in repeated letters to the District Administrations, that the schools proposed will not be " continuation schools ” - 6 4 -

in the strict sense of the term, but “ extension schools ” for improving the general level of education, as contemplated in the conversation held on November 2nd, 1929. In spite of the unambiguous wording of Section IV of the record of the conversation of November 2nd, 1920 action on the applications for the opening of extension schools is continually being postponed although the applications were lodged a full year ago. We therefore request the Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction to be good enough to instruct the Allenstein, Marienwerder and Koslin District Administrations to give effect to our applications for the establishment of extension schools with Polish as the language of instruction, as the District of Schneidemühl has already done. We request the favour of a speedy decision. (S igned) B a c z e w s k i, President.

U n io n o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

in G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, April 18th, 1931.

To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B e rlin .

On March 13th, 1931, a conference was held between representatives of the Prussian State Ministry and representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany regarding the establishment of private vocational and continuation schools, with Polish as the language of instruction, on the basis of Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority. We beg to draw the Minister’s attention to the following further considerations before he adopts a final decision on the outcome of the conversation. The standpoint of the representatives of the Prussian State Ministry is briefly as follows: " Private vocational and continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction do not come under Article 3 of the ordinance, as such schools are not at all suitable for minority education purposes. Article 3 refers solely to schools which give a general e d u c a tio n — i.e ., intermediate and higher schools only (intermediate schools, gymnasia and realgymnasia). Permission to open a private training college for kindergarten teachers and children's nurses in Allenstein (East Prussia) with Polish as the language of instruction will probably be refused, as this would be a vocational school. Similarly it will hardly be possible to permit the opening of private continuation schools for the Polish minority. On the other hand, no objection will be made to the Polish language being taught to children over school age ; but such instruction may be given only by teachers of Prussian nationality (possibly, visiting teachers), whereas it will probably be necessary to prohibit teachers of Polish nationality employed by Polish private minority schools from teaching this subject.” As representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, we beg to make the following reply to the above : Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority covers a ll schools without exception which have a range beyond that of elementary schools. I n the numerous discussions which preceded the issue of the ordinance, the representatives of the Prussian Ministry made no restrictions whatsoever regarding this article. That the ordin­ ance was originally intended to cover " vocational and continuation schools " is clear from the fact that it was treated by the German authorities as tantam ount to an award of educational autonomy. Furthermore, in the discussion of November 2nd, 1929 (Minutes dated March 3rd, 1930, paragraph I V ) , the representative of the Ministry of Education explained that the ordinan ce had been inspired by the same principles as those which determined the conclusion of the Geneva Convention. I n a letter dated March 30th, 1931, the Oberpràsident of Upper Silesia construed Article 115 of the Geneva Convention as authorising private vocational and c o n tin u a ­ tion schools. The letter says: " It is not contested that Article 115 of the Geneva Convention allpws of private vocational and continuation-school instruction to members of the minority. I therefore endorse the view taken by the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany in its m em o­ randum of September 2nd, 1930, page 3, that the basic question as to whether such instruc­ tion is to be permitted or not can be decided only in the light of the provisions of the Geneva Convention. I also agree with the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany - 6 5 —

that the provisions of Article 115 would be pointless if the minority’s right to organise private training and continuation-school education were not adm itted.” If these were the determining principles in promulgating the ordinance, they must still be binding; and, unless the ordinance is amended, Article 3 cannot be otherwise construed, y/e therefore consider the refusal to permit the opening of a private training college for kinder­ garten teachers and children’s nurses and of private continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction as an infringement of Article 3 of the ordinance. Should the representatives of the Prussian State Ministry endorse the new interpretation of this article, the ordinance would lose more than half of its value. A minority right which excludes vocational and continua­ tion schools cannot possibly be described as a “ Regulation of School Questions for the M inority”. It would be highly regrettable if, two years after the issue of the ordinance, this article, which is of the first importance for the minority schools, should now be so restricted as to apply only to higher schools, and possibly only to university extension courses, seeing that teachers of Prussian nationality can hardly be prevented from giving Polish language lessons to adults, even without a special minority ordinance. It should be realised that to prohibit teachers of Polish nationality from giving Polish lessons to adults would be tantam ount to abolishing such instruction altogether, as there are not at the present tim e enough teachers of the subject available who are P ru s s ia n n a tio n a ls . If private vocational and continuation schools are excluded, the Polish minority will be unable to continue the education of young people who leave the Polish elementary minority schools. Attendance at continuation schools where German is the language of instruction will never have the desired results in the case of such pupils. In the light of the present overcrowding in higher educational institutions and in the learned professions, the State insists on a drastic weeding-out process at these institutions, so as to prevent the learned professions being “ proletar- ised ” and to train up a middle class. It is even more incumbent on the Polish minority, 90 per cent of whose members belong to the wage-earning class, to train up a middle class.

(Signed) B a c z e w s k i, President.

U nion o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Ref.: Application for Establishment of Polish Con­ tinuation Schools. Charlottenburg, August 28th, 1929.

To the Schneidemühl District Administration, Department of Public Worship and Education.

With reference to Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, in conjunction with No. 6 of the relevant Executive Order of February 21st, 1929, we hereby apply for authorisation to conduct rural continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction. The schools will be called: Polska W iejska Szkola Doksztalcajaca (Polish rural continuation school), with the addition of the name of the locality in question. It is proposed to establish these schools in all places where Polish private minority elementary schools exist ; the teaching staff, buildings and educational equipment will be the same as in the minority elementary schools. The body responsible for maintenance of the schools Will in all cases be the undersigned Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. The teaching staff will not in principle receive special pay; but in particular cases appro­ priate allowances will be granted. The purpose, duration and curriculum of the school are further explained in the annex. We would beg to be informed of any objections to this proposal, in order that the schools may be opened, if possible, by October 1st, 1929. The curriculum, etc., closely follows the existing curricula for German continuation schools.

Members of the Polish minority who are over the compulsory school age will be adm itted. Existing recreational, musical and young persons' associations may, if occasion arises, be incorporated as special classes in the Polish continuation schools. In this case, it will be the special endeavour of the Boards of the associations in question to assist the teacher, especially ln the maintenance of order and discipline. 6 — 66 —

Where attendance at continuation schools is compulsory, attendance at Polish rural continuation schools shall count for the purpose. No special school fees shall be charged to pupils. (S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i.

D is t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l ic W o r s h i p

a n d E d u c a t io n Schneidemühl, September ioth, 1929.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

In reply to your letter of the 28th ult., you are provisionally informed that the matter has been referred for the necessary action to the Regierungspràsident, Schneidemühl, who will communicate with you further, when the necessary enquiries have been completed. [Signature.]

U n i o n o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, October 18th, 1929. To the Regierungspràsident, Schneidemühl.

In our letter of August 28th, 1929, we applied to the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, Schneidemühl, for authorisation to establish Polish rural continuation schools. By letter of September ioth, 1929, we were informed that our application had been referred to the Regierungspràsident for requisite action. We beg to remind you of our application and respectfully ask for a speedy decision, so that the schools may be opened as soon as possible in view of the fact that the winter half-year term has already begun. In order to avoid misunderstanding, we would point out that the rural continuation schools which we have in view are not technical continuation schools (Fortbildungsschulen) and are not, therefore, vocational schools (Fachschulen) in the proper sense of the word, but extension sch o o ls (Fôrderschulen) for the improvement of the general education of our young people who have left school. W here, however, attendance at continuation schools has been made com­ pulsory by the Divisional Diets, it is proposed that attendance at our private continuation (extension) schools should count for the purpose. The object of our present application is to obtain in principle authorisation for the establishment of the schools and approval of the proposed curriculum. We can then, when the extension schools are being established, make separate applications through the regular channel. (Signed) B a c z e w s k i.

T h e R egierungspràsident

Schneidemühl, October 22nd, 1929.

To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

W ith reference to your letter of October 18th, I am unable as yet to give a final reply pending the decision of the Minister of Agriculture, Domains and Forests. (Signed) von Bülow. — 6 7 —

Th e D i s t r i c t Commissioner o f P o l ic e

Kuschten, January 17th, 1930. To M. St. Bensch, Headmaster, Grossdammer.

Referring to your petition of November 30th, 1929, I am instructed by the Regierungs- prasident, Schneidemühl, to inform you that your application for permission to open and conduct an extension school in Grossdammer, with Polish as the language of instruction, cannot for the moment be granted, as it is doubtful whether it is permissible to organise such schools at all, and the decision of the Minister of Agriculture to whom the matter has been referred, has not yet been received. (Signed) M ü n g e r .

* * *

T h e L a n d r a t ,

K r e i s o f B o m s t

Ref-: Applications of December 3rd, 1929. Züllichau, January 27th, 1930.

To the Polish Catholic School Association of the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, Schneidemühl.

On behalf of the Regierungspràsident, I have to inform you that I cannot at present grant your applications for the opening of Polish extension schools at Kramzig, Neukramzig and Gross-Posemukel. [Signature illegible.] Landrat. * * *

U n io n of Polish School Associations i n G e r m a n y

Ref.: Extension schools with Polish as the language of instruction. Charlottenburg, January 29th, 1930. To the Regierungspràsident, Schneidemühl.

M . Bensch, the headmaster of one of our private minority elementary schools at Gross­ dammer, in the Kreis of Meseritz, informs us that he has been notified by the District Police Commissioner of Kuschten by letter of January 17th, 1930, in reply to his application to the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, Schneidemühl, for the opening and conduct at Grossdammer of an extension school with Polish as the language of instruction, that the application cannot for the moment be granted, as it is doubtful whether it is permissible to organise such schools at all, and the decision of the Minister of Agriculture, to whom the matter has been referred, has not yet been received. In order to avoid misunderstanding, we have the honour to submit the following observa­ tions in amplification of our application of October 18th, 1929, and of the applications lodged on our behalf by teachers at our private minority elementary schools. The latter applications have already made it clear that the extension schools will not be vocational schools in the proper sense of the word, but will aim at improving the general education of young people over school age who declare that they belong to the Polish minority. The extension schools which we have in view are not therefore to be identified with State vocational or compulsory continuation schools. They are intended rather to supplement the instruction given at elementary schools in all its branches. In addition to other instruction, pupils will be taught in the first instance to read and write their mother-tongue, which they have hitherto had no opportunity, or have not h ad sufficient opportunity, of doing. The schools we propose have therefore a general educational character ; and this was recognised by the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction at the conference held on November 2nd, 1929, at which it was explicitly stated that, under Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, schools giving general education beyond the range of elementary schools are admissible as minority schools, and that the Minister's specific authorisation for extension schools giving a general education is consequently un­ necessary and superfluous, so that the minority is entitled, wherever it pleases, to lodge special — 68

applications with the school inspection authorities in compliance with the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority. While pointing out that our applications for the establishment of the extension schools were intentionally addressed to the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, we venture to ask that the above observations should also be submitted to the Minister of Agriculture, with a view to our applications being forwarded to the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction. We request the favour of a specially prompt reply. (S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i , P resident.

T h e L a n d r a t ,

K r e i s o f B o m s t Züllichau, January 29th, 1930. To the Polish Catholic School Association of the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, Schneidemühl. On behalf of the Regierungspràsident, I have to inform you that I cannot at present grant your application of December 9th, 1929, for the opening of a Polish extension school at Klein-Posemukel. [Signature.] L a n d ra t.

U n i o n o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y Charlottenburg, March ioth, 1930. T o the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, Schneidemühl. On our instructions, the Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, an associate member of our union, subm itted several .applications for permission to open and conduct extension schools, with Polish as the language of instruction, in accordance with Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Pohsh Minority. As a result of prior consultations with the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction these applications were expressly addressed to the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, Schneidemühl, and not to the Regierungspràsident, as they referred to schools of a general educational character not intended to replace compulsory continuation schools. Nevertheless, permission was post­ poned until a further decision by the Ministry had been received. The Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction has now, with the express approval of the Prussian State Ministry as a whole, decided by Order of March 3rd, 1930, that the extension schools which we have in view provide a general education and are accordingly, under Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, to be recognised as minority schools, so that further special authorisation is unnecessary and superfluous. We therefore beg to request that the applications originally submitted by us should be duly granted. We may point out that the curri­ culum was in the possession of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction when it recognised the general educational character of these extension schools.

(S ig n e d ) B a c z e w s k i . P resid en t. * * *

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l i c W o r s h i p a n d E d u c a t i o n

Ref.: Your letter of March ioth, 1930. Schneidemühl, July 16th, 1930. To the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg. We have approved the applications made by the Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl for the opening of Polish extension schools.

(S ig n e d ) D r. R o c h o l l . * * * — 6g —

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l ic W o r s h i p a n d E d u c a t i o n Schneidemtihl, July 16th, 1930.

To the Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, Flatow. In virtue of the State Ministry’s Instruction of December 31st, 1839, your application of December 18th, 1929, for the opening of a Polish extension school at Gross-Butzig is hereby granted, subject to revocation. We would point out that, as this school does not take the place of a vocational school (compulsory continuation school), attendance at it will not exempt pupils from the obligation to attend the latter. ( Signed) Dr. R o c h o l l .

D i s t r i c t A dministration

D e p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l ic W o r s h i p a n d E d u c a t i o n Schneidemühl, November 6th, 1930.

To the Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, Flatow. On the instructions of the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, we hereby countermand until further notice the permission granted, subject to revocation, in our letter of July 16th, 1930, for the opening of Polish extension schools. The teaching must be stopped. We may add that negotiations are at present proceeding at the Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction regarding the possibilities afforded by Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Minority Schools Ordinance of December 31st, 1928. The Minister will therefore decide whether Polish extension schools can again be authorised in our district.

To the Uiiion of Polish School Associations in Germany, Charlottenburg.

Copy for information. (Signed) v o n B ü l o w .

U n io n o f P o l i s h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Ref.: Your letter of November 6th, 1930. Charlottenburg, November 14th, 1930.

To the District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education, Schneidemühl.

We very much regret to have to inform you that we cannot take cognisance of your instructions of November 6th, 1930, countermanding the permission granted us to open Polish extension schools. The extension schools organised by us are authorised by Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority. This authorisation was specifically confirmed by the representatives of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction at the conference held on November 2nd, 1929, and the confirmation was approved by the Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction in an Order of March 3rd, 1930. We beg to enclose an extract from the Minutes of the meeting of November 2nd, 1929. To refuse permission for the opening of these extension schools or to countermand the permission already granted involves a curtailment of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority. As this ordinance was enacted by the Prussian State Ministry as such, it can only be countermanded or restricted by the latter, quite apart from the fact that, at the conference on October 2nd, 1928, before — 70 — the ordinance was enacted, when the representative of the Polish minority directed attention to the lack of any guarantee that the ordinance would be permanent, the representatives of the Prussian State Ministry declared in reply that there could be no question of the rights of the minority ever being curtailed, and if any question arose in future it could only relate to an extension of these rights. It is true that negotiations are now taking place at the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction with representatives of the Prussian Government regarding the inter­ pretation of Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928. These negotiation , however, do not in any way concern the extension schools which have already been authorised! They relate to the unconditional authorisation of private vocational and continuation schools with Polish as the language of instruction, in view of our contention that the pupils of our continuation schools should be exempted from any obligation to attend public continuation schools. If our extension schools are regarded as identical with State rural continuation schools in view of their curriculum, the most that could be demanded would be a change in the curriculum submitted. The curriculum which we have planned is intended to serve merely as a guide to assist teachers in compiling special curricula which must necessarily be adapted to local circumstances and to the educational capacities of the pupils. W e are prepared to instruct the teachers in our extension schools to submit special curricula to the District Administration immediately, if so desired, as soon as the latter informs us of the guiding lines which it wishes to be followed. (S ig n e d ) D r. M i c h a l e k , Acting President.

Extract from Minutes, dated March 13th, 1931.

At the invitation of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts amd Public Instruction, a conference took place on March 13th, 1931, from 5.30 until 9.30 p.m., in the premises of the Ministry, concerning certain unsettled questions relating to Polish minority schools in Prussia. The gentlemen whose names are contained in the attached list took part in the conference.

I (A).—The question of the organisation of extension schools was discussed first. Geheimer Regierungsrat G ü r i c h , in agreement with Ministerialrâte Dr. Rathenau and Dr. Stolze, made the following observations: The conclusion reached at the conference with the representative of the Polish School Association on November 2nd, 1929, was that there was no question of establishing private vocational and continuation schools as minority institutions (Nos. I and IV of the Minutes of November 2nd, 1929). All that the Union of Polish School Associations desired was that their young people should not forget the Polish they had learnt, after leaving school, but should extend their knowledge of it and become acquainted with . That could, of course, be arranged in connection with the minority schools, as pointed out at the conference on November 2nd, 1929. In Grenzmark, Posen, , a number of extension schools had been opened on the application of the Union of Polish School Associations, with curricula on the lines compiled and printed by the Union for the vocational and continuation schools which it proposed to establish. The Schneidemühl District Administration, not being informed of the tenor of the negotiations of November 2nd, 1929, had authorised these schools, although their basic plan did not tally with the arrangements come to during the negotiations. Subsequently, the Schneidemühl District Administration had ordered the closing of the schools not complying with the provisions laid down; but the order had not yet been carried out, and the schools were still in existence. Their further existence, therefore, must depend on their being brought into line with the legitimate and agreed requirements of the authorities— i.e ., they m ust confine themselves to the study of the Polish language and literature.

H e rr B a c z e w s k i replied that the facts were as above stated. In his view, vocational and continuation schools, as such, came under the Minority Ordinance. The agreement of N o v em b er 2nd, 1929, was only to be a provisional arrangement pending a fundamental settlement of the question. If, notwithstanding the tenor of the negotiations of November 2nd, 1929, curricula originally printed for private minority vocational and continuation schools had been used as a basis for the extension schools established in Grenzmark, Posen, West Prussia, that did not mean that it was intended to treat these printed programmes as curricula, but merely as lines of guidance for the subjects to be dealt with. He agreed that, until vocational and conti­ nuation schools were authorised, they might temporarily confine themselves to teaching the Polish language and literature. The requisite restrictions for the purpose could be put into force by the opening of the new school year (1931). He added, in this connection, that the twenty- — 7i — three extension schools proposed would be attended by some 700 pupils, some of them aged from 20 to 30 years.

I (B).—Herr Gü r ic h said that the reason given for admitting foreign teachers in Polish minority schools was that, otherwise, such schools could not be opened at all, in view of the lack of suitable persons of German nationality possessing the statutory qualifications for elementary school teachers. He could not, however, believe that a minority as large as the Poles in Prussia was unable to find in its own ranks suitable persons of German nationality to give lessons in the minority language, especially as no professional qualifications were officially required for such instruction. There did not, therefore, appear to be any need to engage foreign nationals for the instruction to which paragraph A related. He was sure the representatives of the Union of Polish School Associations appreciated the very strong resentment of the German population in regard to the very considerable concession which had been made in permitting Polish nationals to teach in German compulsory schools—the more so as the Polish Press from which he quoted a number of articles) frequently adopted a highly offensive and provocative tone in relation to the German population. The granting of a German elementary school licence to a foreign teacher was in itself a very far-reaching concession, which could only be justified by the lack of other suitable personnel ; and German public opinion would fail to understand why the foreign teachers should be given a further concession for schools in which no special professional qualifications were required, and for which there must undoubtedly be suitable candi­ dates among the members of the minority themselves. The Polish minority should surely be able to arrange for visiting teachers to conduct the extension courses to which paragraph A related. It was never proposed, when the employment of foreign teachers was authorised, that these should automatically take over the extension courses in the Polish minority schools. During the negotiations of November 2nd, 1929, the Polish minority representatives themselves admitted the justice of the view that they would have to supply the necessary teachers for the instruction in Polish from their own ranks (see No. I of the Minutes of November 2nd, 1929).

Dr. R a t h e n a u and D r. St o lze concurred.

Herr Baczewski replied that, in his view, No. I of the Minutes of November 2nd, 1929, referred solely to Polish reading and writing lessons to children of compulsory school attendance age. The teachers used for this purpose were not capable of teaching the language and literature to adults. It was for this latter purpose that no suitable personnel was available. If extension schools were regarded as coming under Article 3 of the ordinance, they were entitled to the same facilities as elementary schools. The Union of Polish School Associations attached great import­ ance to the possibility of using the minority school teachers, who had a comparatively large amount of leisure, for the proposed instruction in their free afternoons. The ordinance would lose half its value if the minorities were prevented from making the widest possible use of Article 3. In present circumstances, there was practically no question of higher education; but minority rights which were restricted to elementary education could not be said to constitute a regulation on school questions for the minority. He referred to an Order of the Prussian Minister of Education of September 21st, 1928, calling on German teachers abroad to take any opportunity that offered outside school hours of p rom oting G erm an interests.

Herr G ürich replied that German schools abroad were not minority schools. For the most part they were schools conducted for the benefit of foreign nationals in the countries in question. Minority schools in Germany were intended to enable German nationals belonging to a minority to comply with the provisions for compulsory education. Polish minority schools in Germany were not Polish schools in a foreign country.

Herr Baczew ski remarked that the fact of a teacher in an elementary minority school holding a teaching licence entitled him, even though a foreigner, to give ordinary private instruction. The Polish minority was taking steps to have members of the minority (who would, of course, be German nationals) trained as teachers. They would much prefer not to have recourse to foreign teachers. A special petition would be submitted to the Minister on the subject of the refusal to admit six members of the minority entered by the Union of Polish School Associations for the Easter term 1931 at the German Training College for Teachers at Beuthen in Upper Silesia. Next year he hoped that it would possible to take full advantage of the fifteen places reserved for the minority at the Beuthen Training College.

H err G ü r ic h D r. R a t h e n a u an d D r. St o l z e were unanimous in stating that Polish nationals could not automatically take over the schools referred to in paragraph A without special permission, and that the question of such permission remained open. - 7 2 -

I L — ......

III. — W ith regard to the still pending application of the Union of Polish School Associations for the establishment of a training college for kindergarten teachers and children’s nurses at Allenstein, Herr Gü r ic h said that the departments concerned regarded a training college for kindergarten teachers and children's nurses, not as a general educational institution, but as an institution for vocational and professional training, in which capacity it did not come under the provisions of the Ordinance for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, and could hot be based on that enactment. H e rr B a c z e w s k i referred to the written representations which had beep submitted on the subject to the Ministry of Education by the Union of Polish School Associations. The Union adhered to its view that Article 3 authorised schools of any kind having a wider scope than elementary schools. To construe it otherwise would be tantam ount to an infringement of the article. The power given to the Polish minority by the Minority Schools Ordinance to establish higher educational institutions (gymnasia, etc.) had, for the present at any rate, no practical significance. It was only an academic possibility. The reports in the Press on the subject were in c o rre c t.

H e rr G ü r i c h , re fe rrin g to the representations to the Ministry of Education to which M. Baczewski had alluded, repeated that there was little possibility of the Department altering its views. ' IV . — X ...... (S ig n e d ) J . B a c z e w s k i, (S ig n e d ) D r. J . M i c h a l e k , a. « . s.

( S ig n e d ) G ü r i c h , ( S ig n ed ) D r. S t o l z e , (S ig n e d ) D r. R a t h e n a u , Geheimer Regierungsrat. Ministerialrat. Ministerialrat.

L is t o f P e r s o n s p r e s e n t . Conference held on March 13th, 1931, at the Prussian M inistry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction. Name Office Representing I. Herr Gürich Geheimer Regierungsrat Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction. 2 . Dr. Rathenau M inisterialrat Ministry of the Interior. 3 - D r. S to lz e M inisterialrat Ministry for Science, Arts and Public Instruction. 4 - Herr Baczewski President of the Union of Union of Polish School Associations Polish School Associations in Germany. in Germany. 5 - Dr. J. Michalek Head of Department Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. 6 . Dr. Scheel Assistant Clerk in the Office Ministry for Science, Arts and Public of the Ministry for Science, Instruction. A rts a n d P u b lic In s tru c tio n , as Minute-writer.

* * *

U n io n o f P o l is h School A ssociations in Ge r m a n y

Charlottenburg, September 19th, 1931. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Arts and Public Instruction, B e rlin . The Secretary of our Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, M. Rozynski, informs us that he was asked b y Schulrat Conrad to call at the office of the District Administration in Schneidemühl, where he was notified by Oberregie- rungsrat th a t schoolteachers of Polish nationality were not permitted to give lessons in P o lish private extension schools. Teachers giving instruction in defiance of this order would be d e p riv e d of their teaching licences, which is tantamount to expulsion. Referring to our telephone conversation to-day, I beg respectfully to inform you that, without prejudice to our view that Polish private extension schools come under Article 3 of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928, for the Regulation of School Questions for the Polish Minority, we are prepared to alter the curriculum originally subm itted to the Ministry in order — 73 — to conform with the latter’s requirements. We cannot, however, abandon our view that teachers of Polish nationality are entitled to give lessons in Polish private extension schools. It would cost us too much to employ teachers of Polish nationality, if they were only allowed to teach in the private elementary schools of the Polish minority. We have therefore no choice but to instruct the teachers to resume their lessons in the extension schools after the autumn vacation. Should the Schneidemühl District Administration then proceed to give effect to its resolution and deprive the teachers of their teaching licences, we shall be forced to close down our Polish private minority schools. We beg to bring the above to your notice and ask for a speedy decision. (Signed) Baczewski, President. * * *

The Regierungsprasident

Schneidemühl, September 23rd, 1931. To the Polish Catholic School Association for the Administrative District of Schneidemühl, Flatow.

We have advised the Minister that, as from October ist, 1931, the extension schools in the Grenzmark have been closed, and can only be reopened in the form discussed at the Ministry on March 13th, 1931, when the Minister has issued more detailed instructions on the subject. ( Signed) G a n s e , Vizeprdsident. * * *

D is t r ic t A dministration

De p a r t m e n t f o r P u b l ic W o r s h i p a n d E d u c a t io n

Schneidemühl, September 23rd, 1931.

M. Rozynski, Secretary of the Polish Catholic School Association, Flatow, clo The Flatow Landrat. As from October ist next, all licences for teachers on the staff of private elementary schools of the Polish minority in our district will be reissued. Two specimen forms are enclosed. The licence now specifically states that a licence granted for teaching in Prussian elementary schools belonging to the Polish minority is not valid for teaching in extension schools. I would refer to the detailed discussions which have taken place with our competent official, and request that the minority school teachers in Grenzmark should be instructed accordingly. The Minister has been informed that the extension schools in Grenzmark will be closed as from October ist next, and that they can only be reopened in the form discussed at the Ministry on March 13th, 1931, when the Minister has issued more detailed instructions on the subject. (Signed) G a n s e . * * *

L ic e n c e . In conformity with the Instructions of December 31st, 1839, and subject to revocation at any m om ent, M ...... schoolteacher, of ...... in the Division o f ...... , is hereby authorised for the period of one year to conduct the private elementary school of the Polish minority i n ...... in the K reis o f...... A pplications for an extension of this licence m ust be sent in to this Department in due course.

S c h n e id e m ü h l,...... District A dministration, Department for Public Worship and Education. * * *

L ic e n c e . In conformity with the Instructions of December 31st, 1830, and subject to revocation at any m om ent, M...... schoolteacher, of ...... in the Kreis o f ...... is, for th e period of one year, authorised to give instruction in Prussian private elementary schools belonging to the Polish minority. The licence is not valid for teaching in extension schools. — 74 —

M ...... m u s t r e p o rt h im self, p e rso n a lly o r b y le tte r , to the competent Schulrat. If it is desired to extend this licence, application should be made to the Department in due course.

S c h n e id e m ü h l,...... District Administration, Department for Public Worship and Education.

U n i o n o f P o l is h S c h o o l A ssociations

i n G e r m a n y

Charlottenburg, October 7th, 1931. To the Prussian Minister for Science, Art and Public Instruction, Berlin. W ith reference to our telephone conversation of the 6th inst. regarding the closing down by the Schneidemühl District Administration of Polish private extension schools in Grenzmark, Posen, West Prussia, we forward herewith for your information copy of the Schneidemühl District Administration’s letter. We take this opportunity of again drawing your attention to our letter of September 19th on the subject. We cannot recede from the standpoint taken up in the above letter and in previous conversations that teachers of Polish nationality must have permission to teach in extension schools as well as in elementary schools. We request the favour of a prompt decision. (Signed) B a c z e w s k i, President.

[Translation.] Appendix 16.

H o w A r t i c l e 113 of the Constitution of the Reich is observed in Practice, B y D r. B . Openkowski. (Extracts from the Gazeta Olszlynska, Nos. 71, 72, and 73, of March 26th, 27th and 28th, 1931.)

I. Registration in Poland of the Names and Statutes of Polish Societies. “ No legislative or administrative measure shall in any way hinder the free racial development of foreign-speaking minorities of the population of the Reich, especially as concerns their use of their mothertongue for educational purposes, and in internal administration and in courts of law."

Such are the terms of Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich promulgated on August n t h , 1919. German politicians and German propaganda are constantly citing this article in their eulogies of the Reich. On every occasion, German politicians represent the Reich—including Prussia—as the State which, they claim, possesses the most liberal and the most perfect legislation on the subject of minorities; continual reference is made to the fact that the protection of minorities is guaranteed by the Constitution of the Reich. Let us, however, enquire how this article is applied in everyday practice, and more particu­ larly in the administration of justice. Let us first see how the Germans themselves regard Article 113 of the Constitution of th e R eich . Only a few jurists and legal experts are of opinion that Article 113 of the Constitution is a direct source of legal right—that is to say, that every German citizen who belongs to a foreign-speaking racial group can avail himself of the rights which he is recognised to possess by this article. This point of view is supported by, among others. Dr. Dachselt (Archiv für Politik und Geschichte, 1926, pages 317 et seq.) and by Dr. Gerber, Professor at the University of (Minderheitenrecht ittt deutschen Reich, 1926). The m ajority of jurists are, on the contrary, of opinion that Article 113 d o e s not constitute a right which involves a direct obligation, but that it represents no more than a program m e and a skeleton outline fo r future laws and decrees. In th e ir o p in io n , a d v a n ta g e cannot be taken of the provisions of this article of the Constitution so long as no special law shave been promulgated in execution of it. This opinion, of which the chief exponent is Dr. Anschuetz, P ro fesso r a t University (Verfassung des deutschen Reiches, 1930, p a g e s 453, 478), is a ls o supported by Arndt, Giese, Stier-Somlo and others. They all take the view that the terms of Article U 3 - 7 5 — are so general in character and so lacking in precision as to make more specific legislation necessary, if the rights of minorities inhabiting the Reich laid down in the article referred to are to be defined. Thev argue, for example, that special legislation is required to settle the question whether these provisions of the Constitution refer solely to “ nationalities ” forming the native population of the territory which they inhabit, or whether they apply also to foreign-speaking persons living in different parts of Germany - as, for example, to individual Poles residing in the industrial districts of western Germany, or in urban centres such as , Berlin, , etc. In their opinion, legislation is also required to define more precisely whether the benefits of Article U3 of the Constitution of the Reich should be reserved entirely to those who know only their mother tongue and are ignorant of German, or whether they should be equally available to persons who, in addition to their mother tongue, know and understand German. It is thus clear that the Germans themselves admit that the right in question does not constitute a real safeguard for foreign-speaking nationalities resident in the Reich in default of special legislation on th e subject. The Polish population is in honour bound to fight to obtain such legislation. Until it exists, German propagandists have no right to claim that the national minorities in Germany enjoy great liberty in this respect. This propaganda is, moreover, refuted by the practice of the administrative and judicial authorities. Not only are these authorities of the opinion that Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich is not a law which creates a direct obligation, but they further impose restrictions on the use of the mother tongue, restrictions which are not contained even in the former imperial legislation. This is particularly the case in the matter of the names and statutes of societies and organi­ sations. Names of societies and organisations of nationalities inhabiting the Reich are, naturally, in the mother tongue of the nationality in question, and their regulations are drawn up in the same language. When, however, these organisations apply to the courts for registration, they find great difficulties placed in their way by the German authorities, who refuse to recognise and register the names of societies and organisations in the mother tongue of the nationalities concerned. In such cases, the line taken by the German courts is that, first, there is no law for the execution of Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich, and, secondly, that German is by law the official language of the courts. Applications for registration put forward by Polish societies have thus been refused by the divisional courts in a great number of places (Charlottenburg, , , Oppeln, Stettin, Allenstein), on the ground that the names of these associations were submitted in Polish. Great difficulties had to be overcome and considerable efforts made before the courts agreed to register the societies or organisations in their Polish names. In this connection, it is as well to make it clear that the German courts have no right to raise any difficulties whatsoever in this matter. Apart altogether from Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich, even the pre-war legislation which is still in force lays it down that the official character of the German language does not apply to the terms of requests for the registration of associations ; clearly, the names and statutes of associations are included in such terms. Neither German nor Prussian law contains any legislation forbidding the registration at the courts of the names and statutes of societies in languages other than German. Generally speaking, no difficulty whatever is made in the registration in Germany of a foreign society in the national language of the society. In practice, the German courts do not raise any difficulties except when national minorities are involved. It is therefore clear that all minorities resident in the Reich, and we Poles in particular, must make resolute efforts to secure the registration in the mother tongue of the names and statutes of our societies and organisations. It may be pointed out that, thanks to the efforts of the Union of Poles, we have already gained the day in one case of this nature. Not merely the name, but also the statutes of the organisation concerned in this case have been registered in the Polish language.

II.

Struggle for the Right to use the Polish Language in Courts of Law. As we have already stated, Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich formally prohibits the limitation of the right of foreign nationalities to use their own language before the courts and internal administrative authorities. Unfortunately, there are only too many cases in which this provision is not observed in practice. The requests of parties and witnesses for an inter­ preter to be present in court have been and are being systematically rejected. The courts, omitting to refer to Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich, maintain that the official language in which proceedings must be conducted is German. They even go so far, in their restriction the natural rights of nationalities of foreign speech, as to refuse to call an interpreter even when a party or witness formally declares that he can express himself and follow the proceedings wore easily in his mother tongue. — 76 —

The replies of German magistrates to requests for a Polish interpreter throw a singular light upon the attitude of the German m agistrature towards the minority. For instance, in the Berlin district court, when one of the parties asked for a Polish interpreter, the judge replied: “ You can use the Polish language, but I shall regard what you say as not having been brought by you to the notice of the court”. In the district court, a request for permission to mak use of the services of a Polish interpreter during the proceedings was rejected by the judge on the following grounds : “You speak German well, and the language of the court is German" The complaint made against the court’s attitude was rejected. Similarly, in Grenzmark, and also in East Prussia, our fellow-countrymen are often refused the services of a Polish interpreter during the proceedings. For example, at Allenstein, in East Prussia, a request for an interpreter was rejected, although the applicant stated that hts knowledge of German was inadequate. I n reply to a complaint lodged on this account, the Prussian Minister of Justice stated that Article m of the Constitution could not be taken into consideration in that particular case. Similar cases occur even in Upper Silesia, where, as is common knowledge, in addition to the Constitution of the Reich, the Geneva Convention of May 15th, 1922, in which Germany formally undertook not to place any obstacles in the way of the Polish population as regards the use of their mother tongue before the courts and administrative authorities, is in force. Thus, when a Pole before the Rosenberg Kreis court replied in Polish to a question put by the judge, the latter, Dr. Kamler, said to him: " Please speak in German, and I would draw your attention to the fact that the extent of the penalty rests solely with me. Kindly bear this in mind. ” On a further question being put to him by the judge, the accused endeavoured to reply in German. As, however, he could not express himself fluently and accurately in that language, he used the Polish language from time to time. As stated in the complaint lodged by the accused against the judge, the latter said to him : “ I would once again draw your attention to the fact that, if you wish to give me a Germano-Polish theatrical performance, you will only have yourself to blame if the law is applied to you in all its rigour. ” Thanks entirely to the vigourous efforts of the Polish Union, Judge Kamler was moved from the Silesian territory of Oppeln. This was not, however, the only case of its kind. During proceedings before the court, the judge, Dr. Streubel, in reply to a request by two Poles for an interpreter, said : “ I know that a Convention has been concluded between Poland and Germany, but I am not acquainted with its provisions. I observe that you speak German well; German is the official language, and I cannot allow Polish to be spoken before the German court when the party knows German. ” In this case, also, it was only on account of the intervention of the Polish Union that Judge Streubel was censured. A s these examples clearly show, the German courts have not paid any attention in theirproceedings to Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich, and some even go so far as to violate openly the provisions of the Geneva Convention relating to Upper Silesia, in accordance with which (apart from Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich) our fellow-countrymen have the right to use their own language. Moreover, even under the old imperial legislation, in cases where the plaintiff or a witness has an insufficient knowledge of the German language, the German courts are bound to provide him with an interpreter. In spite of the obstacles placed in their way by the German authorities, our fellow-countrymen cannot renounce the struggle for their lawful rights. Those rights must be recognised, and the laws and decrees necessary for the enforcement of Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich must be enacted.

III.

The Struggle for Polish Personal Names for Polish Children. Articles 1626 et seq. a n d 1684 et seq. of the German Civil Code clearly show that parents have the right to choose their children’s personal names. Accordingly, Article 22, paragraph 10, of the Law of February 6th, 1875, on the A ttestation of Personal Status, which is still in force, merely states in general terms that, when reporting to the Public Registrar the birth of a child, his personal name must be given. Nothing, however, is said as to which personal names may, and which may not, be entered in the register. The only restriction imposed is that no such names may be registered which are inconsistent with public morality. These provisions clearly prove first of all that there is no further restriction as regards the form and character of the personal name and that the registration of non-German (e.g., Polish) personal names is not prohibited. Secondly, the registration of such names in the case of German subjects is not prohibited by Article 11 of the Executory Regulations of March 25th, 1899, which stipulates that the registers of births, marriages and deaths must be kept in German. This provision does not affect the actual tenor of the entry made, of which the personal name of the child for whose registration the parents apply undoubtedly forms a part. The above view is supported by the eminent German jurist, Professor Gerber, to whom we have already referred on page 57 of Minderheitenrecht im deutschen Reich, and also by the Berlin district court’s (No. II) verdict of October 21st, 1929 (document No. 2/T., 39/29)- This verdict expressly authorised the registration in the public records of the French personal name “ Charles We see, therefore, that, quite apart from Article 113 of the Federal Constitution, under existing German law, non-German personal names must be registered in their foreign style ana fo rm . — 77 —

Our experience over a large number of years, however, shows that the public registrars illegally refuse to register the Polish personal names of the children of Poles who are German subjects. Courts of law in all instances (district courts, divisional courts and the court of appeal) to which Poles who are German nationals have applied, have rejected the complaints made against public registrars who have refused to enter a Polish personal name in the register. The reason urged is that public registers must be kept in German, and that foreign personal names given to German subjects may therefore be registered only if there are no equivalent German forms for such names. Even when Article 113 of the Federal Constitution is invoked, the courts point out that this article cannot be taken into consideration, as no laws or regulations giving effect to it have yet been issued. The protracted proceedings, hitherto taken, have not given the desired result. As public registrars refuse to enter a child’s name in the Polish form and style, Polish parents rightly refuse to sign the register. Cases frequently occur therefore of children who have no personal name recognised by the German authorities, although some of them are several years old. This shocking state of affairs is best illustrated by the following instances: The son of Jan Sikora, a miner, of , Westphalia, was born on July ist, 1926. His parents wished him to be registered under the Polish personal name of “ Czeslaw ", The registrar objected, and entered the name “ Czeslaus ”. The parents refused to sign the certificate. The case is now, for the third time, before the Ahlen Divisional Court, having already been twice before all the judicial instances. It is noteworthy that the highest instance, the Berlin Court of Appeal (Kammergericht), in a verdict of December 12th, 1926, and the Miinster District Court, in a verdict of January ist, 1927, approved the registration of the Polish personal name “ Czeslaw On the motion, however, of the Miinster Regierungsprasident, the Ahlen Divisional Court, by a verdict dated February 25th, 1927, again ordered the registrar to “ correct once more the correction ” made in the Register, and enter the German form “ Czeslaus ” instead of the Polish “ Czeslaw ” . The boy is now about five years old and will shortly start going to school. The same thing happened in the case of the sons of Herr Bartsch of Allenstein, one of whom was born on March 5th, 1929, and another on March 30th, 1930. The personal names “ XVojciech Franciskus Jôzef ” and “ Stanislaw Tadeusz ”, respectively, were refused registration, and the forms Franciskus Josef ” and " Stanislaus Tadeusz ” registered instead. The parents did not sign the certificates. In a verdict of January 16th, 1931 (No. 8a. X, 770/30), the court of appeal (Kammergericht) and the Allenstein District Court, in a verdict of February 26th, 1931 (No. 2. I l l , 16/30), endorsed th e public reg istrar’s action.

[Translation.] Appendix 17.

Sentence of the Court pronounced March 13TH. 1931. ( Signed) ...... Registrar to the Court. In the people’s nam e !

In the m atter of Arthur Saenger, innkeeper, of Berlin- Schôneberg, Ebertstrasse 27, represented by Jan Baczewski, Berlin, W. 62, Kurfürstenstrasse 125 a, as Plaintiff, wrsw the Frontier District Settlement Public Utility Company, G.m.b.H., for the Frontier Marches of Posen and West Prussia, of Schneidemühl, Landeshaus, Jastrower Allee 5, as D efendant. Counsel for the Plaintiff, Rechtsanwalt Fleischer of Schneidemühl, Counsel for the Defendant, Rechtsanwalt Dr. Kraeuter of Schneidemühl, The Second Civil Chamber of the Schneidemühl District Court, composed of Landgerichts- direktor Berndt, Landgerichtsrat Dr. Rosentreter and Landgerichtsrat Dr. von Rozycki, in pursuance of the oral proceedings of March 13th, 1931, has decided and does hereby decide as follows : The action is dismissed. Costs for the defendant.

Facts of the Case. I ,0lL0c.tober l8th> I 912» a right of repurchase was registered in Part II, No. 4, of the Zakrzewo and Register, page 329, in favour of the Prussian State represented by the Settlement mmission for Posen and West Prussia, in pursuance of a registration permit dated August 19th, 912. Under the terms of the registration permit the right of repurchase was recognised in - 7 8 -

various contingencies including the event of failure by the landowner to c o m p ly with one of the obligations assumed in the Rentengutvertrag dated August 19th, 1912. These obligations included the condition that the landowner should live on his holding, and work the land. At the time of the registration of the right of repurchase the owner of the land was the Innkeeper Frank and, after July 25th, 1928, Frank jointly with his wife, Bertha Frank, née Baumann. Under an agreement dated July 30th, 1928 (Nos. 126 to 128 of the Zakrzewo Land Record- page 329), the above-mentioned owners sold the land to the plaintiff. On July 20th, 1929, the plaintiff was entered in the land register as owner. On November 2nd, 1929, the Prussian Govemmënt transferred its right of repurchase under the entry in Part II, No. 4, of the Zakrzewo Land Register, page 329, to the defendant company. On November 19th, 1929, a record of this transfer was entered in the land register. The defendant company subsequently exercised its right of repurchase and brought an action against the plaintiff for abandonment (Auflassung) of his holding (see files of the Schneide­ mühl District Court, 2. O. 465/30). The plaintiff contends that the defendant has no possession of the right of repurchase, on the grounds that the said right is purely personal and consequently not transferable. The transfer of the right of purchase, he argues, is invalid for the further reason that the West Prussia and Posen Settlement Commission, with which the right was previously vested, has since been dissolved without its rights having been previously transferred to any third p a rty . The plaintiff further contends that the exercise of the right of repurchase is contrary to Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich, which provides that all Germans are equal before the law. He argues that this means that the same law must be uniform in its application to all German subjects. The Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act of June 26th, 1912 (Preussische Gesetzsammlung, pages 183 to 185), on paragraph 3 of which the right of repurchase registered in the name of the Prussian Government is based, is, he avers, a discriminatory measure directed against Germans of Polish race and in view of Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich can no longer be regarded as valid. The application of the Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act is further alleged to be contrary to common morality. The plaintiff requests the Court : To order the defendant to have the entry in the Zakrzewo Land Register, page 329, Part II, No. 4, relative to the right of repurchase cancelled. The defendant requests the Court: To dismiss the action. The defendant contends that the right of repurchase registered in Part II, No. 4, of the Land Register of Zakrzewo, page 329, is still legally valid and has been effectively transferred to the defendant company. The exercise of the said right is contrary neither to Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich nor to common morality. For the other arguments put forward by the parties, reference is made to the memoranda dated December 30th, 1930, and March 9th, 1931.

Reasons for the Judgment of the Court.

The action must be dismissed, as the right of repurchase registered in the name of the defendant company is legally valid. The registration of the right of repurchase is based upon paragraph 3 of the Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act of July 26th, 1912 (Preussische Gesetzsammlung, p ag es 183 to 185), and on Article 29 of the Prussian Civil Code Enactm ent Law. The right is a purely subjective personal right, and in principle such rights are not transferable. This bar to transfer, however, is based entirely on special legislative provisions (see, e.g., Articles 1092, 1098, 514 of the Civil Code). No provision can be found which precludes the transfer of the right of repurchase under paragraph 3 of the Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act. No objections of principle therefore arise in respect of the transferability of the right (cf., GUthe-Triebel, footnote 45 to Article 12, AGGO, pages 1476 and 1477; RGR Komm., footnote 1 to Article 497 of the Civil Code, K. G. J. 36 A., No. 47, page 214). Nor is the transfer of the right of repurchase barred by the fact of the of the W est Prussia and Posen Settlement Commission. The Settlement Commission was nothing more than an administrative office of the Prussian State. It was never an independent legal entity, nor was it ever the possessor of the right of repurchase, which belonged to the Prussian State. The Commission's dissolution does not therefore affect the ownership of the right of repurchase or the continued existence of that right. The Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act and the exercise of the right of repurchase under paragraph 3 of that Act do not conflict with Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich. Paragraph 1 of that article provides that all Germans are equal before the law. This sentence, however, does not mean “ equal rights for all It is not to be construed as conferring identity of rights. It merely says that the law shall be applied to all uniform ly and w ithout respect of persons. It enjoins equality before the law not equality o f th e la w (An s c h ü t z , fo o tn o te 1 to Article 10 of the Reich Constitution). Such being the meaning of Article 109, paragraph 1, of the Consti­ tution of the Reich, it does not affect the Rights of Property (Consolidation) Act or the right of repurchase registered under that Act. Nor is there anything contrary to common morality within the meaning of paragraph 13° of the Civil Code. That clause does not raise the question of " the morality of State legislation — 79 —

(BGZ. 84, No. 18, page 106). The only point that can arise is whether the legal transactions 0n which the right of repurchase exercised by the defendant was based are null and void as being contrary to common morality. The answer in this case is in the negative. The legal transactions on which the right of repurchase was based and transferred to the defendant company were measures for maintaining German property in German hands and as such contain nothing contrary to common morality (RGZ. 84, No. 18, page 106). For these reasons. . . the defendant company is the rightful holder of the right of repurchase exercised by it against . . . The award of costs is governed by Article 91 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(Signed) Berndt. Dr. Rosentreter. D r. v o n R o z y c k i. Done at Schneidemühl, March 19th, 1931.

(Signed) L in d e m a n n , Registrar to the District Court.

[Translation.] Appendix 18. [No. 103.]

FIFTH SESSION OF THE REICHSTAG, 1930,

M o t io n . Dr. Frick and others to move, the Reichstag do resolve : To call upon the Government of the Reich to prepare forthwith a law for the protection of the eastern districts of Germany, embodying the principles hereinafter following, that is to say: I. Immunity from Distraint. 1. Immunity from distraint shall be accorded to all such agricultural, forest or market- garden undertakings as are managed or conducted by the owner or lessee himself direct. 2. Immunity from distraint shall be accorded until such time as the prices locally obtain­ able for the under-mentioned staple products have been maintained for three consecutive months uninterruptedly above the under-mentioned figures: r m . R ye (per t o n ) ...... 200 W heat (per t o n ) ...... 240 Potatoes for eating (per quintal) ...... 2.50 Sw ine (per q u in t a l) ...... 75 Milk (per l i t r e ) ...... 0.15 it being understood that the said prices are obtainable during three months of the period August 15th—April 15th. Foi the period April 15th—August 15th immunity from distraint shall be accorded in principle. II. Credit Aid. 1. All current debt obligations of the owners or lessees to whom paragraph I, sub- paragraph 1, relates shall be revised in such a manner that all interest payments due of over 4 per cent, and all deductions from the principal made when the credits were accorded, shall be treated as amortisements of capital, and no obligations shall hereafter be recognised or discharged at rates higher than 4 per cent for interest or 1 per cent for amortisation payments. 2. The Government of the Reich shall make available sums not exceeding 200 million Reichsmarks free of interest with a view to the continuance of the undertakings concerned. 3. Arrears of taxes shall be cancelled as from October ist, 1930.

III. Acquisition of Real Estate. 1. Agricultural, forest or market-garden undertakings may be acquired only by the provin­ cial land settlement associations or by German nationals, and in the case of the latter only where the party acquiring the undertaking himself immediately assumes the direct management or conduct thereof. 2. German nationals who send their children to Polish minority schools are in principle excluded from th e rig h t to acquire such undertakings.

IV . Land Offices and Experts. n I- Land Offices for the execution of measures in connection with the Eastern Districts e ief Action must make use of committees of the owners and lessees for purposes of supervision an co-operation, in addition to the arbitrators and experts appointed by them. — 8o —

2. Land Offices may not take any action contrary to the objections of such committees.

V . G eneral. 1. None of these provisions relating to immunity shall be applicable to owners or lessees employing foreign workers or workers who send their children to Polish minority schools. 2. An immediate general immunity from distraint shall be accorded in the case of the undertakings to which paragraph I, sub-paragraph I , relates pending the coming into force of the law.

Berlin, October 16th, 1930.

(S ig n e d ) D r. F r i c k ; B u c k ; R itte r v o n E p p ; F eder () ; Dr. F r a n k I I ; D r. G o e b b e l s ; Go rin g ; H i e r l ; K a s c h e ; K o c h (East Prussia) ; M utsch- m a n n ; R o s e n b e r g ; R u s t ; S t o h r ; S tr a sse r ; W i l l ik e n s .

[Translation.] Appendix 19.

G e r m a n M i n o r it ie s P o l ic y .

Imaginary M inority Rights in Germany : Official Statistics of Minorities’ Schools in Prussia : Statistics of the “ Tow. Szkolne” : German Schools in Poland: Demands of the " Deutscher S c h u tzb u n d

B y J a n S kala. (Extract from Kulturwehr, July 1931.)

As a result of the fresh action taken by the German Foreign Minister, Dr. Curtius, as the advocate of the German minorities on the League of Nations, the legal position of the national minorities in the German Reich has again become a subject of public interest in . Par­ ticularly significant is the fact that the legal position, as stated in Article 113 of the German Constitution (the only reference in the Constitution), has remained the same, inasmuch as for the last eleven years no executory provisions to that article have been issued. This is particularly significant as Germany has given a m oral undertaking to afford the same measure of protection to her minorities as is afforded by numerous other European countries under the terms of the treaties for the protection of minorities, and is incorporated in the constitutions of the countries in question, though she is not bound to do so by international law. T h e legal position of minorities in Germany is also rendered more difficult by the fact that the legislation of the Reich and of the Federal States concerned (with the exception of the Provisional Protection Law, of July 22nd, 1919, in Saxony) consistently precludes the fo rm a tio n of any regular body of law for national minorities in German territory and deals with the legal position of minorities exclusively by means of ministerial ordinances and decrees, and even secret decrees. Thus: (1) Germany is the only country in Europe which does not accord any protection or legal rights to minorities under the Constitution, but, on the contrary, has for more than a decade prevented the application of Article 113 by consistently interpreting it in a sense incompatible w ith the Constitution ; (2) Germany is the only country in Europe in which minority rights are established, not through the legislative, but through the administrative channel, with the result that there are no laws relating to minorities, but only ordinances and educational decrees. W ith regard to the contention that Article 113 is interpreted in a manner incompatible with the Convention, it is sufficient to refer to the facts (authenticated by docum entary evidence), which clearly show that, in practice, this sole provision of the Constitution relating to minorities is not applied. The use of the mother-tongue is not allowed in the courts, nor is any attention paid to this provision of the Convention by the adm inistrative authorities: indeed, t h e registration of personal names in the mother-tongue is either refused or prevented. 1 The methods of legislat­ ing through the administrative channel call for no further mention, as what few educational provisions exist are not laws but are officially and expressly described as " ordinances ” and “ decrees ”. Many of these indeed have been issued as secret decrees and never published. The following is a list of secret decrees: 1

1 See Kulturwehr 1931, Vols. 4 and 5, pages 125 et seq. * The older secret decrees are included here, as they have not been rescinded and can therefore be applied at any time, and certainly are applied whenever they are considered to fulfil the objecta in view. — 8i —

1438 B of August 28th, 1872. U III 16 124 of November 9th, 1877. U III A 711 of November nth, 1918. U III A 430 of May 3rd, 1919. U III A 2107 of November 6th, 1920. B 1174 of July 4th, 1873. B 7439 III of July 20th, 1886. B 216 U III A of February nth, 1902. U III A 1287 of November 30th, 1918. B 1740 of June 23rd, 1873. B 5222 of March 16th, 1894. Ministerial Decree of September 27th, 1901. U III A 608 B of June 23rd, 1917. U III a 15 397 I of August 25th, 1880. 10 344 U III a of February 28th, 1881. U III A 413 of April 9th, 1914. U III A 1067 of August 25th, 1919. It should be noted that this list contains only the decrees issued by one Ministry—the Ministry of E ducation. These facts, which rest upon documentary evidence, have not led to any effort on the part of the responsible officials to alter the legal position, which is untenable both from the political point of view and from that of the minorities, but they have had this surprising result : that attempts are being made by means of official propaganda to deny the facts of the case and to present a picture of the legal position of the minorities in Germany which corresponds neither to modern ideas as to the law regarding minorities nor to the professed mission of those responsible for German foreign policy as the protectors of all minorities. In this connection, special mention should be made of Prussia, wherewith the exception of Lusatian- (who also have settled in the of Saxony and are rather differently treated there)—practically all the minorities have settled (, Danes, , Lusatian- Sorbs, Latvians, Poles). The responsible German politicians and the Prussian authorities are naturally just as well acquainted with the position as are the representatives of the minorities, and can see for themselves the effect produced by such a state of affairs abroad, and it is quite natural that attempts should be made to mitigate or counteract that effect. An interesting instance of this kind was furnished a short time ago by the Prussian Diet and the Prussian Ministry for Science, Art and Education. The Prussian Diet adopted the follow­ ing decision at its plenary meeting of March 25th, 1931 (document 6328) : “ The Staatsministerium is requested to submit to the Diet a report showing how many German schools have been closed in former German territories since the signing of the and how many Polish minority schools have been opened on German soil since that date.” On May 26th, 1931, the Prussian Minister of Education replied as follows : 1 " I beg to state that I am unfortunately not in a position, as regards the schools in the former German territories, to prepare such an accurate list as has been asked for. As regards the Polish minority schools in Prussia, I would refer to the list of February 25th, 1931 (U III A 5045, see Annex 1 attached and also Annex 2).” This reply is further accompanied by two enclosures, the first of which describes the position in the various territories: A. Schleswig-Holstein; B. Oppeln ; C. Other Prussian territory; D. Polish reading, writing and religious instruction under the terms of the Decree of December 31st, 1918 (U III A 1412); E. Instruction in Wendish. The second enclosure is a list of the private Polish elementary schools in Prussia set up under the terms of the Ordinance of December 31st, 1928. Ad A. — It is stated that in the Danish State elementary school, 182 children belonging to the minority are given instruction, and in the 7 private Danish elementary schools ( Land and Schleswig) 617; in the Danish private elementary schools there is a staff of 23, 5 of the teachers being Prussian and 18 Danish subjects. It is also noted that, in Flensburg, a large number of children from the State school (where naturally all the teachers are German) are transferred to the Danish private school. Apart from the violent agitation carried on by State officials there against the Danish private school in Schleswig, the existence of Danish private schools has been officially recognised. Ad B. — The position is somewhat different with regard to the Polish schools in Upper j-esia- The Prussian Diet document also has much to say regarding the 24 minority schools which are alleged to have been kept open and which the Reich Minister for Foreign Affairs, r. Curtius, specially mentioned in Geneva. As a m atter of fact, there are only 27 State minority schools in Prussian Upper Silesia. It is said that there are 51 of these schools—namely, 27

in No. 7302, Prussian Diet, Third Election Period, 1. Tg. 1928 to 1931. U III A No. 5180, — 82 —

actually in existence, and 24 “ kept open "—an assertion which misleads the public in a material particular. These “ schools without pupils ” only exist on paper, as there are no teachers or schoolrooms, and the schools are not known even by name *. We assume that the responsible authorities will gradually give up this habit of juggling with figures, as it convinces no one, In my opinion, the best practical settlement of the question would be the conversion of these Prussian State schools which only exist on paper into Polish private minority schools. If this is done, they will certainly not remain em pty, and then there will really be 24 more Polish minority schools in Prussian Upper Silesia. That would make a far more favourable impression on the League of Nations from Germany’s point of view than these 24 imaginary schools. With regard to the Polish private schools, the document states that there are under the Geneva Convention 7 Polish private elementary schools with 26 children and 7teachers who are Polish subjects, though at present 4 schools are without any pupils. A d C. — In the other parts of Prussia there are no public (State) minority schools for the Polish minority. The document enumerates the Polish private schools in the Administrative Districts of Allenstein, Marienwerder, Schneidemühl and Kôslin: 53 prim ary schools with 1,637 children and 71 teachers (3 Prussian and 68 Polish subjects). W e deal with these figures in further detail below. Of the 92 (not 68) teachers who are Polish subjects, 31 hold a teacher’s certificate issued by a Prussian teachers' training college dating from pre-war times, so that the only distinction between them and their 18 (not 3) German colleagues is the fact that they are in possession of Polish passports. Ad, D. — The document gives the following figures for the Polish writing, reading and religious instruction in the districts of Allenstein, Marienwerder, Schneidemühl and Oppeln: 58 schools, with 7,243 Polish-speaking children of school-age, of whom only 1,687 are said to come into question as regards Polish instruction, though 1,806 actually attend the Polish classes. According to this, the number of children attending these classes is 119 more than, in the opinion of the authorities, “ come into question". The document does not explain this phenomenon, but, if 1,806 children actually attend the Polish classes, they m ust "come into question", unless it is contended that none of these children “ come into question”. In that case, the classes should be discontinued altogether, as has been done in the district of Allenstein, with regard to which it is stated in so many words that: “ Polish writing, reading and religious instruction is not given in State schools ”. The only alternative view is that all the 7,234 Polish-speaking schoolchildren ought to receive this instruction, as they certainly do “ come into question This instance in particular shows, quite unintentionally, how untenable the whole Prussian policy with regard to minority schools is. Not only are three different methods of instruction mentioned—(1) State minority school; (2) private minority school; and (3) writing, reading and religious instruction—but an attem pt is also made to determine who actually “ comes into question ” with regard to them. A d E. — For the first tim e in the history of Prussia, an official departm ent gives the number of schools and schoolchildren belonging to the Lusatian-Sorb (Wendish) minority. The 43,000 Lusatian-Sorbs mentioned in the official Prussian statistics have only 2 schools, with 54 children, who are stated to receive instruction in writing, reading and religion in their native language. Unfortunately, however, this statement is not altogether true. Neither in Kotten nor ;n Hoske is there any teacher qualified to give instruction in writing and reading, as none of them has received a suitable training in a teachers’ training college. Religious instruction was provisionally given by a Catholic priest in the Lusatian-Sorb language, and apparently continues to be so given. Even if it is assumed that the statement made in this document entirely accords with the facts (which is not the case), it contains an implicit admission which I should lik e to bring to the notice of all those who, for years past and again recently, have persisted in maintaining that my statem ents with regard to Lusatian-Sorb schools in Prussia were “ lies ", “ falsehood1 etc. *. I therefore repeat that 43,000 Lusatian-Sorbs have only 2 schools in Prussia, in which altogether 54 children receive religious instruction in their native language. There is one more remark to be made with regard to this list, as we are providing the public with more accurate statistics regarding Polish schools. Next to the statem ents of places with Polish private schools, the lis t contains an indication of the number of schoolchildren, divided into the following categories: Number of schoolchildren: On the day of opening; On a given date (January ist, 1931) ; Total: German —, German-Polish —, Protestant —, Catholic —. According to this, 1,491 Polish children attend the Polish private schools, besides 5 German children and 141 children described as German-Polish. These “ German-Polish " children are one of the most extraordinary items in the official list submitted. As they are expressly mentioned separately from the Polish children, the question arises why this has been done. Either they are German children, whose parents prefer to send them to the Polish private school ra th e r than g iv e th e m a German schooling, or they are Polish children who n a tu ra lly ought to b e educated at the Polish school. German-Polish children attending a Polish minority school only exist

1 See Kulturwehr 1931 (No. 2, pages 41 et seq.). , * The Deutsche Rundschau, of Bydgoszcz in Poland, the Nordsckleswigscke Zeitung, of Aabenraa, tn Grenzdeutsche Rundschau, of Hamburg etc. - 8 3 - in the imagination of those officials who consider that it is their business as far as possible to twist the obvious facts of the case to the disadvantage of the minority, so as to suggest to uninformed public opinion that there is the smallest possible number of Polish schoolchildren. In itself, such " doctoring ” of statistics would be a matter of little importance, but it gains importance by the fact that such “ doctored ” figures are used in political propaganda against the Polish minority. It is our intention, however, to throw a searching light on this propaganda and ruthlessly expose it for the enlightenment of European public opinion so that those concerned will find it hard to continue to obscure the issue, as they are deliberately doing. Two instances in particular are calculated to facilitate our task very considerably: For Flatow-Abbau (Administrative District of Schneidemühl), the official statistics mention 23 " German-Polish ” children but not one single " Polish ” child, as attending the Polish private minority school ! These statistics are still more illuminating in the case of the of Kôslin, as in the four schools mentioned all the children are described as “ German-Polish In both cases, of course, they are purely Polish children, as the Prussian Ministry of Educa­ tion and the Prussian Diet will hardly m aintain that parents who are really German in sympathies, language and origin send their children to a Polish minority school. This statement shows the tendentiousness of the statistics submitted, and public opinion may safely be left to make the proper inferences in estimating the value of these official figures and the methods of arriving at them. The statistics of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany, at June ist, 1931, were as follows : (1) Private elementary schools, 64 schools, 1,884 children; (2) State minority schools, 27 schools, 306 children ; (3) Language classes, 94 classes, 3,709 children ; (4) Religious instruction in the Polish language (Stateschools), 34schools, 721 children ; (5) Teachers who give instruction in these schools, with theexception of the 27 State minority schools in Upper Silesia, n o teachers (18 German and 92 Polish subjects). Note. — In the 27 State m inority schools in Upper Silesia, the instruction is given by German teachers (that is, teachers of German nationality and race). The following may also be mentioned : 28 kindergartens with 441 children, 23 extension classes with 759 pupils, 153 pupils of secondary schools of Polish race (in German secondary schools), 5 pupils at a college for the training of kindergarten mistresses, 131 pupils attending secondary schools in Poland, 76 candidates, male and female, for official educational posts at teachers' training colleges in P o la n d , 33 persons who have studied at German or foreign universities, 6 candidates at the Pedagogic Academy at Beuthen, Upper Silesia. All German newspapers have published the statistics contained in the Prussian Diet document (6328/7302) in the form in which they were distributed by the official Press bureaux. The Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung (Berlin, June 23rd) added one comment only: “ and how are the German minorities treated in the ceded territories? ” The Rheinisch-IY estfàlische Zeitung (, June 6th) speaks in the following terms of the defective nature of the information given by the Prussian Minister of Agriculture with regard to the German schools in former German territories: “ In view of the increase in the number of Polish minority schools, which are only used for fostering a Polish irredentist movement in the eastern territories which have been left to us, it is much to be regretted that the Prussian Staatsministerium has failed to give us any information with regard to the German minorities in Poland. The Prussian educational authorities must surely be fully informed on this burning question, as otherwise they would be guilty of criminal negligence. It is far more likely that they are chary of giving more exact data, as, in the m atter of schools, the Poles have certainly failed to fulfil their obligations. ” The Frankfurter Zeitung (June 10th) publishes a particularly remarkable article, although it only confirms what we have often said about it—namely, that when speaking of minority questions it is like a blind man talking of colours, although, as far as it can do so, it is at pains (though clumsily enough) to belittle the position of the national minorities in Germany and their demands, on the lines of the official propaganda. The Frankfurter Zeitung prefaces the Prussian minority school statistics with the following pathetic remarks: “ We savages, . . . Polish newspapers and politicians never tire of saying, as M. Zaleski said in Geneva in answer to the German petitions: * We Poles would be glad if our compatriots in Germany were treated anything like as well as the German minority in Poland ! ’ As foreign countries are so ignorant of the real conditions both in Poland and in Germany, this comparison, which is proclaimed to the world by those who know that it is false, finds many eager hearers and readers, although an isolated individual here and there may have been made somewhat uneasy by the negotiations regarding the Polish 1 pacification ’ measures in Upper Silesia and the Ukraine. The real position of Polish minority schools in Germany is revealed by a survey prepared by the Prussian Ministry of Education (outside Prussia there is no Polish minority in Germany), showing the position of the Polish minority schools in the eastern frontier provinces. - 8 4 -

The following list shows who proclaim what they know to be untrue and what the real position is with regard to the Polish minority in Germany and the German minority in Poland:

G ermany Poland Number of members of the Polish Number of members of the German minority in Germany approxi­ minority in Poland (approxi­ m ately ...... 1,000,000 m ately) ...... 900,000 Number of schoolchildren belonging N um ber of schoolchildren belonging to the Polish minority (15 per to the German minority (15 per cent of the adults)...... 150,000 cent of the adults)...... 135,000 Those of them who receive instruc­ Those of them who receive instruc­ tion in their native language tion in their native language (P olish)...... 6,620 (G erm an)...... , 76,036 Number of German private elemen­ Number of Polish private schools 64 tary schools...... 242 Number of State minority schools 27 Number of State minority schools 535 Number of Polish private second­ N umber of German private second­ ary schools ...... o ary sch o o ls...... J$ 6 Total number of schools .... 91 Total number of schools . . . 813

Out of about 150,000 Polish children in Germany, approximately 6,620 receive instruction in their native language (Polish) = about 4 per cent. Out of about 135,000 German schoolchildren in Poland, 76,036 receive instruction in their native language (German) = about 59 per cent. There are 91 schools in Germany for 150,000 Polish schoolchildren—that is to say, one school per 1,945 Polish children in Germany. There are 813 schools in Poland for 135,000 German schoolchildren: that is to say, one school per 165 German children.

My sole object in drawing attention in the first part of this article to the comments which are incompatible with the spirit and letter of the Constitution of the German Reich, dated August n th , 1919, was to point out clearly to the official departments responsible for applying the Constitution the results of their passive attitude towards the rights of national minorities in Germany. The campaign to belittle the claims of all national minorities in Germany may be effectively and quite convincingly discredited if public opinion, both in Germany and in the world at large, can be made to realise what are the corresponding claims of the German minorities as set forth in responsible German circles. In th e Kalender für deutsches Recht (1929), published with the official support of the Govern­ ments of the Reich and the Federal States by the " Deutscher Schutzbund ” at Berlin, these claims are set forth with admirable clearness. This publication makes the following statement with regard to the general objects prescribed in German quarters for the German minorities in the ceded and other foreign territories (Kalenderblatt, of September 13th and 14th) : “ The effect of the political changes arising out of the issue of the war has been, in many of the German territories which have been annexed or otherwise jeopardised, that those in power have endeavoured to drive a large part of the German element out of the country. Direct expulsion was not the only method used; many other kinds of pressure were brought to bear, such as expropriation of land and capital, contesting of nationality, dismissal of officials of German race, boycotting, intimidation, etc. In so far as Germans have been compelled to settle in the Reich, they have a right to compensation for hard­ ships suffered and, in particular, those responsible for Germany’s foreign policy are in honour bound to fight for and secure for them the right to return to their posts abroad and continue the work they were doing for their own home and people on the frontiers and outside Germany, which was forcibly interrupted. ” In so far as German minorities have suffered from such methods, those minorities have more than once intimated that they disapprove of them. This gives them the p olitical and moral right clearly to enlighten public opinion in Europe as to similar methods employed by those responsible for Germany's internal policy against minorities in the Germ an Reich and energetically to combat these methods.1 If those responsible for Germany's foreign policy are in honour bound to do this (as the “ Deutscher Schutzbund ” says in the last paragraph of the above quotation), then those responsible for Germany’s internal policy are certainly in honour bound not to take away from the national minorities in Germany, who have stood fast as loyal citizens on the land that was their fathers', in spite of the hard political and economic blows that fate has dealt them, their natural right to retain their own culture and not to twist the terms of the Constitution to their detriment. T he righ t to their own schools has to some extent been accorded to the D an es and Poles, b u t this right has been withheld from all the other minorities, and nothing is done to put an end to this injustice so as to justify the following demands made by the G erm an minorities and in their name in the above-mentioned propagandist article in the " Deutscher Schutzbund (Kalenderblatt, of May 17th and 18th) :

1 See Kulturwehr, 1931, Nos. 4/5, pages 125 et seq., a n d a l s o 1931, No. 7: "Prussian Land Settlement P r a c tic e in respect of the National Minorities in the German Reich"; and 1927, Noe. 5/6: “The Existing Law to the National Minorities in the German Reich." “ The right to German schools, which the groups of Germans settled abroad demand from the Governments of the countries in which they live and claim at the bar of inter­ national justice, is not confined to instruction in the German language, but includes the preservation of an essential German mentality, which can find its most satisfactory expression in the form of sound cultural self-administration . . An essential right that is denied more especially to the Polish minority (but also to the Lusatian-Sorbs), although Article 113 of the Constitution of the German Reich expressly provides for it, is the right of parents to choose the personal names of their children. The German claim is formulated as follows (Kalenderblatt, of April 12th and 13th) : “ Obviously everyone has the right to bear the name which he has inherited, and to choose the personal names of his children. In point of fact, however, both these rights have been disputed in the clash of nationalities. The existence of State registers enables the State, in practice, to influence the spelling of the Christian names of new-born children and to insist, for instance, that Johann shall be entered as Jan, or Joseph as Giuseppe, thus saddling the child for life with a foreign name. And the State even interferes with surnames, as when in the southern Tyrol, for instance, surnames derived from place-names have been changed by the authorities to accord with the new geographical denominations, or when, as in Latvia and , the State adds local endings to German names and insists that they shall be written in the foreign way. Germans abroad fight for the right to their own nam es as being one of the most important factors of family tradition and racial tenacity.” We also claim this right, and for the same reason. When will the German Reich itself give up germanising the traditional baptismal and personal names of the national minorities and use the surnames of the Lusatian-Sorbs, which have been handed down from father to son in official registers and other records ? Of special importance for the whole public life of national minorities is the use of their native language in the courts. Article 113 of the Constitution of the German Reich states that the parts of the population which speak foreign languages must not be hindered in any way from using their own language in the courts. The right of the German minorities to use their native language in courts of law is claimed in an article in the Kalenderblatt, of March 29th and 30th, which reads as follows : “ Old Germanic law recognised the right of every man to be tried by his peers. Since the State has assumed the administration of all departments of justice, the subject nationa­ lities must be thankful if they are enabled to plead in the courts, defend themselves and hear sentences in their own language, without being put to disproportionate additional expense. Since the case of the two Flemings who were executed in , although, as was afterwards proved, they were innocent, and who were unable to understand the charge or to defend themselves against it, public opinion has been made to realise the tremendous risk of judicial murders and miscarriages of justice; but little has been done in practice to remedy this state of affairs. No country can be regarded as a country where the law is equitably administered if it denies its citizens the right to plead in their own language.” Hitherto, every single application to be allowed to use the languages of national minorities in the courts has, contrary to the terms of the Constitution, been refused on formalistic grounds. What in the German view applies to all other countries with minority populations applies to Germany: no country can be regarded as a country where justice is equitably administered if it denies its citizens the right to plead in their own language. We will close this treatise on German minority rights and policy with these statements made by a representative organisation engaged in the defence of German ideals, as the “ Deutscher Schutzbund ” claims to be: It will no longer be possible for those responsible for the German propaganda against the national minorities in Germany to represent the claims of these minorities as exaggerated, or to allege that a model solution has been found for the minorities question in the German Reich, and it is to be hoped that the responsible departments will draw the necessary moral and political conclusions regarding national minorities in the German Reich from the claims and demands of German minorities abroad.

[Translation.] Appendix 20.

P r u s s ia n L a n d S e t t l e m e n t P r a c t ic e in r e s p e c t o f N a t io n a l M in o r it ie s .

B y D r. B. von Openkowski. (Extract from Kulturwehr, July 1931.)

I. One of the chief respects in which the national minorities in Prussia are in a disadvantageous position is th e allocation of land. I h av e sta te d m ore th a n once in K ulturw ehr 1 that national

1 See my articles : “Siedlungspolitik” (“Land Settlement Policy”), 1927, No. 10, pages 479 et seq., "Agrar- Siedlungspolitik” ("Agrarian and Land Settlement Policy”), 1928, Nos. 7 and 8, pages 269 et seq., and Agrarpolitische Ausnahmegesetzgebung gegen die nationalen Minderheiten in Deutschland” (“Exceptional Land Legislation directed against the National Minorities in Germany”), 1930, Nos. 4 and 5, pages 121 et seq. — 8 6 —

minorities in Prussia are systematically overlooked in this matter. When it is said on the German sid e that, especially since the w ar, there has been no exceptional land legislation in Germany directed against minorities and that the national minorities are in this respect, both in theory an i in practice, treated on a footing of absolute equality with the rest of the population, this does not accord with the facts. Dr. Fritz Karl, for instance, deals in Ms publication, "The Legal Position of National Minorities in the Reich and in Prussia'',1 with my article “ Agrarian and Land Settlement Policy : Exceptional Legislation”, in Kulturwehr, 1928, Nos. 7 and 8, pages 269 et seq. He says, on page 32, with reference to my article: “ There can be no question of the agrarian and land settlement policy of the new Germany constituting exceptional legislation directed against the national minorities, as is to some extent the case in eastern and south-eastern European countries."

The fact that the German minorities in other countries enjoy the greatest freedom of movement in the matter of land purchase, etc., has often been proved in Kulturwehr. To take a recent instance, it may be pointed out that Poland has, under the terms of the Germano- Polish Liquidation Agreement of October 31st, 1929 (which has acquired force of law as a result of the exchange of the documents of ratification in Warsaw on April 21st, 1931), relinquished of her own free will her right of liquidation and repurchase in respect of land, with the result that more than 70,000 Germans (landlords with their families, workmen and employees) have been able to earn a living on non-liquidated estates in western Poland and have been left in full possession of their property, which they may resell or rent, to Germans or others. In contrast to the action thus taken by Poland in favour of the German elements of her population, Prussia still continues, in practice, to apply the anti-Polish ifcttfcwgul-legislatton, which dates from Bismarck's tim e.1 Quite recently, the Provincial Court (Landgericht) of Schneidemühl stated, in a legal decision of March 13th, 1931 (2. O. 787/30), that the provision of Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich, whereby all German nationals are equal before the law, did not affect the validity of existing exceptional legislation, including the pre-war 2?#«te*ig«Megislation and the right of repurchase based thereon. This Jfe#*te«g«tf-Iegislation (which is clearly, from its wording, exceptional legislation directed against minorities) is not mentioned at all by Dr. Fritz Karl. When Dr. Fritz Karl goes on to say, with reference to the agricultural provisions mentioned by me : “ The provisions of the Decree of the Chancellor of the Reich relating to the purchase and sale of agricultural property, of March 15th, 1918 (Reich Legal Gazette, p a g es 123 et seq.), and of the Reich Land Settlement Law of August nth , 1919 (Reich Legal Gazette, pages 1429 et seq.), contain nothing to justify this criticism (that is to say, the anti-minority tendency mentioned by myself)", I can only say that I was careful to make it quite clear in my article (loc. cit., pages 269 and 270) that the provisions of March 15th, 1918, and August nth , 1919, do not, in their wording, discriminate between national minorities and persons of German race, but that the provisions as they are applied in practice by the authorities and the other bodies concerned may justly be described as exceptional legislation, in view of their one-sided application against the nat ional minorities. I have also dealt with these two sets of regulations in a special a rticle (loc. cit., pages 273 to 279) and have also—in order to point the contrast—dealt in a further special section (loc. cit., pages 279 to 290) with those provisions which are, from their wording, clearly in the nature of exceptional legislation directed against national minorities. The secret decrees directed against national minorities in the matter of agricultural policy, which have been criticised by me, and, in particular, the Decree dated Aprijfoth, 1025, of the Oberpmsident of the Province of Upper Silesia are not discussed at all by Dr. I'ritz Karl, while he simply dismisses the “ instructions of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare, of March 6th, 1927, relating to the promotion of the construction of houses for agricultural labourers from revenue derived from productive unemployment relief funds " by calling them " emergency measures arising out of the necessity to protect national interests No attempts to show that “ Prussia-Germany's " anti-minority agricultural policy is non-existent will alter the fact that exceptional legislation in the matter of agricultural policy directed against the national minorities does exist in "Prussia-Germany”, and that the Regulations of March 15th, 1918, and August n th , 1919, do serve to prevent national minorities from acquiring land. The numerous complaints received from members of minorities, and especially the numerous complaints and interpellations of the former Polish members of the Prussian Diet, and the petitions addressed to the Government, clearly prove that Prussia's post-war policy with regard to n a tio n a l minorities in the matter of land is quite as harsh and drastic as her pre-war policy, although its form may have somewhat changed. A former member of the Prussian Diet, J a n Baczewski, stated, and rightly, on July ist, 1925: * " . . . 1 can only say of the present policy with regard to Poland that the old system obtaining under the Imperial regime is still with us to-day. Only the tactics have changed Then, the Expropriation Law was passed and an expropriation policy was openly practised. Now, it is called af land settlement policy, but it Is the same thing under ano ther

1 Published by H. Büttner, Berlin, S. 0. 16 (Thesis for the University of ), 1930. * See my article: "Agrarpolitische Ausnahmegesetze gegen die nationalen Minderbeiten in Deutschland Ein Gegenstiick zum deutsch-polnischen Liquidationsabkommen" ("Exceptional Land Legislation directed against the National Minorities in Germany: A Contrast to the Germano-Polish Liquidation Agreement ) in Kulturwehr, 1930, Nos. 4 and 5, pages 121 et seq. * See Verbatim Report of the Diet, Session 1925, pages 2973 et seq. — 87 —

name. For instance, the representative of Oberprâsident Proske, Herr Berger, of Oppeln, issued a confidential decree to the Landràte : ‘ T he Oberprâsident of the Province of Upper Silesia, strictly confidential, O. P. III. 3. No. 779, of April 9th, 1925 . In this strictly confidential ’ decree, he makes the Landràte personally responsible for preventing any land from coming into Polish hands, and states that, ' in order to avoid any misunder­ standing, the term “ Polish” does not apply solely to Polish subjects’—in other words, it includes members of the Polish minority, such as ourselves, who possess German natio­ nality. The fact that it is called ‘ confidential ’ betrays its illicit nature, since it shuns the light of day. Secret decrees are characteristic of the present land settlement policy, or, in other words, expropriation policy. We who are of the soil are to be deprived of our own land in Upper Silesia, East Prussia, Ermeland and Masurenland, whatever our sympathies may be, and foreign interlopers are to be settled there. If there are to be settle­ ments, the indigenous population has the prior right to settle and to obtain land. While those concerned are anxious to observe the appearance of justice in the eyes of the world, their intention, as this confidential decree proves, is to continue to pursue a policy of expropriation in secret, while outwardly calling it land settlement policy.”

II. When official authorisation to conclude contracts of purchase or leases is refused to members of the minority, or applications received from members of the minority for building credits, land for settlement purposes, arable land for purchase or leasing, etc., are refused, those concerned naturally avoid, as far as possible, giving the real reason for their refusal—namely, that the applicants belong to the national minority. The pretexts given in order to reconcile such refusals with the terms of some legal provision or other are sometimes so absurd and grotesque as to be quite evidently fictitious. Often they do not accord with the facts. We will give a few illustrations : In accordance with Article 1, taken in conjunction with Article 3, Nos. 1 to 4, of the Decree of March 15th, 1918, the authorisation for the transfer (Auflassung) of a property, the creation of a usufruct in respect of the produce of a property, as also any agreement whereby enjoyment of the produce is conferred or the obligation to transfer a property is constituted, may be refused, when the land is intended to form part of an agricultural or forest undertaking: (1) If the execution of the judicial act is likely to prejudice the regular exploitation of the land, and thus affect the public food supply; or, (2) If the land to be used for agricultural purposes is ceded to a person whose principal occupation is not, or has not formerly been, agriculture ; or, (3) If the judicial act is effected with a view to or in execution of an uneconomic parcelling out of the land; or, (4) If the execution of the judicial act is likely to destroy the economic independence of an agricultural concern by amalgamating it with another. In Gross-Dammer (Grenzmark, Posen, W^est Prussia), a member of the Polish minority, Jan Bloch, purchased land with a view to giving it subsequently to his son Thomas, so as to set him up independently. The Landrat at Meseritz refused the authorisation under Article 3» No. 4, of the above-mentioned decree, on the ground that Jan Bloch owned land of his own in that place and that there was reason to fear that the two properties would be amalgamated. The son, Thomas Bloch, was then stated to be the purchaser, whereupon the authorisation was refused under No. 1 of Article 3 above, on the ground that the son had no means and that the transaction was fictitious, the object being to give the land to the father through the intermediary of the son, and also that the exploitation of the land would presumably, owing to the fact that the son had no capital, affect the public food supply, especially as the land had no live-stock, etc. But the fact of financing by a third party (in this case through the father from the son’s estate) does not normally make a legal transaction fictitious, furthermore, there was apparently sufficient live-stock and equipment on the land purchased. As the Prussian Minister of Agriculture stated, in reply to the appeal lodged, that optants returning home from Poland must first be supplied with land, we can only assume that the real reason for refus­ ing to grant the necessary authorisation in this case was the fact that the Bloch family belonged to the Polish minority. The Landrat at Flatow (Grenzmark, Posen, West Prussia) refused the authorisation for the contract of purchase between a farmer named Budnik at Kônigsdorf and the purchasers, Andreas Budzinski, Franz Brostowicz and others, under No. 3 of Article 3 mentioned above, on the ground that the parcelling out of the land was uneconomic. It was further stated in the reasons given th at: “ The official investigations have elicited the fact that the seller s land consists of two separate properties which were united under one control by purchase some twenty years ago. In the interests of the public food supply and of proper and rational exploitation, the land must again be divided into two independent properties, especially as the necessary buildings for two properties are there.” In reply to this, it may be stated that the two properties appear to have been united, not twenty, but thirty-five years ago, when they were in the hands of two brothers. Further, the buildings are in disrepair and are totally inadequate, and could thus not be used for the two independent properties ; it would therefore be much more feasible to parcel them up as desired. — 8 8 —

T h e Landrat of Flatow refused to authorise the contract of purchase between a farmer named Habura, of Seedorf, and the purchasers, Botanski, Szalski, Plewa, Pyszczek, and others, under Article 3, Nos. 3 and 4, of the above-mentioned regulations. The lots to be sold were, it is stated, so small that they could not be made independent viable concerns. TCie remaining land, amounting to some twenty-five Morgen (the whole property measured sixty Morgen ' was also, it was stated, too small to form an independent economic concern. The fact is, however' that the purchasers merely wished to enlarge the property they already owned by purchasing the lots in question. Botanski already possesses a property of four Morgen of land, to which he desired to add a further twelve and a-half Morgen; S zalski ow n s on e Morgen of land and wanted sev en Morgen more; while Plewa owns fourteen Morgen of land and desired to acquire six Morgen through the parcelling out of the land. Pyszczek already, owns five Morgen of land and proposed to acquire five more. The other purchasers, too, simply wanted to increase their properties. Moreover, it is difficult to understand why the remaining twenty-five Morgen should be regarded as too small to form a separate viable estate. T he Landrat of Flatow refused authorisation for a contract of purchase submitted by a farmer named Schwanke, of Lugetal, and by a farmer named Kulpa, of Dobrin, under No. 1 of Article 3 above, on the ground that the purchase-price (50,000 RM.) was exorbitant and the purchaser, with the capital at his disposal, was not in a position to work the land properly, espe­ cially as a considerable part of the live-stock and equipment had been taken away by the seller. In point of fact, the land measures 125 Morgen, is in excellent condition and contains large new buildings (which alone are valued at at least 20,000 RM.), and the whole of the crops have also been sold with the land. The price, 50,000 RM., appears to be quite reasonable. The buyer himself is stated to possess 35,000 RM., 30,000 of which have been deposited. He himself is an old and experienced farmer, whose principal occupation is farming and who thoroughly under­ stands the business ; but, owing to the prevalence of foot-and-mouth disease, he was unable to purchase larger stocks of cattle at the time when the contract of purchase was concluded.

III. Article 4 of the Reichssiedlungsgesetz (Reich Land Settlement Act) of August nth, 1919, for constituting new settlements and promoting the system of land settlement called Anlieger- siedlung—that is to say, the system of increasing small farms already in existence so as to make them independent economic units—grants a right of pre-emption to concerns entrusted with the creation of these kinds of settlements, in order to acquire settlement land. This right of pre-emption can, of course, be used as a means of preventing members of the minority from acquiring land. For instance, in Tiefenau, in the Kreis of Marienwerder, the owners—the brothers, Gluzewski—sold their land in lots to small local Polish farmers; the contracts of purchase were authorised by the competent Landrat, as it would have been impossible to find any pretext for refusal under Article 3 of the Decree of March 15th, 1918; but the East Prussian Land Company, of Kônigsberg, exercised its right of pre-emption under Article 4 of the Reich Land Settlement Act and sold the lots to persons of German extraction. The land had been in Polish hands from time immemorial. The original purchasers all belonged to the Polish minority. It is clear from the attitude of the East Prussian Land Company, as explained in document E . 17, 697, of November 14th, 1928, that, in the matter of land settlement, only persons of German extraction are considered. The system of Anliegersiedlung, which is governed, apart from the Reich Land Settlement Act of August n th , 1919, by certain executory provisions, besides the requirements with regard to the economic usefulness of the land in question, is applicable subject to the condition that the person desiring to acquire the land already possesses a dwelling-house and agricultural buildings and accessories, and that his principal occupation is farming or his secondary occupation agriculture if his principal occupation (artisan, industrial labourer) does not afford him a living. It has been found that, in practice, members of national minorities are passed over in the matter of land settlement. On the occasion of the partitioning of the State domains in Skietz (Grenz­ mark, Posen, West Prussia), about twenty-five applicants of Polish nationality were ignored b y th e Kulturamt in Schneidemühl. The reason given was that labourers or artisans had no right to land, although labourers or artisans with German sympathies obtained land up to tw e n ty Morgen and more. Others were refused on the ground that they had opted for Poland, although they had not, in fact, done so. At Bresnitz, in the Kreis of Ratibor (Upper Silesia), Auszügler named Bozek, Halamoda, Olbryst, Mme. Murawiec, Grzesik and Anderska (a war widow) and others who belonged to the Polish minority had for years rented and farmed land belonging to the of Ratibor in order to improve their position. They owned land of their own measuring from one to six Morgen. The leased land was taken away from them and let to persons with German sympathies. When they made enquiries, they were received with shrugs of the shoulders and some such remark as: " You’ll get land somewhere else; don’t worry us”. “ Somewhere else ” obviously meant " in Poland In Schonowkz, in the Kreis of R atibor, settlement land was refused by the KuUuratnt at Ratibor undo: the Anliegersiedlung system to members of the Polish minority named Radek, Wycish and Wylezich, and also to a member of the Polish minority, Mme. Gomik, of Makau, of the Kreis of Ratibor. M. N ow ak , Regierungs- und Kulturrat of Ratibor, expressly stated that persons with Polish sympathies would not receive settlement land. Certain members of the Polish minority, Halamoda, Lepiorz and Zebraka, of Lubowitz, in the Kreis of Ratibor, had for sixteen years leased and farmed land in Lubowitz from the administration of the ducal estate. The land was taken from them by the Kulturamt in Ratibor and given to persons with German sympathies who were in less need and had enough land. M. Nowak stated, inter alia : " Halamoda, you won’t get any land; yoU — 89 — are a Pole (Grosspole). Lepiorz is an insurgent and he will not get any land either”. A member of the Polish minority, Josef Stolot, of Schierat, in the Kreis of Gleiwitz, bought himself some land. Before the land was transferred, he was summoned before the Amtsvorsteher at Pinow, who said that doubts had arisen with regard to his nationality, that he had acted as commandant of the local police and that his daughter had had a post in the Paritative Commission, and asked him if he still wished to apply for permission to purchase arable land. The question of his nationality had to be submitted to the office dealing with Upper Silesian questions relating to nationality. T he Regierungsprasident in Oppeln had, however, to recognise his German nationality. On the occasion of the sale of the land belonging to Herr Madelung, of Sakrau, in the Kreis of Gleiwitz, the following declaration was made to the purchasers by the K u ltu r­ amt of Oppeln : “ The complete farm may be disposed of, but only to a German from Poland. It may not be sold under any circumstances to a local inhabitant (meaning a member of the Polish m inority). T h e K ulturam t reserves the right of pre-emption. ” The right of pre-emption in favour of the K u lturam t of Oppeln was obviously entered in the land registers in order to prevent Poles from acquiring land. The farmers Gràlla, of Sakrau, and Ochmann, of Oleszek, who belong to the Polish minority, were also met by a refusal. The estate inspector said to the Kulturam t official with regard to Ochmann : “ He is ‘ white-red ’ ” (meaning a Pole). On many occasions, and, in particular, in Upper Silesia, which comes under the Geneva Convention, cases have arisen of members of the Polish minority being unable to obtain settlement land, in spite of the fact that the legal prerequisites were fulfilled, while Germans have been able to obtain far more land than they needed to support themselves. In one place, members of the Polish minority were passed over in the matter of allotting settlement land ( Anliegesiedlungs- verfahren), while persons of German extraction were brought in from other places, although they did not fulfil the legal pre-conditions (such as having a dwelling of their own, etc.). In this way, both through the Anliegesiedlungsystem and in general, the creation of settlements of other kinds in purely Polish districts, a " wedge ” of persons of German extraction has been introduced, so that the German votes on the communal councils predominate, and it could then be alleged that the commune in question was a German commune. It is true that, in many cases, the Polish applicants did not fulfil the conditions either, but persons of German extraction were accepted in their place, although they, too, did not fulfil them. The Polish would-be purchasers who were passed over were in many cases told that, when the next Anliegesiedlung was carried out—some five or six years later—they would be able to apply for land again. The members of the minority are also discriminated against in the m atter of building credits. A farmer named Slawinski, of Gillau (East Prussia), could not obtain a building permit from the Landrat in Allenstein, and, when the m atter was submitted for administrative settlement, the objections had to be withdrawn. When Slawinski thereupon applied for a building credit, he was specifically told by the Landratsamt that money for land settlement purposes could be given only to persons of German extraction. He was told at the Homes Association, which is supported by public money, that persons with Polish sympathies could not be considered in connection with homesteads or land settlem ent.

IV. " The instructions of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927, relating to the promotion of the construction of houses for agricultural labourers from revenue derived from productive unemployment relief funds (III. R. 5. c. gen. 6/27) ”, says Dr. Fritz Karl, “ are to be regarded as emergency measures dictated by the necessity of protecting nationals’ interests, although they are clearly inadequate. The provisions describing the object of the measure point out, and rightly, that it is intolerable that hundreds of thousands of Germans should be without employment in their own country, while large numbers of foreigners find work and a livelihood in our country as seasonal agricultural labourers. This can, for the most part, be remedied only by the creation in the country districts of houses suitable for German agricultural labourers. These instructions are not, however, directed against the national mino­ rities in Prussia. The Prussian Land Settlement Commission (Ansiedlungskommission), know n from pre-war times, has been liquidated by the Law of March 10th, 1924 (Collection of Laws, page 126). ” It is true that the former Land Settlement Commission for West Prussia and Posen, with offices in Poznan, was theoretically liquidated by the Prussian Law of March 10th, 1924 (P russian Collection of Law s, page 126). Its spirit still makes itself felt, however, and its functions have been transferred to other authorities by the Prussian Executory Decree of April 24th, 1924 (Prussian Collection of Laws, page 479). The President of the Prussian Building and Finance Office in Berlin styles himself (see communication of November 2nd, 1929, No. 3531/1929) the legal successor of the Land Settlement Commission, and this was recognised by the Provincial Court (Landgericht) of Schneidemühl in its finding of March 13th, 1931, mentioned above, in which it confirmed the validity of the cession of the right of repurchase by the President of the Prussian Building and Finance Office in respect of the frontier district settlement of Schneide­ mühl, and of the exercise of that right. It was palpably dishonest that, in accordance with the communication of the Landrat of Flatow, dated December 30th, 1929 (Tgb. No. 151. Geh. [confidential]), the exercise of the right of repurchase should have been expressly ordered by the Prussian Minister of Agriculture in this case, at a time when the negotiations between Poland and Germany with regard to the Germano-Polish Liquidation Agreement (in which, as is a matter of common knowledge, Poland waives her right to exercise the right of liquidation and repurchase in favour of the German population) were not yet legally terminated. In view of the above, we see that, in practice, the Land Settlement Commission still exists in another form. Some light is thrown on the position by the case brought by Jan Baczewski, of Berlin, — 9 0 -

former Deputy in the Prussian Diet and Chairman of the Union of Polish School Associations in Germany. This case is now before the of the Reich at Leipzig (as the court of appeal), since the Oberlandesgericht at Marienwerder decided (as the court of second instance in favour of the Landgericht of Schneidemühl in its finding of June 30th, 1931. W ith regard to the Decree of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare of March 6th, 192 , the following statement is made concerning the object of the Decree: ' " It is intolerable that hundreds of thousands of Germans should be without employ­ ment in their own country, while large numbers of foreigners find work and a livelihood in our country as seasonal agricultural labourers. This can be remedied only by the creation in the country districts of houses suitable, hygienically and otherwise, for German agri­ cultural labourers. In order to promote the construction of dwellings for agricultural labourers, Reich and State have made certain sums, derived from productive unemployment relief funds, available for this purpose. This measure is aimed, not only at excluding foreigners, but also at distributing labour more profitably or creating fresh employment and, in particular, at rendering possible the transfer of labour from towns to country districts, and thus increasing agricultural production." If this were really the object for making Reich and State funds available in virtue of the instructions of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927, it would have to be admitted that the Prussian Government was entitled to take measures to protect the national economy. If the measure were really aimed exclusively at distributing labour more profitably and creating fresh employment for German nationals by excluding foreigners, and if all Prussia and German nationals benefited equally by the instructions of the Minister for Social Welfare, regardless of race, there could be no valid objection to the instructions. Indeed, it would appear at first sight from the opening words of the instructions of the Minister for Social Welfare quoted above, and, in particular, from the contrast drawn between “ Germans” and "foreigners" (“ It is intolerable that hundreds of thousands of Germans should be without employment in their own country, while large numbers of foreigners find work and a livelihood in our country as seasonal agricultural labourers . . . ”) that all German and Prussian nationals were to receive consideration without regard to their racial origin, under the terms of the instructions. If, however, we examine the other sections of these instructions, we find that they are really tantamount to exceptional legislation expressly directed against foreign nationalities in Prussia. It is expressly laid down in the instructions that only persons of German extraction may be considered in connection with the allotment of housing accommodation for agricultural labourers to be constructed with sums derived from productive unemployment relief funds— in other words, that persons of foreign origin who possess German nationality are excluded. This is particularly unjust, since all German nationals (including the national minorities) participate equally in providing the Reich and State funds for the houses to be constructed in accordance with the instructions of March 6th, 1927, which are expressly stated to be exempt from the house-rent tax (Hauszinssteuer) . However urgently necessary it may appear to take measures in the national interest, such measures must on no account be exclusively borne by taxpayers who are of foreign race while possessing full German nationality like any other citizens. Article 109 of the Constitution of the German Reich lays down one law for all German citizens, of whatever racial origin, and Article in of the Constitution accords the fullest freedom of movement and equality to all German citizens in the matter of the acquisition of land, while Article 113 of the Constitution further expressly forbids any cultural or social restrictions being imposed in national minorities by means of legal or administrative measures, so that the above-mentioned Decree of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare has no justifi­ cation whatever in law, inasmuch as only persons of German extraction are allowed to benefit by its provisions. The instructions of the Minister for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927, which are considerably amplified by a number of later provisions and have been extended to cover " homesteads ”, etc., are really favourable, not only to persons of German origin who possess German nationality, but also to foreigners in so far as they are of German origin. Further, in virtue of these instructions, non-interest-bearing long-torn loans are accorded, which are entered as a guarantee mortgage in the land register, in order to promote the construc­ tion of settlement buildings. The houses are, as we have said, exempt from the house-rent tax. Further, a pre-condition for the granting of the loan is the entering in the land register of a limited personal servitude to the effect that the houses must, for a period of fifty years, beoccupied exclusively by the families of agricultural or forest labourers of German extraction. This entry must be in favour of the Prussian State represented by the Regiervngsprâsident. The registration of this limited personal servitude also subsists even if the loan is repaid, and the fact that the limited personal servitude can be registered has been acknowledged by the decision of the Berlin Kammergericht dated December 3rd, 1925 (document Z: 1. X 669. 25/1). This undertaking (secured by an entry in the land register) on the part of the settlers only to take persons of German extraction as tenants—that is to say, not even persons of foreign race who are of German nationality—has, in practice, led in many cases to workmen from outside who are not of German extraction but are of German nationality being unable to work outside their own place of domicile because they could not find lodgings. During the present unemploy­ ment crisis, which is forcing many workmen to leave their homes and families to look for work elsewhere, such measures as these may have a truly disastrous effect. It has been found that in many cases settlers were ready and willing to take into their houses persons who had found — g i —

-nrk at the place where the settlement was situated in order (if for no other reason) to make a mle extra money by letting rooms to the workmen at a small charge, but that the undertaking A L had given compelled them in every case to refuse to take the workmen in question, as, in ÎL event of contraventions of the instructions of the Minister for Social Welfare, the right In demand repayment of the loan, with the addition of 25 per cent plus interest at the rate of 2 per cent above the discount rate of the Reichsbank obtaining on the date when payment {alls due, is reserved. The Ministerial Decree designates the “ Provincial Housing Companies ” (W ohnungs- lilrsorgesesellschaften) and the Chambers of Agriculture (which are enumerated in the Decree for the different provinces of Prussia) as the organisations responsible for the execution of the measures. . The instructions of March 6th, 1927, were made the subject of an interpellation in the Prussian D iet. In connection with a particular case which had arisen in Upper Silesia, M. Klimas, a former polish deputy in the Prussian Diet, submitted Minor Question No. 1735 (page n 12), with regard to settlements under those instructions : - , . in particular, it is intolerable that people should be officially forbidden to admit persons not of German extraction {i.e., Poles) to settlement houses. There have been frequent cases of owners of settlement houses having to give an undertaking secured by an entry in the land register (as demanded by the State) not to take Poles as tenants for fifty years, in spite of the fact that the Poles pay the house-rent tax like anyone else. Not only are settlement houses made available on condition that Poles may not be admitted, but credits to owners of land are usually granted on this sole condition. This is an intolerable state of affairs contrary to the Geneva Convention, and means nothing less than the expulsion of the Polish population from Upper Silesia. “ Is th e Staatsministerium prepared to put an end to this state of affairs immediately ? What measures does it propose to take to this end ? Will it, in particular, instruct the Administration of Oppeln to have all such entries in the land registers cancelled and not, in future, to demand from owners of settlements and owners of landed property applying for credits to give an undertaking to take only persons of German extraction as tenants ?

The Prussian Government replied as follows:

T h e P r u s s ia n M in is t e r fo r S o c ia l W e l f a r e "III. R. I. 63. Spec. 39/27.

“Reply to Minor Question No. 1735 of Deputy Klimas (page 1112).

“ Berlin, October 21st, 1927.

"To the President of the Diet. “ In reply to Minor Question No. 1735 regarding the infringement of the Geneva Convention by the Regierungsprasident at Oppeln, I beg to reply as follows in agreement with the Prussian Minister of Justice:

“ 1 “ (2) The financial assistance accorded for the construction of agricultural labourers dwellings is uniformly governed for the whole of Prussia by the Decree of the Prussian Ministry for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927 (III. R. 5c. gen. 6/27). Where this decree contains provisions which are not compatible with the special legal status of the former plebi­ scite area created by the Geneva Agreement, care has been taken that these provisions shall not, in practice, be applied within the territory in question.

(Signed) pp. S c h e i d t .”

Deputy Klimas thereupon addressed the following interpellation to the Prussian Government in the Diet on November 22nd, 1927 (Minor Question No. 1986, page 1386): “ I am not satisfied with the following reply of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare of October 21st, 1927 (III. R. 1.63. Spec. 39/27), to my Minor Question No. 1735 (Pa Se I1 1 2 ). point 2: “ ' The financial assistance accorded for the construction of agricultural labourers dwellings is uniformly governed for the whole of Prussia by the Decree of the Prussian Ministry for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927. Where this decree contains provisions which are not compatible with the special legal status of the former plebiscite area created by the Geneva Agreement, care has been taken that these provisions shall not, in practice, be applied within the territory in question.’ “ In the Minor Question, I pointed out, inter alia, that the undertaking on the part of the owners of land only to take persons of German extraction as tenants for a period of 1 This does not concern us here. fifty years is entered in the land registers of settlement houses in favour of the State of Prussia represented by the Regierungsprasident of Oppeln, and that credits are usually granted to owners of landed property only on condition that they give such an undertaking secured by an entry of this kind in the land register. In view of this, I had asked the following questions : “ ‘ Is th e Staatsministerium prepared to put an end to this state of affairs imme­ diately ? Will it, in particular, instruct thje Government of Oppeln to have all such entries in the land registers cancelled and not, in future, to demand from owners of settlements and owners of landed property applying for credits to give an under­ taking to take only persons of German extraction as tenants ? ’ " The Minister for Social Welfare does not really answer these questions, and the entries in land registers still exist and Polish agricultural labourers are still prevented from occupying settlement houses. “ Is th e Staatsministerium now prepared to give a satisfactory answer to these questions in detail and to take energetic steps immediately to remove the alleged abuses ? ” The answer was as follows :

“T h e P r u s s ia n M in is t e r f o r S o c ia l W e l f a r e “ III. R. 63. Spec. 47/27.

"Answer to Minor Question No. 1986 (page 1386) of Deputy Klimas,

" Berlin, January 6th, 1928. “ To the President of the Diet. “ R ef. : Infringement of the Geneva Convention b y th e Regierungsprasident of Oppeln. “ T he Staatsministerium, sees no necessity to take the measures demanded in Questions Nos. 1735 (page 1112) and 1986 (page 1386), since the alleged abuses do not exist, as has already been explained in detail in the reply to the first question No. 1735 (page 1112).

(Signed) pp. S c h e id t ."

In connection with a complaint that was lodged, the President of the Mixed Commission at Kattowitz wrote as follows to the Union of Poles in Germany on July 12th, 1926 (J. No. 1041/26): “ . . .A s stated in the report of the German Government, no secret decree was, in fact, issued relating to the acquisition of settlement land. Possibly, the allegation made during the verbal negotiations of May 15th, 1926, referred to the Decree of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare of March 23rd, 1926 (III. R. I. 1500/26), relating to the promotion of the construction of houses for agricultural labourers, but that is not a secret decree. Where this decree contains provisions which are not compatible with the special legal status of the former plebiscite area created by the Geneva Convention, according to the statements of the German Government, these provisions are naturally not applied in practice within the territory in question . . . " This Ministerial Decree of March 23rd, 1926 (III. R .1. 1500/26), is merely a forerunner of the Decree of March 6th, 1927 (III. R.5C, gen. 6/27), and was valid until April ist, 1927, when it was superseded by the Decree of March 6th, 1927, which is to the same general effect. The Union of Poles in Germany submitted an application to the Staatsgericktsihof for the German Reich at Leipzig on December 3rd, 1929, requesting it to declare the Ministerial Decree of March 6th, 1927, incompatible with the Constitution. At its session on February i8 th , 1930 (document St. G. H. Tgb. 94/29), the Staatsgcrichtshof rejected the application on the ground that the Union of Poles in Germany was not competent to make it. As there is no rem ed y for decisions of the Staatsgerichtshof, the Union of Poles in Germany applied to the Prussian Prime Minister for the cancellation of the provisions in question through the administrative channel, and received the following reply:

“The P russian Minister for Social W elfare J •'ill. 6229. 27/56.

" Berlin, September 4th, 1930. "Ref.: Financial assistance accorded for the construction of agricultural labourers' dwell­ ings from revenue derived from productive unemployment relief funds. “ In reply to the communication of April 17th of this year (Tgb. No. 1311/30), ad dressed to the Prime Minister, I beg to inform you, on behalf of the Prussian Government, that, — 93 —

contrary to your statement, neither recently nor at any time has there been discrimination against applicants of Polish origin in favour of persons of German extraction in the territories inhabited by the Polish minority and, in particular, in Upper Silesia, and that no such discrimination is to be feared in the future. Consequently, no such measures as are asked for in your application are needed. (Signed) pp. Dr. Sc h n e id e r ."

T h e contention of the Prussian Government that the Decree of March 6th, 1927, is not, in practice, applied does not accord with the facts. Even in Upper Silesia, which comes under th e Geneva Convention, the provisions of the decree are applied now as before. For instance, th e writer has knowledge of contracts of this kind dating from 1929 and 1930 in which the H o u s i n g Company for Upper Silesia (Wohnungsfürsorgegesellschaft für Oberschlesien) of Oppeln is mentioned as the distributor of the settlement land. In these contracts, explicit reference is made to the instructions of the Minister for Social Welfare of March 6th, 1927. The housing c o m p a n y is expressly mentioned in the ministerial decree in question as the organisation e n t r u s t e d with the execution of the measures taken for the promotion of the construction of h o u s e s for agricultural labourers from revenue derived from productive unemployment relief funds under the Decree of March 6th, 1927. Furthermore, the official statistics show that th e ministerial decree in question is still applied. According to statistics published in the Volkswohlfahrt, 12th year (1. 6. 1931), No. 11, columns 559 and 560 (position as at April ist, I93i)> 492 workmen’s houses and 2,642 single cottages for agricultural labourers—that is, 3,134 dwellings in all—have been constructed from revenue derived from productive unemploy­ m e n t relief funds since the stabilisation of the currency (1923) in the parts of Upper Silesia w h e r e there are Polish and Czech minorities : 168 workmen’s houses in 1923-24, 65 in 1925, 88 in 1926, 83 in 1927, 53 in 1928, 20 in 1929 and 15 in 1930; the figures for single cottages being : 1923-24, 695; 1925, 643; 1926, 307; 1927, 272; 1928, 288; 1929, 244, and 1930, 193. If we take th e o t h e r parts of Prussia with an autochthonous minority population, we find that, in East P r u s s ia , for instance, where there is a Polish and Lithuanian minority population, 5,067 workmen's houses and 2,502 single cottages— or 7,569 dwellings in all— were constructed during the years 1923 t o 1930 under this ministerial decree ; in Grenzmark, Posen, West Prussia, with a Polish m in o r it y , 734 workmen’s houses and 1,321 single cottages, or 2,055 in all; and in Schleswig- H o ls t e i n , with a Danish and Frisian minority, 179 workmen's houses and 1,494 single cottages, or 1,673 agricultural labourers’ houses in all. In Lower Silesia and Brandenburg (where, besides th e Polish population, there is a Lusatian-Sorb [Wend] minority) : 676 and 1,086 workmen’s h o u s e s , respectively, and 1,181 and 2,028 single cottages, respectively (or, in all, 1,857 in Lower S ile s ia and 3,114 in Brandenburg), were constructed during the sam e period. In P om erania, w h e r e there is a large percentage of Poles, 2,071 workmen’s houses and 2,354 single cottages, or, in all, 4,425 agricultural workers’ houses, were constructed during those years. Altogether, 12,188 workmen’s houses and 25,901 single cottages, or, in all, 38,089 agricultural workers’ h o u s e s , were constructed in Prussia under the Decree of March 6th, 1927, during the years from 1923-24 to 1930 inclusive. Since the stabilisation of the currency, 206 million marks have b e en provided for the construction of these houses from Reich and State subsidies derived from productive unemployment relief funds : in 1924, 17 millions ; in 1925, 19.5 millions; in 1926, 21.5 millions; in 1927, 37 millions; in 1928, 38 millions ; in 1929, 33 millions ; and, in 1930, 40 millions. How, in view of these facts, the Government departments in question can maintain, as they do in the above-mentioned communications, that no exceptional legislation directed against the national minorities in virtue of the Ministerial Decree of March 6th, 1927, exists in Prussia, is incomprehensible. The provision to the effect that only persons of German extraction may be considered in connection with the allotment of settlement houses must in any case be regarded as exceptional legislation directed against persons of foreign extraction, although, as we have shown above, these persons are taxed just like their fellow citizens of German race. As long as the Ministerial Decree of March 6th, 1927, is retained and applied, it will be in the nature of exceptional legislation directed against the national minorities, and so long will discrimination be practised against those minorities in the acquisition of settlement land under that decree. * * *

The Union of Poles in Germany lodged a petition dated March 8th, 1929, with the Council of the League of Nations at Geneva, regarding the discrimination against the national minorities in Germany, and especially the Polish minority in Upper Silesia, in respect of agrarian and land settlement policy. The petition mentioned the German Chancellor’s Decree dated March 15th, 1918, the Reich Land Settlement Act of August n th , 1919, the secret decrees, and especially that of the Oberprâsident of the Province of Upper Silesia of April 9th, 1925 (O. P. III. 3. No. 779), and the instructions of the Prussian Minister for Social Welfare dated March 6th, 1927, and the unfair discrimination against the Polish minority through the practical application of those instructions was proved by a whole series of concrete cases. The German Government gave an assurance at the next session of the Council of the League that it would remove the alleged abuses; but the facts as set forth above show that they have not been removed. II. OBSERVATIONS OF THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT.

[Translation.]

F o r e ig n O f f ic e .

B erlin, M arch 30th , 1932. To the Secretary-General of the League of Nations.

With reference to your letter to the German Government of December 21st of last year transmitting the petition of the Association of Poles in Germany (Section I, Oppeln) regarding the position of the Polish minority in German Upper Silesia, I have the honour to communicah below the German Government's observations:

I. 1. In its petition, the Association of Poles (Section I, Oppeln) has not confined itself to lodging complaints, in its capacity as a local organisation, regarding the alleged oppression of the Polish minority in German Upper Silesia— i.e., in territory to which the Geneva Convention applies; it has gone further and referred to a large number of incidents which took place or are alleged to have taken place in parts of Prussia to which the Convention does not apply and which are totally unconnected either with Upper Silesia or its special legal status. For such a proceed- ing:—as the petitioner was of course well aware—no justification or support can be found either in the Geneva Convention or in any other statutory or treaty provisions. The petition, in short, is an attempt to create an entirely false impression of the Polish minority's position in Germany. The German Government must, as a matter of principle, refuse to consider the petition, in so far as it deals with questions outside the limits of the territory governed by the Geneva Convention. It most emphatically denies the petitioning society's right to act in such matters. It rejects any attempt to transfer from their proper place the principles of law laid down in existing treaties and being before the League Council matters over which it has no jurisdiction. In order, however, that the material inaccuracy of the Polish assertions may be laid bare to the world and that no doubt may subsist as to the policy of irreproachable liberalism pursued towards the Polish minority throughout the whole territory under Prussian administration, in order moreover that the true causes of the regrettable dimensions dividing the two sections of the population may be clearly established, the German Government will, in the course of the observations that follow, also deal with the position of the Polish minority outside Upper Silesia. But in so doing, it wishes it to be clearly understood that such particulars are supplied for information only and without prejudice to its attitude in subsequent cases. They must on no account be quoted in support of the extension of the Council's jurisdiction beyond the limits of the Geneva Convention. 2. The petition presents not an objective picture of the present position of the Polish minority in Germany, but an incomplete and tendenciously coloured caricature. In this document, a miscellaneous assortment of happenings from the most diverse districts of Prussia and going back to a whole variety of dates are thrown together without method or system. Single events are mentioned with a frequency which is often misteaHiwg and presented without reference to the accompanying circumstances, thus creating an entirely false impression of cause and effect. Most of the particulars mentioned are already several years old. Incidents are brought up which took place in 1922 and 1924 although they represent a phase long since left behind. Some of these occurrences have, moreover, been erroneously transferred to 1931. Almost all the cases mentioned were cleared up long ago and in most instances examined carefully and settled -/ith the minority. Others have been investigated and decided by the President of the Mixed Com­ mission while a few, even, have come before the League Council. The petition is a tissue of wild exaggerations, gross misrepresentations and untruths. Official ' and the people at large are accused of motives which are absolutely non-existent and for which no kind of evidence is adduced. In a large number of cases, moreover, particulars such as would facilitate the thorough investigation of complaints are lacking ; the petitioner, on the contrary, confines itself to generalities, the only object of which is without any kind of proof to work up feeling against the German administration and population. Political motives are often malicious] imputed in the case of occasional incidents and friction such as can never altogether be avoided among a frontier population differing in race and degree of culture. The petitionar is thoroughly well aware that in none of the cases dealt with was it possible to adduce proof that the alleged molestation and persecution of the minority had been in s t ig a t e d — 95 — or even tolerated by any German authority. On the contrary, all complaints or grievances oi th e minority, when brought to the notice of higher officials, were, without exception, taken into consideration and redress speedily granted. This is especially true of the province of Upper Silesia, w hose Oberprâsidenten have always regarded it as their especial duty to ensure that the rig h ts o f the minority are respected in their province. The entirely one-sided description of the Polish minority’s situation must be categorically rejected. 3. The petitioner also entirely ignores the fact that the minority in Prussia enjoys rights far in excess of those to which it is strictly entitled. Nor does he mention the manner in which, thanks to the liberal policy pursued by the Prussian Government, the minority has developed and progressed, nor how it has been enabled to build up, along the Eastern frontier, a cultural life of its own with an extensive educational organisation, nor finally, with what benevolence the life of the Polish minority has been fostered and strengthened by means of other institu­ tions, Kindergartens and infant schools, an exceptionally strong system of societies and dubs, young people’s associations, choral and games societies, agricultural unions, the flourishing minority Press, banks and co-operative societies. If, notwithstanding these extensive concessions, the minority, its leaders and its Press, have recourse to unrestricted agitation and other machinations—to which further reference will be made below—and thus sow discord and dissention in the frontier districts, the German Go­ vernment must decline all responsibility therefore.

II. The following remarks are issued on the separate points raised in the petition, in the main, in the same unsystematic order in which they have been presented by the Association of Pole

1. Passport Questions. The petitioner complains that the authorities have not shown the necessary spirit <*£ accom­ modation towards the minority in the matter of the issuing of passports and permits; he dies a number of examples all of which occurred outside Upper Silesia (page 6 of the petition). It is clear from Appendix 1 that the action taken by the authorities was justified in every single case and that the issue of passports or frontier permits has never been refused without sound reasons. It cannot however be the task of German officials to make possible or to facilitate the participation of German subjects in Polish nationalist demonstrations m the other side of the frontier which, as experience has proved, are occasions for violent agitation against Genm ay.

2 . S c h o o l s . (a) The complaints of the Association of Pok- with regard to the insufficient number, as they consider it, of minority schools are of long standing. It has always been maintained by the Poles in the Press and elsewhere in public—and even before the League Council—that tte establishment of Polish minority schools on an adequate scale has been impeded by the hostile attitu d e of the German authorities and people. As regards its general attitude in this matter, the German Government begs to refer to its statement in respect of a previous petition (document C. 145.1929.1). It repeats emphatically that th e petitioners contention regarding the hostile attitude of the German authorities and people towards the minority schools question is inaccurate in every respect. The comparatively small number of Polish minority schools is due, not to official chicanery or to any hostility on the p a rt of the population, but rather to the simple fact that the overwhelming majority of pa­ rents, even when culturally they fed themsdvai part of the Polish nation, send their children to the majority schools on their own initiative and of their o n free will. The Polish minority schools organisation is governed by the ell-known "Ordinance for the Regulation of School Matters for the Polish Minority". This decree, which Is appended in Appendix 2, gives a dear picture of the liberal policy pursued bv the Government « Bratdh. towards the Polish minority. Under its terms attendance at Polish schools depends sdtiy on the parents or guardians of the children. All children without exception whom fmmtts or gtntriums so desire, can attend the Polish schools. (b) The assertion on page 7 of the petition that "the Polish inhabitants of the Süfsian district of Oppeln possess no schools in which instruction is given in their mother tongue" is, as the petitioner must wed know, in direct contradiction to the facts. In Upper Silesia mere are twenty-five state minority schools with instruction in the Polish language and nine private schools, the latter ha vim; 111 pupils. There are, in addition, twenty-four school* winch totm p e t been closed despite the fact that no applications for admission have been received for some totem. T he statement made by the Oberfirisident at the Province of Uppar Siksia m. A eefl fU k ‘931, concerning the relation of private schods to State sshoole, to which

in Upper Silesia. This calculation is deliberately misleading, as has often been pointed out on the German side, without the minority thinking fit to correct its methods. The "Association’’ has included all those children whose native language was returned as German and Polish in the 1925 census (see Statistical Year-Book for the , 1931, vol. 27, page 44). These children cannot, however, be reckoned ipso facto as belonging to the Polish minority as they belong to the so-called “mixed language population” in whose case German no less than Polish can be regarded as their native language. This question has already been dealt with in the German Government’s observations on another petition (document C. 369.1929.1, page 32). (c) A table showing the private minority schools throughout Prussia, with the exception of the Upper Silesian plebiscite area, is contained in Appendix 3. The preponderance of teachers who are Polish subjects is particularly worthy of note. The petition has also entirely omitted to mention the State subsidies which the Prussian Government has accorded from time to time for the private Polish Minority schools. These amounted in 1929-30 to 81,863 RM. and in 1931 to 50,499 RM. Further, to complete the picture, it may be mentioned that among the private minority schools there are some where the number of pupils has dwindled below that normally permitted for German private schools, or for minority schools in any other country. In some places, the number of children attending the schools was under ten (see Appendix 3). The Prussian Government cannot, of course, permanently recognise all these truly grotesque miniature schools with Polish teachers which can no longer be considered to be schools at all. (d) The implication on page 7 of the petition to the effect that the arrival of Polish teachers is deliberately delayed in order to make the setting up of minority schools more difficult is a typical example of the unfairness of the petitioner. In certain cases, the premature arrival of Polish teachers before the minority school was opened has been refused. This measure was fully justified in view of the fact that Polish teachers had been coming to Germany before it was even certain whether, when and where a school could be set up. They then used their free time exclu­ sively to canvass for the opening of such schools by means of economic and other promises, or to carry on other illicit agitation. Consequently, in agreement with M. Baczewski, Chairman of the Union of Polish School Associations, it was arranged (as stated in the Minorities given in Appendix 4) that teachers might not enter the country more than a fortnight before the opening of the school. (e) The statement of the petitioner that the decision of the authorities in the administrative district of Oppeln on January 13th, 1925, as to the possibility of transfers during the school year (page 7 of the petition) was directed against the minority, is absolutely baseless. The peti­ tioner must be well aware that this settlement was made by the school authorities at the desire of the President of the Mixed Commission and in the interests of the minority itself. The Polish School Association has indeed on many occasions during the last few years benefited by the pro­ visions of this ordinance. (f) In order not to overload this memorandum unduly, our reply to a number of the peti­ tioner’s further specific allegations regarding questions affecting minority schools is given in special appendices. Thus the reply to the statements contained in the petition with regard to the legalisation of signatures (page 7) is contained in Appendix 5; the incident at Stollarzowitz and the treatment of the teachers (pages 7 and 8) is dealt with in Appendix 6; the alleged deli­ berate procrastination in the matter of establishing minority schools (pages 8 and 9) in Appendix 7; the alleged hostility to the minority schools (pages 9 et seq.) in Appendix 8] the kindergarten teachers’ training college at Allenstein (page 11) in Appendix 9, and the question of continuation schools (pages 11 and 12) in Appendix to. All the statements contained in the petition on these several points are either intentionally misleading or are at complete variance with the facts. (g) Finally, the construction placed on the article by Dr. Rathenau, Ministerial Coun­ cillor, in the Berliner Tageblait of November 29th, 1928, to the effect that Dr. Rathenau, who officially participated in the drafting and execution of the Minority Schools Ordinance, was raising a cry for the defence of the school (page 7 of the petition), is entirely unfounded and can best be refuted by a perusal of the article itself, which is attached as Appendix li. O nly failure to understand the meaning of the article, or malice, could lead anyone to interpret it in the sense in which it is construed in the petition.

3. Autonomous Administration.

The incidents in Upper Silesia dealt with in the petition (page 12) go back for many years: they refer to the elections of mayors of communes in 1926-27 in the case of which the right of the authorities to grant or refuse confirmation of appointments was in some cases rigorously exer­ cised. The incidents in question were dealt with in the course of detailed negotiations with the President of the Mixed Commission. A large number of the. mayors whose confirmation had been refused were subsequently confirmed in their appointments. It is true that the authorities h ad a t th a t tim e s t i l l to apply a severe criterion when exercising their right to confirm a p p o in t­ ments, but it must not be forgotten that only a comparatively short time had elapsed since the Upper Silesian insurrection and that it was still a vivid memory in the minds of the population, which had not recovered from the resentment engendered by the acts of violence c o m m itt e d by — 97 —

; ,f Poles. Since then, members of the minority have been confirmed without opposition in any co m m u n a l offices to which they have been elected.

4 . P arliamentary E l e c t io n s . The statement of the petitioner on page 12 that the Polish population is hindered by political and economic pressure and by acts of violence from giving free expression to its views at elections is not borne out by the facts. It is clear from Appendix \2 that even the single case quoted by the Association of Poles in support of its allegation is entirely irrelevant. The German Government declares that no protest against the manner in which elections have been carried out has been lodged by the Polish Catholic People’s Party on the occasion of any of the numerous elections to the Reichstag and the during the last ten years. This speaks for itself.

5. A l l e g e d A t t e m p t s t o G e r m a n is e t h e P o p u l a t io n . (a) The question regarding the entering of Polish Christian names in the register of births (page 13 of the petition) was settled by No. XVI of the Final Protocol of the Geneva Convention. It is impossible to ascertain whether an objection has ever been raised to the name " Jacek” by a German registrar, as the petition does not mention the date or place of such occurrence.

(b) As regards the replacing of Polish place names by German names, it must be stated at the outset that German Upper Silesia would be perfectly entitled to stress the German character of the province in the names of its towns and villages. Upper Silesia was for centuries undivided German property. Whereas in Poland, immediately upon Eastern Upper Silesia passing into Polish hands, the German names were changed into Polish ones by the authorities» nothing of the kind has been done on the German side. It is trae that there have been a considerable number of instances of place names being changed in Germany, but this is not due to “pressure from above" but to a spontaneous movement on the part of the German population. Place aamea may only be altered in virtue of a decision by the local autonomous bodies, subsequent ratification by the Prussian Ministry of State being required. The changes in names mentioned on page 13 of the petition must therefore be attributed to decisions taken by the inhabitants of the places concerned. The case of Zakrzewo-Buschdorf dealt with in Appendix 13 of the petition goes to show that the authorities never change place names against the wishes of the commune, (c) T h e general accusations made include the statement on page 13 that, with a view to Germanisation, “every vestige of Polish culture is being destroyed m Silesia". The only instance given is that of the Piastenschloss at Oppeln, with regard to which it may be said that, when it became necessary to reconstruct the Government building at Oppeln, part of the Piastenschloss had to be considerably altered. The principal part of the building—the big round tower dating from 1230— was preserved. With the help of Government funds, it was possible to clear those parts of the old town which were of exceptional prehistoric and historié importance and to make them available for scientific research. With regard to the general charge that buildings of cultural interest have been ruthlessly destroyed, we would point to the systematic and careful preservation with the help of public funds of buildings and monuments of cultural interest in Upper Silesia.

6 . S o c ia l , C u l t u r a l a n d R e l i g i o u s M a t t e r s . (a) ReMing of Halls. — The Oberprâsident of Upper Silesia, in a Decree oi April 20th, 1928, which is still in force, instructed the authorities under his orders to inform hotel and innkeepers, etc., that the refusal of premises for meetings of the Polish parties was not in accordance with the policy of the Government authorities. In spite of these instructions, there are no doubt cam in which innkeepers, etc., refuse the use of their premises for Polish festivities, theatricaljperfonn- ances and other meetings, for fear of losing their German clients, or ol collisions taking place between the Polish and German sections of the population with resultant damage to their pre­ mises. These are purely private matters which ere outride the control of the authorities. The details of the cases mentioned on pages 13 and 14 sre dealt with in Appendix 14. (b) The Theatre. — The Geneva Convention imposes no obligation upon the contracting parties to support minority theatres. Nevertheless, grants sre made and facilities accorded by 6 Prussian authorities for performances of plays in Polish The grant of the Prussian Govern* ment for the Polish theatre mentioned in the petition itself amounted to 5,000 RM. Apart t e a ™s, a considerable grant was accorded in 1930 to the Polish Catholic School Association st Hmdenburg. 1 he troubles which occurred on the occasion of Polish theatrical pttUm m m m at Oppcin, Rosenberg and Goslawiti were quite exceptional and regrettable incidents. The aunng a performance in Boiko mentioned on p a p 14 of the petition m alio 4n J | w tià 4» Appendix 15, which describes the circumstances mat gave tm to tfc* iuddenta e t or th e rest, no difficulties, have ever been piaoeâ in titt way of the B g * * 11 ntpaprUy m m & eè* artistic performances. A Polish band has been allowed to give priaik concerts at Bertthen in 1 1 < - 9 3 -

national costume, and even in Breslau plays have been performed by the Polish League of Youth while a few months ago the minority in Flatow—in the immediate neighbourhood of the German’ Polish frontier—was allowed to give an exhibition of Polish art. (c) Use of the Polish Language. — No one in Germany is prevented from using the Polish language either in public or in private. The isolated instances mentioned in the petition on pages 14 et seq. as proving the contrary are explained and reduced to their proper proportions in Appendix 16. A With regard to the use of the Polish language in courts of law dealt with in Appendix 16 of th e petition—No. 72 of the Gazeta Olsztynska—the general statements made and particular cases mentioned in that* appendix are dealt with in detail in Appendix 17. Briefly, the following should be said regarding these cases. They happened some time ago and have, since they have been made known, been taken up by the Prussian Minister of Justice and carefully sifted. Where it has been found that mistakes have been made by the authorities, the necessary action has been taken. If the Association of Poles cannot quote more instances than those mentioned in th e petition for a period of something like ten years, it is clear that they are only individual cases which do not justify such generalisations. (d) Religion. — The few—from the material point of view negligible—individual cases mentioned in the petition (pages 15 et seq.) as instances of violent disturbances during religious services are dealt with in Appendix 18. Two of these cases have already been discussed by the Council of the League of Nations. As regards the general complaints as to the “unedifying activities of the clergy, who have taken an active part in the struggle against the Polish minority”, these are vague statements which the petitioner does not even attempt to support by evidence. As regards the territory coming within the scope of the Geneva Convention, the petition merely mentions that the priest at Beuthen-Rossberg refused on May 18th, 1930, to bless Polish boy-scout flags and only stated his intention to refuse to do so at the last moment so that it was not possible to appeal to superior authority. This refusal to bless the flags was, however, due to the ecclesiastical regulation issued by the Cardinal-Prince-Archbishop of Breslau that the blessing of flags should be restricted to those of associations approved by the ecclesiastical authorities and forbidden in the case of Asso­ ciations not so approved. The Polish boy-scout troop in Beuthen has not been approved by the ecclesiastical authorities. The minority is perfectly well aware of this rule, which is applied to all associations, including the German ones. The accusations made against the clergy in other parts of Prussian territory really amount to a complaint to the effect that an insufficient number of services in Polish are held in two Catholic parishes in Berlin. The explanations contained in Appendix 19 show that all these complaints are unfounded. Where there is a real demand, a sufficient number of Polish services are held and in many cases a more than sufficient number. The facts set out in the annex show that the religious require­ ments of the Polish-speaking population in Berlin are fully met and that the clergy are extremely conciliatory in their attitude.

7. Economic Life. (a) As regards establishment (pages 16 and 17 of the petition) there has never existed in Prussia a “decree excluding the members of the minority from acquiring property and land”, so that it could not have been "only rescinded for the province of Upper Silesia”. As stated in League document C. 491. 1929.1, to which reference is made by the petitioner, the decree in question was not a decree applicable to the whole territory of Prussia, but an ordinance issued by the Office of the Oberprâsident a t O ppeln in 1925 con fin ed to Upper Silesia. Since then, the Prussian Minister of Agriculture has again (on April 20th, 1928) informed the Heads of th e Kulturamt in Upper Silesia that even the appearance of unfair treatment of members of the Polish minority in the matter of establishment is to be avoided. For the rest, permission to conclude a land purchase contract may only be refused under the Decreee of March 15th, 1918, for definite and specified economic reasons. The nationality of the purchaser cannot be legally adduced in support of a refusal. In actual fact, members of the minority in all the eastern provinces have acquired land right up to the present time. The assertions made by the petitioner are answered in detail in Appendix 20. I t w ill be seen from this annex that the Sanger case, of which much is made in the petition, had no political causes. The unsupported accusations against officials made in the two other "instances” are emphatically denied. (b) I t is not clear what the alleged cases of window-breaking with stones and threatening letters to bank directors mentioned on pages 17 and 18 of the petition under the heading “ B anks have to do with the economic and banking affairs of the minority. It is as impossible to prevent members of the minority occasionally receiving threatening anonymous letters as it is to prevent irresponsible individuals from throwing stones unobserved. It is absolutely impossible to place the property of every member of the Polish minority under permanent police protection. Ten authorities can only state again and again that excesses of every kind committed against m em bers — 99 —

0f the minority and their property are inadmissible and take severe action whenever such offences can be proved. As regards the statement contained in the petition that "the economic enterprises of the minority are systematically hampered” or that "the Prussian authorities are following a policy of impeding the development of the Polish minority by every kind of petty annoyance", we can only say that this accusation is utterly unfounded. The authorities allow a very large measure of freedom to the banks and companies belonging to the Polish minority, which are described in the Gazeta Olsztynska of June 19th, 1930 (No. 139), as "a bulwark against the attacks of the fenemy on the economic existence of the minority and a shield against attempts to exterminate the Polish element on its own native soil”. Otherwise these banks and companies could at a time of depression such as the present scarcely be as prosperous as they obviously are For instance, according to a notice which appeared in the Polish paper Katolik Codzienny, o f March 27th, 1931, the Polish People's Bank at Beuthen was in a position “to revalorise the pre-war savings fund without any legal compulsion”. For the rest, the people's banks and Rolniks are for the most part used to further Polish national political aims by exercising economic pressure. Cases have been known in which the granting or continuance of credits has been made conditional upon the applicants sending their children to the Polish school or keeping them there. The individual cases enumerated in the petition are dealt with in Appendix 21.

8 . P r e s s . The complaints contained in the petition (page 18) with regard to "the action of the German authorities against the minority Press” are specially surprising. This positively grotesque accu­ sation makes it dearer than anything else could that the Association of Poles has only one object in view, and that is to discredit the German administration regardless of the true facts of the case. As a matter of fact, the" very highly organised Polish minority Press (see Appendix 22) enjoys an unexampled measure of freedom. In spite of the undisciplined violence of its organs, no minority paper had been suspended in any single case until the coming into force of the Emer­ gency Decree of March 28th, 1931. The first orders of the Reich, which, as shown in Appendix 23, were entirely justified, were (as is correctly stated in the petition) not issued until July or August 1931. A few more instances of the provocative character of the minority Press, taken from the voluminous material available, are given in Appendix 24. The Association of Poles includes in its remarks about the Press (page 19) references to parliamentary resolutions introduced by German opposition parties and complains that the spirit of those resolutions is hostile to the minority. We will only say that as long as such resolutions of the opposition parties are not adopted by Parliament or by the Government, there can be no ground for com plaint.

III. As already stated above, the petition of the Association of Poles gives an entirely one-sided account of the position of the Polish minority. In particular, the complaints with regard to the hostility of the German population towards the nc >iority are entirely unfounded. The petition intentionally says nothing whatever about the underlying causes of the atmosphere of discord which unfortunately prevails. The German Government therefore considers it to be its duty to make good the petitioner’s omission in order to show clearly who is responsible for this regrettable state of affairs. The peaceable and hard-working German frontier population is in general sympathetic to the Polish m inority. T he German Grovemment would in this connection refer to the resolution (Appendix 25) recently passed by the German population as represented (from the Nationalists to the Social-Democrats) in the Ostdeutscker Hexmatdienst AUenstein, in which not only the sym­ pathy felt by the frontier population for the cultural aspirations oi their Ptokiah fellow-citizens is stressed, but the desire is expressed that the competent authorities should enforce the laws for the protection of Polish cultural aspirations with me fairness and generosity which are tradi­ tional in Germany. fhe population does, however, feel—and rightly so—that minority institutions should not be used for carrying on agitation against Germany on German soil. It sees how, within the framework of these minority institutions, unrestrained agitation is continually being carried on, propaganda made for the idea of a , Polish secessionist ambitions fostered and the limits of loyalty thus constantly overstepped. Tito arrogance and incredible agitation of the Polish minority and especially of its leaders, call for measures of legitimate self-defence. The population refuses—and rightly so—to tolerate such abuses and excesses, or any artificial foster;

[Translation.] Appendix 1.

I s s u in g o f P a s s p o r t s a n d P e r m it s . (Page 6 of the Petition.)

(a) Nothing is known of a Bimka passport case. The reference is probably to Franz Biemek, son of the farmer Biemek of Gr. Dammer. Franz Biemek wished to use the passport for cycling daily from his home to the college at Bentschen, but it was refused on suspicion of espionage. The passport was eventually issued to him in June 1929 when it was found that there was nothing to justify such a suspicion. (b) No case is known in which the Commissioner of the Kreis of Kuschten refused to issue a passport to children on holidays. The statement made in the petition is probably due to the fact that in June 1931, out of 17 children in the district of Kuschten who were proposed for the holiday exchange, the District Commissioner regarded six as not requiring assistance, and therefore did not admit them to the exchange. They were the children of well-to-do farmers at Gr. Dammer. The District Commissioner acted in accordance with his duty. (c) The M isiew icz (brother and sister) were deprived of their passports on suspicion of espionage. They subsequently recovered their passports, since no definite grounds for such suspicion could be proved. (d) The passport was withdrawn by the Landrat of the Kreis of Stuhm , not in December hut in August 1930. On August 16th and 17th, 1930, a demonstration took place under official direction in the five villages situated east of the Vistula along the Kreis of Marienwerder, to celebrate their ten years’ union with Poland. The demonstration was described as “The Tenth Anniversary of the Liberation of the Five Vistula Villages from the German Yoke”. It began in the evening of August 16th, 1930, with a torchlight procession. On Sunday, August 17th, the arrangements included a march to the German-Polish frontier, in which a company of the Polish infantry regiment stationed at Mewe took part. The entire proceedings developed from a mere celebration into a political demonstration on a large scale. This found expression, for instance, in the inscription on a triumphal arch at the Vistula ferry in Johannisdorf : "Poland’s frontier does not stop here”, and in a poster bearing the inscription in Polish : “We, people of Ermeland, Masurenland and of the Marienburg territory demand to be joined up to our mother country”. It is worthy of note that, in addition to the large number of official persons, active troops took part and numerous armed military associations paraded close to the frontier. Twelve German nationals from the Kreis of Stuhm, 17 from the Kreis of Marienwerder and one from Marienburg took part in the proceedings. On account of their participation in a demon­ stration directed against the German , all these persons forfeited their travelling passports and their temporary or permanent identity cards under Articles 11, 21 and 71 of the Passport Proclamation of June 4th, 1924 ("Endangering of important German interests”). (e) The statement regarding the refusal of frontier cards at Lauenburg is in its general form incorrect. There are naturally cases in all frontier districts—not only in the Kreis of Lauen­ burg (Pomerania)—of individuals having their frontier cards withdrawn for personal reasons. There have been only a few cases of complaints against the withdrawal of frontier cards, and the complaints have without exception proved to be unjustified. As a rule the passports were with­ drawn on account of convictions for smuggling and the like. In no case was this action due to reasons of national policy. The certificates issued in the Kreis of Lauenburg (Pomerania) for crossing the frontier to Poland, to attend church, were all withdrawn in January 1929; after that date the Catholic population was able to make use of the arrangements made for them by the newly-founded parish of Wierschutzin in the Kreis of Lauenburg, so that it was no longer necessary to cross the frontier in order to attend church. Moreover, the Voivod of Pomerelia in Thom expressed his agreement at the time with the closing of the frontier crossing points (church roads) Oppalin- Tillau, Sellnow-Seelau an d Sellnow -Strebielien.

* * * [Translation.] Appendix 2.

D e c r e e f o r t h e R e g u l a t i o n s o f Sc h o o l Q u e s t i o n s f o r t h e P olish M i n o r i t y , Article I. § i. — The minority within the meaning of the following provisions shall be held to be that part of the population of the Reich which declares that it belongs to the Polish element. § 2. — A person's declaration that he belongs to the minority may be neither investigated nor contested. The specific mention of a child in an application for the opening of a minority school, or the entering of a child for a minority school, by the persons responsible for his education, shall be held to be a sufficient declaration that the child belongs to the minority.

Article II. § l. — In the case of children of German nationality of school age belonging to the Polish minority and living in one and the same school district or at such a distance from it that their regular attendance at school may be regarded as assured, the need for opening a private minorit elementary school with Polish as the language of instruction must always be recognised unless the education of the children belonging to the minority is sufficiently provided for by a State or private minority elementary school.

§ 2. — Children who are not of German nationality may be allowed to attend the private minority elementary school if it is proved that they belong to the Polish element by origin or langu age. § 3. — Children of the minority comply with the obligation to attend school by regular! v attending a private minority elementary school. § 4. — In order that permission to open and direct a private minority elementary school may be granted, the person to whom the permission is to be given must possess the necessary qualifications for appointment in the Prussian teaching profession. Permission may also b* granted to a teacher (of either sex) who possesses corresponding qualifications in the Polish teaching profession and against whom there are no objections, particularly of a material or moral character. In order that such a teacher may be admitted, he or she is not required to give proof of further qualifications, even as regards language. The same provisions regarding teaching qualifications shall apply to any teachers appointed in addition to the director. § 5. — The school premises must comply with reasonable requirements, and the number of children to be taught must also be taken into consideration; as a rule, the requirements are not the same as for a State school. Before the school is opened, the necessary teaching appliances must be provided. § 6. — It shall be regarded as proof that the school possesses the necessary means for carrying on its work if a legally competent association of at least 100 members of German nationality provide the necessary guarantee. In this case, further proof may only be required if the number of full-time teachers at the schools for which the association has accepted the guarantee exceeds 5 per cent of the number of the members of the association. § 7. — Exceptions to the curriculum of the German State schools may be admitted, provided they are necessary in order to give proper instruction in Polish culture The Polish language shall replace German as the medium of instruction, f i rman must be taught as a subject in an adequate number of lessons. The holidays must be the same as in the State elementary schools.

Article III . § 1. — The opening of private schools which are of a higher standard than elementary schools and employ Polish as the language of instruction is subject to the same provisions as are applicable to the opening of all similar private schools. The provisions of A rticle I I, §§ 2 to 6, shall apply, mutatis mutandis.

§ 2. — The granting of permission to hold examinations admitting to State privileges is subject to the same principles as for other private schools, provided that sufficient instruction in German is given in the minority schools.

Article IV. In order still further to prepare teachers in private minority schools for the special duties of minority education, and to qualify them specially for teaching to such schools, special arrange­ ments and organisations in the form of permanent courses m aybe created by associations having their seat in th e territory of the Reich or by individual subjects of the Reich at their own expense. — 103 —

The school inspection authorities may not, however, make it a prerequisite or condition for employment as director or teacher at a minority school that h e or she should have attended such courses. Article V. § i. — If in a school district with up to 20,000 inhabitants the number of children of school age attending a private minority elementary school is not fewer than 40, if in a school district of more than 20,000 but not more than 50,000 inhabitants, the number is not fewer than 80, if in a school district of more than 50,000 but not more than 100,000 inhabitants, the number is n0t fewer than 120, and if in a school district of more than 100,000 the number is not fewer than 2 4 0 , such private elementary school must be granted a State subsidy. Changes in the number of scholars during the school year shall not be taken into consideration. As a rule, the State subsidy shall amount to 60 per cent of the sum paid in salaries to the full-time teachers. If premises are placed at the disposal of the minority school by the State or the school district free of charge, the rental value of the premises may be charged to the cash subsidy. School districts within the meaning of these provisions shall also include the school societies (school communities) which still exist. § 2. — The subsidising of private minority schools of a higher standard than elementary schools is subject to the same provisions as apply to other similar Prussian schools. § 3. — The school inspection authorities are authorised to give permission for the use of State school premises for private minority school instruction.

Article VI. § 1. — If a private minority school is attended by a sufficient number of children of school age to fulfil the conditions laid down in Article V, § 1, for the grant of a State subsidy during three successive years, and those conditions are still fulfilled, such school shall, on application being made by the persons responsible for the education of at least 40 children of school age who attend this school, be converted into a State elementary school with Polish as the language of instruction. The maintenance of such an elementary school and the appointment and payment of the teachers shall then be subject to the same provisions as in the case of other Prussian State elementary schools. If, however, the persons responsible for the education of a greater number of children than are represented by the applicants object to the school being converted into a State school, such conversion will not take place. Until April 1st, 1934, State elementary schools with Polish as the language of instruction shall be included in a school district at the request of the persons responsible for the education of at least 40 children of school age, or private minority elementary schools shall be converted into State schools, if the number of the children of school age in the school district in question for whom the application has been made amounts to at least 5 per cent of all the children of school age belonging to the same district at the beginning of the school year. School districts within the meaning of these provisions shall also include the school societies (school communities) which still exist. § 2. — Before teachers are appointed to such a school the parents’ council of the school shall have an opportunity to make proposals and shall also be consulted before special textbooks are introduced. § 3. — With regard to the organisation of instruction in writing, reading and religion in Polish, the existing provisions remain unchanged.

Article VII. The provisions of Articles I to VI of this Decree shall not apply within the area covered by the Geneva Convention ; but in the entire administrative district of Oppeln the Decree of the Minister of Education of December 31st, 1918 — U. III. A. 1420 — shall apply in addition to the provisions of the Geneva Convention.

Berlin, December 31st, 1928. (Signed) B r a u n , (Signed) B e c k e r , (Signed ) Grzesinski, Prussian Ministry. T a b l e o f t h e P r i v a t e P o l is h E l e m e n t a r y S c h o o l s i n P r u s s i a (o u t s i d e t h e A r e a c o v e r e d b y t h e G e n e v a Co n v e n t io n ). (P o s i t i o n o n J a n u a r y i s t , 1 9 3 2 — D e c r e e o f D e c e m b e r 31ST, 1928.)

Effectifs du per­ Nombre de salles Nombre d'élèves à la date de Nombre d’élèves 1“ janvier de classe à la P i s l’ouverture 1932 sonnel date du 1” Janv. l i s s Nombre enseignant 1982 «“ |-a a®® £ 2 rj Number of Scholars on Date Number of Scholars on Number of class­ s Lieu où est située Date de de Number Nom et nationalité des ® ® = 8 n3 of Opening Jan u ary 1st, 1932 rooms available on Obser­ l ’école Circonscription scolaire Cercle l'ouverture classes of Teachers Jan. 1st. 1932 Instituteurs f i l l © vations a—= = S le jour le ! i"§ | Place where school School district Landkreis Date of catho­ ® £ catho­ Number | i Name and nationality of . fc •5 | « « qS de l'o u ­ 1” janv. 1 1 1 Ee marks 8 Is situated opening polonais liques n i l polonais liques of verture 1932 48 f the teachers Total Total classes - 5 1 Polish Ca­ Polish Ca­ On the On J a ­ 111 1 1 s

polonais £ •<= g Protestant

Protestant date of nuary protestants 5 protestants tholic f l M i tholic No. allemands et opening 1st. 1982 i l l

liani un Imm propra Imm un liani prsmii. school the In -S ÎÎ 1 2 a 2b 2c 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 a 16 17 18 1» 20 21 22 23 " District d’AUensteln — Administrative District of Allcnstein I Dietrichswalde Dietrichswalde Allenstein 10. 4.29 16 - — — 16 — 16 18 — — 18 — 18 1 1 1 — 1 — Chabowski, Pol. 137 2 Neukaletka Neukaletka 10. 4- 29 41 —— 41 — 41 3° —— 30 — 30 1 1 1 — 1 — Turowski, Pruss. 78 3 Neuwuttrienen Wuttrienen 10. 4. 29 8 ■—— 8 — 8 IO — — 10 — 10 1 1 1 — 1 — Hedrich, Pol. 128 — — 4 Schônfelde Schônfelde 10. 4. 29 21 —— 21 — 21 15 —— 15 — 15 1 1 1 Jeseiclowicz, Pol. 108 3 Plautzig Plautzig 7- 1. 3° 17 —— 17 — 17 20 —— 20 — 20 1 1 1 — 1 — Gransicki, Pol. 151 6 Woritten Woritten 24. 2. 30 11 —— 11 — 11 12 — — 12 — 12 1 1 1 — 1 — Bina, Pol. IOI 7 Gr, Leschno Gr. Leschno 24. 10. 30 9 —— 9 — 9 14 —— 14 — 14 1 1 1 — 1 — Nieborak, Pol. 40 — — 8 Skaibotten Skaibotten 11. 8. 30 2 —— 2 — 2 6 — 6 — 6 I 1 1 — Hofmann, Pol. 109 4 0 1 9 Jommendorf Jommendorf 12. 8. 30 10 —— 10 — 10 9 — — • 9 — 9 1 I 1 — 1 — Latosinski, Pol. 116 1 0 W emitten W emitten 23.10. 30 5 —— 5 — 5 10 —— 10 — 10 I I 1 — 1 — Sikora, Pol. 54 11 Sternsee Stemsee Rôssel 1. 9- 3° 10 —— 10 — 10 10 —— 10 — 10 1 1 1 — 1 — Stachowski, 143 12 Gr. Purden Gr. Purden Allenstein 18.12. 30 6 —— 6 — 6 17 —— 17 — 17 1 1 1 1 — — Jasiek, Pruss. 141 1 3 Piasutten Piasutten Ortelsburg 18. 4.31 2 —— 2 2 — 1 —— I 1 — II 1 — 1 — Laue, Pol. 154 1 4 Gillau Gillau Allenstein 8. 6. 31 11 —— 11 — II 13 — — 13 — 13 1 I 1 — 1 — Setny, Pol. 120 15 Braunswalde Braunswalde » 15- 6.31 8 —— 8 — 8 11 — — 11 — 11 1 1 1 — 1 — Gromadecki, Pol. 98 177 —— 177 2 175 196 — — 196 1 196 15 15 15 I 14 — 1,678

District de la Prusse occidentale — Administrative District of West Prussia 1 Altmark, pr. Altmark Stuhm 3- 6. 29 28 — — 28 — 28 38 — — 38 — 38 1 1 1 1 —— Samowski, Pol. 167 2 Gr. Waplitz Gr. W aplitz 3- 6. 29 14 — — 14 — M 25 — — 25 — 25 1 1 1 , 1 —— Manczynski, Pol. ■ 124 / Kleszynski, Pol. 3 Honigfelde Honigfelde 3. 6. 29 62 — — 62 — 62 42 — — 42 — 2 2 2 1 — 42 — \ Lewandowski, Pol. 157 — — — 4 Hohendorf Hohendorf 5*12. 29 4 — 4 4 3 — 3 — 3 1 1 1 1 — — Frl. v. Kistowski, Pol. 53 5 Neudorf Neudorf 23. 6. 30 8 —— 8 — 8 15 — — 15 — 15 1 1 1 — 1 — Juika, Pol. 130 6 Nikolaiken Nikolaiken 18. 3- 3° 11 —— 11 — 11 11 —— 11 — 11 1 1 1 — 1 — Piotrowski. Pol. 194 ? Neumark 28. 8. 30 7 —— 7 — 7 7 — — 7 — 7 1 1 1 — 1 — Wisniewski, Pol. 107 % Pestlin Pestlin 17. 8. 29 25 — — 25 — 25 33 — — 33 — 33 1 1 1 — 1 — Malemowski, Pol. 145 Pr. Damerau 10. 8 —— 8 8 8 — — — 9 Pr. Damerau 5 3 0 — — 8 — 8 1 1 1 — I Nowakowski, Pol. 27 1 0 Sadluken Sadluken 14- 4-31 13 — z3 — 13 8 — ■ — 8 — 8 1 1 1 — 1 — Pichowiak, Pol. 39 180 — — 180 — 180 190 — — 190 — 190 11 11 11 4 6 — t ,i43 District de Sehneidemülil — Administrative District of Schneldemühl 1 IL’enfantprot.etl 1 (allemand, est la fille dupropr.de/ / rimm. occupé / ! ! ! 1 x r I 1 Aspenau I Aspenau Flatow 3* 6- 29 1 6 1 5 1 5 l 6 1 5 — !P«r l'éoo/. pol.; R e d l a r s k i . r o i . 13 1 The 6erm. Prot.1 L , - ’ 1 Ttogetvs^ti, 3 1 Gr. Butzig / Gr. But zig 7. 8.29 87 i 2 84 — 87 92 — ■2. I 90 — 92 j 4 2 3 — 3 i — 1 Zielinski, T>ol. I Mozelewaki, Pol. 4 j Fla tow I Flatow » 21. IO. 29 46 -- 38 8 _ 46 61 —— 61 — 61 3 2 3 K urzm ann, P ol. 5 ; Flatow, Abbau Flatow » 20. 12. 29 14 -- 14 —— 14 23 — 23 —— 23 1 1 I Kowalski, P ol. 6 Gr. Friedrichsberg Gr. Friedrichsberg » 21. IO. 29 7 -- — 7 — 7 9 —— 9 — 9 1 1 I Kolsdziej, Po! I4. 4.29 i 1 2 f Salkowski, Pol. 7 Glumen Glumen » 53 — 52 — 53 55 — 54 — 55 3 2 I Marzalkowski, Pol. - 8 Kietz Kietz » 5. 6.29 61 — 61 — 61 5i —— 5i — 51 3 2 2 Hoffmann, Hans, Pol. 9 Kleschio Kleachin » 14. 4.29 22 -- — 22 — 22 21 —— 21 — 21 1 1 I Mackowicz, Pol. 10 Kônigadorf KOnigsdorf » 7. 6.29 *5 -- — 25 — 25 26 — 2 24 — 26 1 1 I Kowalski, Pol. Luberaki. Pol. 11 Lugetal Lugetal » 6. 6, 29 57 — 57 — 57 58 — — 58 — 58 3 2 2 Lewandowski, Pol. 12 Preuaeenfeld Preussenfeld » 8. 6. 29 37 -- — 37 — 37 36 —— 36 — 36 .1 1 I Grzenda, Pol. 13 Radawnitz I: dawnitz » 6. 6.29 32 -- — 32 — 32 46 — — 46 — 46 1 1 I Mackowicz, Pol. M Ruden Ruden » 5- 6.29 17 -- 5 12 — 17 26 — — 26 — 26 1 1 I Biematowski, Pol. Kierzek, Pol. 15 Schwente Schwente t 14. 4.29 42 — — 42 — 4* 55 — — 55 — 55 3 1 2 Smoczinski, Pol. 16 Neu-Schwente Nen-Schi.mte » 31. 10. 30 15 -- 6 9 — 15 19 —— 19 — 19 1 1 I Kularicki, Pol. 17 Seedorf Seedorf » 3 Ô. 29 10 -- — 10 — 10 16 —— 16 — 16 1 1 I Jendhoff, Pol. 18 Seefelde Seefelde » 8. 8. 29 21 -- — 21 — 21 29 —— 29 — 29 1 1 I Konnal Pol. 19 Slawianowo Slewianowo » 21. 4.29 30 -- — 30 — 30 33 —— 33 — 33 i 1 I Jasick, Pol. 20 Stemeu Steinau t 30. 10. 30 19 -- 6 13 — 19 21 — 5 16 — 21 1 1 I Gliezewski, Pol. Bielinski, Pol. 21 Stewnits Stewnits > 8. 6. 29 45 -- — 45 — 45 41 — — 41 — 41 1 1 I Crezeska, Pol. Un«#àwirtiu- îtri* à l'école sllimttid* # 3 , Pol. Zakrzewo — One girl traaa- Jaczorek, Pol. 191 22 Zakrzewo » 3. 6. 29 132 — 132 — 132 139 —— 139 — 139 5 4 4 ferred to the Berman Wool Wichlatz, Pol. *o,3 _ _ _ _ I llWiWttU! 412 23 Kxojanke Krojanke » 9- 8.31 1 1 1 9 9 9 1 1 1 X ... :ber Kliszewski, Pol. Kramzig Kramzik Bomst I- 5-29 35 35 35 28 28 28 1 I I Kuchta, Pol. 67 *4 âjimlüBB d’an “ grasi nombre d'enfinu «I Sroka, Pol. commentaient 23 Neukramzig Neukramzig » 11. 6.29 74 — — 74 — 74 103 — — 103 — 103 3 2 3 4 fréquenter Jaskolski, Pol. 157 rtoü Kapalowna, Pol. Lsfts fctti e< beglnnen DlmkiKiîi- de •• -«libre de Zorawski, Pol. Kl. Poeemuckel Kl. Posemuckel s II. 6.29 2 — 67 — 69 72 — — 72 — 72 2 2 101 26 69 3 OeoHi» I# the Groth, Pol. birth me 27 Gr. Poeemuckel Gr. Poeemuckel • I- 7-29 22 _ 22 22 28 28 28 1 I 1 Knak, Pol. 42 28 Bomst Bomst » 13.10.30 6 -- — 6 — 6 6 — — 6 — 6 1 I 1 BaJcar. Poi 254 Tomiak, Pol. Gr. Dammer Gr. Dammer Meseritz 18. 6.29 109 — — log — 109 132 —— 133 — 133 4 3 3 , Pol. 220 29 Staza, Pruss. 1,131 5 77 1.049 I 1,130 1,286 1 4» 1.245 I 1.285 5* 41 45 33 District de Kêslin — Administrative District of KOslin 1 Bemsdorf Bemsdorf Bit tow i 4- 30 M — *4 —— 14 10 — 19 — — 10 1 1 1 — 1 — Wyaiecki, Pol. 125 — —— 8 — 8 —— 8 1 1 1 — 1 — Grabych, Pol. 44 3 Grdbenxin Gfôbenrin » 17. 6. 30 13 *3 13 — 3 Obawdamerow OsUwdamerow 9 8. 7-29 36 — 36 —— 36 18 — 18 —— 18 1 II 1 —- Labon, Pol. 53 4 PUtenheim PUtenheim > 3- 7- 29 27 — 27 —— 27 26 — 26 —— 26 1 1 1 — 1 — Ledochowski, Pol. 56 90 — 90 —— 90 62 — 62 — — 62 4 4 4 — 4 — 378

Btomet I’O fpta (es defcers dee territoire» soumis à rapptieation de la Convention de Genève) — Administrative District of Oppeln (excluding tbe area covered by the Geneva Convention) i I fatjw I Gnb

[Translation.] Appendix 4.

Min u t e s o f D isc u ssio n r eg a r d in g P e r m issio n for T e a c h e r s of P o lish N a t io n a lity a t Min o r it y S chools to e n t e r t h e Co u n t r y . (Page 7 of the Petition.)

At the request of the Prussian Ministry for Science, Arts and Education, a discussion took place on March 13th, 1931, in the premises' of the Ministry, regarding outstanding questions connected with Polish minority education in Prussia. I—IV ...... V. A discussion further took place regarding the date on which permission is to be given to teachers of Polish nationality for minority schools to enter the country. It had already been established in the discussion on September 18th, 1930, that, since the preparations for opening the school are made by the Union of School Associations, it would be sufficient if the permit were granted on such a date that the teacher could enter the country, at the earliest, fourteen days before the opening of the school. The Union, in making its preparations, need only give the name of the teacher to be appointed, produce his papers and enquire whether he may count on obtaining a permit if the minority school is created. M. Baczewski concurred in this arrangement and pointed out that it was essential for the Union to know in good time what the prospects were of obtaining a permit, so that it could prevail on the Polish authorities to release the teacher in question and be able to make its preparations for opening the minority school. VI—X......

(Signed) Baczewski, (Signed) Dr. J. Michalek, ( Signed) G ü rich , (Signed) Dr. S t o lz e , Geheimer Regierungsrat. Ministerialrat.

(Signed) D r. R a th e n a u , Ministerialrat.

[Translation.] Appendix 5.

L egalisation of S ig n a t u r e s in A pplications for o pe n in g a Min o r it y School. (Page 7 of the Petition.)

1. On checking signatures which appeared to be doubtful, it was found in many cases that they were forged; moreover, some were the signatures of unauthorised persons (brothers and sisters). The Government therefore issued a Decree on March 14th, 1924, to the effect that the signatures must be legalised beforehand by the local policy authority (district superintendent— Amtsvorsteher). In a Decree of May 22nd, 1924, the Government issued a special application form and instructed the district superintendents (Amtsvorsteher) to refrain from exercising any influence or criticism in legalising the signatures. This order was supplemented by the Decree of September 4th, 1924, according to which the head of the commune (Gemeindevorsteher) was authorised to legalise signatures. This was followed by a Decree of December 9th, 1924, in which any person authorised to use an official seal was declared to be entitled to legalise signatures—». e., not only the Amtsvorsteher and Gemeindevorsteher, but also the Landrat, Sehutrat, clergyman, registrar, police, president, and Justice of the Peace (Schiedsmann). 2. Moreover, difficulties first arose in the Polish part of the plebiscite area regarding the legalisation of signatures on applications for opening minority schools. While legalisations were not required in Germany until the school year 1923-24, they were introduced in Poland by the Decrees of the Voivodie of Silesia of August 21st and December 29th, 1922. — 107 —

[Translation.] Appendix 6.

I n c i d e n t s a t S tollarzowitz a n d C a s e s c o n n e c t e d w i t h T e a c h e r s . (Pages 7 and 8 of the Petition.)

(a) The incidents at Stollarzowitz took place on March 10th, 1924.— i. e., more than eight years ago, when there was still great excitement in Upper Silesia regarding the struggles with the insurgents. The offenders were sentenced by the court, in some cases to imprisonment. In 1924-25 the matter was brought before the President of the mixed Commission under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention.

(b) Karaskiewicz, a Polish subject, was a teacher at the private Polish elementary school at Wendzin. Although a foreigner, he had obtained permission from the German Government to direct the school. Unfortunately, however, during his activity in German territory he did not show the restraint which might have been expected. He endeavoured to win over children for the minority school in the commune by giving them or their parents small presents and promising the parents material advantages through Polish banks. In particular, he aroused justified resentment among the inhabitants of the district by making derogatory remarks about the German State, the German school and the German teachers. The excitement in the commune was so great that the inhabitants compelled him to leave. Criminal proceedings were taken against the inhabitants who had compelled Karaskiewicz to leave and ended with their conviction. An extract from the judgment is enclosed as a sub-appendix. The plaintiff Karaskiewicz withdrew the appeal which he had lodged. He left German territory of his own accord without being expelled ; a charge of perjury is pending against him. The matter is the subject of a petition of the Association of Poles of April 28th, 1931, under Article 149 of the Geneva Convention.

(c) H err W agner, a German subject and a Polish private teacher, at a public meeting on June 7th, 1931, in Gross- Strehlitz, in speaking of the Polish educational system, made disparaging remarks about the methods of German teachers. He called the German teachers “ devils and the reverse of educators, as they only poison the minds of the children In view of these incidents his application for a teaching permit was refused. The petition brought against this decision on January 2nd, 1932, by the Union of Polish School Associations under Article 149 of the Geneva Convention is at present before the President of the M ixed Commission.

(d) Rychel, Styp-Rekowsky an d W alasiak were proposed as heads and teachers at private minority schools, for instance Walasiak for the school Deutsch Mtillmen, Kreis Neustadt. Rychel, for example, obtained permission for the private minority continuation school at Tells- ruh. Such a teaching permit for the head of a school is only granted for a. definiteschool. There could be no question of granting a subsequent request to issue a teaching permit for the entire territory of the State as, according to the existing law, such permits do not entitle persons to conduct private schools. The discussion with Geheimrat Giirich mentioned in A p p e n d ix 6 (a) of the petition is in accordance with the legal position described above. It was ascertained by the court in the criminal proceedings against Jan Bauer, teacher of the Polish minority at Bütow (see case (/) in this appendix), that the teacher Edmund Styp von Rekowsky had received eight weeks’ military training in the 14th Polish Infantry Regiment at Wloclawek. When Styp von Rekowsky, who is a German subject, was asked by the president of the court as to the object of this training, he refused to reply; he stated as the reason for this refusal that he was afraid that a reply to the question would bring him under the criminal law.

(e) The author of the threatening letter to the teacher Goetze has not been ascertained. The Public Prosecutor stopped the proceedings, as further enquiries showed no prospect of success. The Association of Poles on December n th , 1930, made a complaint under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention. The enquiry instituted by the President of the Mixed Commission also gave no result, and was dropped as no clue could be found as to the identity of the offender.

(/) The case of Jan Bauer, teacher of the Polish minority at Bütow.—The head of the Polish School Association in East Pomerania, Jan Bauer, in the course of legal proceedings denied on oath that he : (a) had agitated for the Polish minority school, and (6) had carried on Polish national propaganda. As there was reason to believe that he was not speaking the truth, he was charged with perjury and recently sentenced by the court at Stolp to twelve months’ imprisonment. It was regarded as an extenuating circumstance that if he had spoken the truth, when previously questioned as a witness regarding Polish national propaganda, he might have accused himself of treason; it was also taken into consideration that he was dependent upon the Union of Polish — io8 —

School Associations and thought he was obliged to follow their instructions. He has lodged an appeal against this sentence. It was therefore not yet been put into execution. In the proceedings before the court, the witness Pluto von Prondzinski, farmer, of Berns- dorf stated on oath that Bauer had urged him to send his children to the minority school; Bauer had told him that he would receive an allowance of 600 RM., payable when the children left school. On the same occasion he had said that the Polish State paid this allowance; the money cam e from Poland. The defence contested the accuracy of these statements and produced witnesses on the other side who, however, when examined on oath, were unable to shake the evidence of Pluto von Prondzinski. Other witnesses also stated on oath that Bauer had promised them considerable sums of money if they sent their children to the Polish school. At a meeting of the Polish Leagues of Youth at Zakrzewo in the Kreis of Flatow, Bauer made a speech in which he spoke of the “ oppression of Poles by the Germanic conquerors ” and urged his hearers to fight against the oppressors. Notes for lectures were found in his possession one of which referred to the “ Polish Sea ”. When asked by the President of the Court what Bauer meant by the " Polish Sea ”, he replied " The Baltic ”. The singing of the so-called Kasubian hymn was practised under his direction ; this hymn calls for action against the German foe, “ so that the Polish blades may fall on the necks of the Germans Bauer distributed among the population the text of the well-known Rota song, thè singing of which was described by M. Calonder, President of the Mixed Commission, as highly objectionable in the territory covered by the Geneva Convention. With the assistance of Bauer, who had himself been a Polish Boy Scout, although he is a Prussian subject, members of the Leagues of Youth that were under his supervision were sent to the University Extension Courses at Dalki and to the Teachers’ Training College at Rogasen, where these German subjects, according to their own statements in court, were given field training and instructed in the use of arms, Bauer's first arrest, as mentioned in the petition, took place in 1929. At that time action was taken against him for infringing Article 9 of the Law against the Betrayal of Military Secrets. In the absence of proof, the Supreme Court decided on July 13th, 1929, to stop the proceedings. The statement made in the petition that he was released “ without any investigation having taken place ” is therefore not correct.

(g) The teacher Kwella, who was engaged until April 1st, 1931, at the private Polish minority elementary school at Glumen in the Kreis of Flatow and who was to become head of the minority school at Klonschen in the Kreis of Bütow, was refused permission to remain in Prussia when it was discovered that, as he himself admitted, he had grossly deceived the German authorities by incorrect statements. Under these circumstances there was no further question of his being employed as a Polish minority school teacher in Germany. He was not formally expelled from Prussia. He had been previously expelled from Saxony and because he had obtained permission to enter those States by means of untrue declarations. This case has nothing whatever to do with the “ opening of any more Polish schools " in this province. The Union of Polish School Associations of Germany was fully informed of the facts at th e tim e.

(h) The teachers Kabsa and Szumocki are Polish subjects. Szumocki in March 1931 already held a teaching permit and has been in Bütow since the middle of June 1931. He was intended for the school to be opened in Pschywors. The application to open this Polish minority school was, however, verbally withdrawn in August last year by the acting head of the Polish School Association. The statement made in the petition that this school could not be opened because Szumocki had not received a teaching permit is therefore untrue. There was no question of granting a permit to the teacher Kabsa to enter the country, since the opening of a minority school at Klonschen has not yet been authorised. The statement on page 9 of the petition that the minority at Klonschen had erected a special school building is incorrect. The land-owner Schroder, of Klonschen, obtained permission in 1930 to build an annex to his dwelling-house, but had no permission for school premises. Permission could not be given to use the annex for school purposes as it in no way complied with the require­ ments. It was proposed to make alterations in the annex, but there has been no official inspection. Consequently, the fact that Kabsa did not receive permission to enter the country is not the cause of the school not being opened.

Sub-Appendix to Appendix 6(b).

E x t r a c t f r o m J u d g m e n t o f t h e Co u r t a t K r e u z b u r g , U p p e r S i l e s i a , o n S e p t e m b e r IOTH, 1931, IN THE CASE AGAINST THOMAL KOSALLA, OF WENDZIN, FARMER. AND CHAIRMAN o f t h e Co m m u n e , a n d O t h e r s .

Statement of Reasons. The co-plaintiff and witness Marian Karaskiewicz, teacher, acting on instructions from the Union of Polish School Associations of Germany (Incorporated Association), Beriin-Charlotten- b u rg , which was also admitted at first as a co-plaintiff, proceeded in September 1930 to W endzin in t h e Kreis of Guttentag in order to open a private Polish minority school and to teach in the school. In Wendzin, a small frontier village with a population of simple peasants who, though — i o 9 —

mainly German in their sympathies, prefer to use the Polish language among themselves there was already a German elementary school with three teachers, two of whom were capable of giving instruction in the Polish language. Karaskiewicz, though admitting that he was not obliged to enter into such activities which he said, were the duty of others, engaged in active propaganda for the objects he had at heart’ He did not, however, always act with the tact and reserve which, according to the statements of the Oberregierungsrat Count Matuschka, who was heard as a witness and expert and of M. Baczewski, Chairman of the Polish School Union, are always required of minority school­ teachers in neighbouring countries in virtue of mutual agreements, especially when thev are not subjects of the country affording them hospitality. He did not confine himself to visiting the parents of his scholars and such parents as he might expect to find favourable to his tendencies and aspirations, but made house-to-house visits in order to arouse interest for his work in various unusual ways. For instance, on his visits and on other occasions he often had sweets with him, which he distributed liberally to the mothers and children. He not only offered the men of the village beer and cigarettes in the inn, but also invited them occasionally to his dwelling to have a glass of spirits and some music. During these meetings he naturally spoke of his vocational interests but, m addition, he did not fail to suggest to his guests that they should send their children to his school or should ask their relatives and friends to do so He had no objection when one of his guests on one occasion took away a Polish newspaper but even suggested that he should hand it on after perusal. Though these actions on the part of the teacher Marian Karaskiewicz may perhaps be attributed to a certain harmless affability of character, they nevertheless a p p e a r in a m ore questionable light in view of some of the details extracted from the mass of evidence He offered the witness Robert Wosch the prospect of good earnings on blacksmith’s work if a new building was erected for a Polish school at Wendzin, but made it a condition that the witness should send his children to the Polish school. •X , He. ^ j ited the witness Marie Sklorz on two occasions and offered her a loan free of interest if her child came to his school On a third occasion, the witness Anastasia Kosalla went on his behalf to the witness Mane Sklorz and told her that she could have as much money from Karaskiewicz as she wished, but must send her child to the Polish school. He asked the witness Simon Brylka for a promise that his children should later attend his school, although they were only one and two years old. The witness Stanitzok, innkeeper, whose room Karaskiewicz thought of taking was offered the prospect of earning a sum of 400 RM. a month. When this was refused, Karaskiewicz said that m two years time the witness would “ think about it ”. The witness Gertrud Dwornik aged ten years a bright healthy child, was spoken to by Karaskiewicz in the street and asked whether she had a good time in the German school; if not, she should come to him, as in his school th e children h ad a good tim e. In speaking to the witness Paul Wloch, Karaskiewicz went so far as to say that, if he wished ■ RpSrTln11 schooi'y ould be shut_up while he even said to the witness Maria Kaczmarczyk: lonf wf shall all be Poles . On another occasion he said that if German Upper Silesia bloodshed* ln five years- it would be taken by force, and then there would be

, dlsParaging/ emfrk ab°Ut the German schools to the witness Ludwig Lelonnek to the effect that they produced communists, while the Polish school produced good citizens. I his activity on the part of the co-plaintiff and witness Karaskiewicz did not meet with

L T p ïT h ap-pr°val iv l l COJ T Une of W endzin> particularly as the differences between German n ^tWS , ,had, hxeen aImost ^t^ely dispelled since the insurrection and had been replaced by peaceful and harmonious conditions, began to appear with renewed violence

had W n r . l V ' 3 I B 1 , ere was a meeting of the representatives of the commune which ™ n 7 g00d tir an5 in,thf re6ular manner- At this meeting, the persons present of " p i ?f t^ elXe members decided unanimously to protest against the proposed opening had hm vît school and o suggest that the Polish teacher Karaskiewicz, whose carping criticism to the the ^m une, Sh,°uld be exPelIed' This decision waSP transmitted the Landrat of the Kreis of Guttentag for further action.

madJfnrH g I e P^shm ents to be inflicted on all the accused persons, allowance was action of th a circum.sta.nce that they were extremely irritated and excited by the above-described h a d w ! j co-plaintiff Karaskiewicz, and entertained the natural desire that the peace which ested sh o u ld I thC aCtlf SS Pr,°Paganda °f a ^uest whom they had neither invited nor red should again be restored in their native village. — 110 —

[Translation.] Appendix 7.

A l l e g e d D e l a y i n t h e o p e n i n g o f M i n o r i t y S c h o o l s . (Pages 8 and 9 of the Petition.)

(а) The statement that permission to open the private Poiish minority school at Wollentschin Kreis Rosenberg, Upper Silesia, was unjustifiably postponed is incorrect. The arrangements regarding school premises, etc., reported by the applicants for the opening of the minority school were inadequate. The school premises had no flooring; there were no heating arrangement: lavatories, etc., so that a demand had to be made that these defects should be made good It is, moreover, evident that there was no delay on the part of the authorities from tht fact that the application, accompanied by building plans, was handed in to the Oppeln administration on October 21st, 1930 and that, after it had been examined and the defects were made good a permit for the school was granted on December 22nd, 1930.

(б) It is not clear how the opening of a German State elementary school at Jendrin could be contrary to the rights of the minority. The groundless suspicion that some of the children attending the Polish private school had been induced “ by various means ” to go over to the German State elementary school is emphatically repudiated.

(c) It is quite untrue that the permit to open the school at Kutzoben was intentionally delayed through unusual conditions being imposed in respect of the school premises. These premises were not even subject to the conditions ordinarily required of German State elementary schools; it was, however, necessary to require the observance at any rate of the most essential health requirements.

(d) The allegations regarding delays on the part of the authorities in connection with the opening of the private schools at Wendzin, Radlau and Klein Lagiewnik are devoid of any found­ ation. This would have been clear if the petitioner, in enclosing in Appendix 6 a cop y of his memorandum to the Regierungs-Prasident at Oppeln had also enclosed a copy of the Oberprâsident's reply, but for obvious reasons he failed to do so. Naturally, the school premises are not subject to the same requirements as State schools, but dangerous cellars and staircases must be put in order before the school can be allowed to begin work. With regard to the Wendzin case, it may be said that the opening of the Polish private school was not delayed by any official department. With regard to the Landrat’s visit to the Gemeindevorsteher, Kosalla, mentioned in Appendix 6 to the petition, we may repeat the remarks made in the communication from the Oberprâsident of the Province of Upper Silesia of April 7th, 1931, to the Union of Polish School Associations in Berlin, to the effect that in the course of official negotiations Kosalla had complained to the Landrat that his brother-in-law, the farmer Gorzolka, was in a bad financial position and that the Landrat had informed the Gemeinde­ vorsteher, as in duty bound, that his brother-in-law could obtain help from the Oststette; he should induce his brother-in-law to make an application to the Oststelle. This conversation took place in the presence of the Kreis medical officer, the Kreis inspector and the head teacher at a time when the plot of land sold by Gorzolka was already entered in the land register as the property of the Polish School Association, which fact was known both to the Landrat and th e Gemeinde­ vorsteher. It is not clear what is meant by the general suspicion expressed in the petition that " Article 100, paragraph 2, of the Geneva Convention was also quite arbitrarily interpreted by the Prussian authorities ”.

(e) A room in the German State elementary school was leased to the private Polish minority school at Oslau-Damerow. As, however, on the renewal of the lease, the Polish School Association refused to accept the condition that the premises should only be used for the purposes of the private minority school, notice was given to terminate the lease. For reasons of health, permission could only be given temporarily to continue the lessons in a private house w h ic h had been leased. In the meantime, however, the Polish School Association built a schoolhouse of its own. In erecting this building, it was naturally obliged to comply with the conditions for obtaining a building permit. The premises are now completed. The minority is under no disadvantage.

(/) The matters relating to the schools at Pschywors and Klonschen have already been dealt with in Appendix 6 (A).

(g) There is no obligation to give permanent accommodation to the private minority school at Plattenheim in the premises of the State elementary school. As a special concession, a room in the State elementary school was placed at the disposal of the Polish School Association for the opening of their school. In reply to the statement in the petition that the minority is placed at a disadvantage because thirty children are taught by one teacher in a angle room, in the minority school, it must be pointed out that this number is considerably smaller than the number of children taught on an average in one room in German State schools. — I l l —

(h) The statement that no steps have been taken since December 1930 by the Prussian authorities with regard to a Polish kindergarten at Tiefenau is incorrect. On December 1st, 1930, the Polish Catholic School Association of the Bezirk of Weichselgau applied for authorisation to open a kindergarten for the Polish minority at Tiefenau, and for a permit for Mme. Helene Polomska to direct this kindergarten. In accordance with the professional opinion of the Kreis medical officer, the premises provided for the kindergarten did not conform with the minimum conditions required of all kindergartens under the regulations in the interest of the children's health. Permission to open the kindergarten could therefore only have been given on condition that the necessary changes in construction should be made. The authorisation had, however, to be rejected because a permit could not be granted to Mme Helene Polomska to direct the kindergarten. She could only prove that she was trained as a domestic children’s nurse ; she had no social pedagogical training, such as is required in all kindergartens in Prussia. Her training could therefore not be regarded as technical training within the meaning of the existing Prussian regulations of December 9th, 1930, so that, after careful examination, the application of the Polish School Association had to be rejected by the Prussian Government. This decision w as taken on purely technical grounds ; the result would be exactly the same for a German kindergarten under the same conditions.

[Translation.] Appendix 8.

Alleg ed H o stility to th e P o lish Schools. (Page 9 and following of the Petition.)

(a) Shot fired at the Polish school in MOilmen.—The shot was fired at a window of an empty room of Johann Dziadek’s house, intended for the minority school which was being created. The bullet found in the room belongs to the so-called S-ammunition of the German Reichswehr. Although Dziadek alleges that he made enquiries immediately after the shot was fired, he observed no one. A surprise search made on August 5th, 1931, in Dziadek’s dwelling brought to light a military carbine with 51 rounds of such S-ammunition. It is therefore highly probable that Dziadek himself fired the shot. After extensive enquiries the court proceedings were stopped as they had led to no result. The incident was the subject of proceedings under Article 585 of theGeneva Convention beginning on August 1st, 1931, and ending on November 3rd, 1931.

(b) The statement attributed in the petition, page 9, to the teacher Tschauder was m ade at a late hour in private conversation over a glass of beer. Tschauder was severely admonished by his school council for this remark.

(c) On the occasion of the school festival at Oslau-Damerow on September 7th, 1930, a group of the Stahlhelm belonging to the district proceeded to Oslau-Damerow. Some members of this group unfortunately tore down some garlands and created other disturbances. The Landjager who were there intervened and caused the Stahlhelm group to withdraw. The enquiry which was immediately instituted and in which no fewer than twenty witnesses of German and Polish sympathies were heard was, however, finally stopped. The school festival was not “ broken up ” by the arrival of the Stahlhelm group, since it had not been begun on account of the heavy rain. In view of the above remarks, the statement that the Landjager, the public prosecutor and the Landrat took no action is incorrect.

{d) With regard to the Nikolaiken case, Dr. Curtius, the former German Minister for Foreign Affairs, made the following statement at the Council of the League of Nations in January 1931: “ In Nikolaiken, in the Kreis of Stuhm, administrative district of West Prussia, differences of opinion between Germans and members of the minority regarding a lease developed into personal insults, threats and actual damage, even damage to the minority school. Before these events took place there was—as there now is—complete harmony between the minority and the majority in this place; the agitation was artificially fomented from outside. The Polish teacher has expressly declared that he never noticed any hostile attitude towards himself on the part of the German population. He declared that the German teachers treated him as their colleague and in a friendly way. He has also admitted that he was entirely satisfied with the treatment received from the authorities. The local authorities, including the President, who belongs to the Polish minority, and other members of the minority have unanimously signed a declaration that they were convinced the events in question were not caused by an anti-Polish attitude on the part of the German population and the authorities. The believes that reasons of personal and private revenge — 112 —

were at the bottom of these events. In addition, the administrative authorities and the courts took action at once against the offenders, who were severely punished with several months' imprisonment. The statement that organised attacks had been made by Hitler storm troops (the number given was 50 to 60 men, while in fact only eight young people took part) was shown to be untrue in the course of lengthy proceedings, as also was the statement that the competent Landrat was the originator of these unfortunate events. It was, however, proved and expressly recorded in the judgment of the court on January 7th, 1931, that the photographs showing the demolished school had been taken at a later time after the Committee of the local Polish School Association had artificially introduced a certain amount of disorder. This case can therefore be regarded as disposed of. ”

(e) M. Weise, the lessee of the Government estate at Preussenfeld, was compelled by the depression to make a considerable reduction in the number of his labourers. In deciding which labourers should be dismissed he was guided solely by their capacity and other personal reasons. Political views played no part, and this is clear from the fact that labourers whose children attended the Polish minority school were not dismissed while, on the other hand, those who were dismissed include labourers who did not send their children to the Polish minority school. The complaint made by the dismissed labourers was, moreover, rejected by the Labour Court at Flatow.

(/) The forest labourers J oh. Saborowski and Paul Pela of Oslau-Damerow were dismissed in accordance with the terms of their contracts by the Prussian State (Forest Administration) under instructions from the Regierungsprasident, through the competent head forester. The forester Zimmermann, mentioned in the petition, expressly denies having made the withdrawal of the notice of dismissal dependent on the labourers sending their children to the German school and taking part in propaganda against the Polish school. Moreover, the labourers who had received notice are still living in the official quarters and are employed when required by the Forest Administration.

(g) T he statem en t th a t th e mayor of Stanislewo inform ed th e labourer P eter Saremba (the name is incorrectly given in the petition) that he could not receive unemployment benefit if he sent his children to the Polish minority school is incorrect. In the summer of 1931 Saremba applied to the Labour Office at Bischofsburg for " crisis benefit ”. The prescribed form was sent by the Labour Office to the mayor, who completed it in accordance with the provisions and signed it together with the two assessors. Saremba received a reply from the Labour Office, not from the mayor, refusing the request because he drew a considerable income at that time from his land and the legal provisions for the grant of “ crisis benefit " were thus not fulfilled. In this case, accordingly, no political considerations were involved.

(h) It is incorrect that the Landjager Packmehr sought a quarrel with the Polish family Bartnik (not Bartikow) after the opening of the Polish school because it was held in their house. Not only Packmehr, but other Landjager officials, were compelled, even before the opening of the Polish school, to take action against Wendelin Bartnik and his wife for various offences. The Bartnik family have a bad reputation and have been several times convicted by the courts; the husband has even been sentenced to five years' imprisonment for theft. On the last occasion Bartnik was sentenced to a fine of 90 RM. in 1931 for insulting Packmehr. The official steps taken against Bartnik have therefore nothing to do with the fact that he has given the Polish school accommodation in his house.

(1) Extensive official investigations have shown that it is not true that the Landjdger Prangel and th e teacher Gabriel at Kôn. Neudorf advised the landowner Redmer and his wife not to send their children to the Polish school.

(j) The statement that the labourer Joseph Pakalski was dismissed when he sent his children to the Polish school is untrue. Pakalski was employed last year on road-making by an Elbing firm and was dismissed solely because the firm's work was concluded. Moreover, according to his own statement, he sends his children to the Polish minority school because he regularly receives seven metres of cloth for the children of school age and other grants for the smaller children.

(k) The statement that the Landrat of the Kreis of Allenstein advised the married couples Surrey and Grabowski, living in the village Neu-Kaletka, who had suffered losses from fire, not to send their children to the Polish school, promising them credits in return, is categorically denied by the Landrat. All the negotiations with the persons suffering losses from the fire took place in the presence of the officials concerned. Their statements agree that such rem ark s were never made by the Landrat. — U S —

n\ jhe remarks made by Ludwig, a young school officer on probation, at Skaibotten regard- . some inhabitants of Skaibotten are attributable to the fact that the head of the Polish 'chool association had tried to secure the attendance of children at the Polish minority school by promises of material advantages. On the complaint of the Union of Polish School Associations the necessary steps were taken against Ludwig.

(m) The petition entirely misrepresents the facts. There is a private minority school at Grobenzin directed by a Polish subject. When one of the schoolchildren stated at the inspection made by the Government school inspector on December gth, 1930, that it was a Polish child, he corrected it and said it was a German child whose native language was Polish. The remark was made in a friendly manner and was intended to make clear the difference between the native language and State nationality. The assertion that the school inspector Novak “ ordered ” the child to describe itself as a German child is untrue.

(«) There is no question of any “ attack ” having been made on Theophil Cysewski at Oslau-Damerow. On the evening of September 8th, 1930, M. Zimmermann, mayor and forest warden, who is not popular with the Polish minority, came into conflict with Cysewski because the latter had annoyed his wife by using insulting expressions in Polish. When Cysewski was examined on the same evening by the Landjager on duty, no trace of injury could be found. Moreover, it was not proved in the court proceedings that Cysewski had been ill-treated. As a result of this incident, the Polish inhabitants of Oslau-Damerow on the same evening arranged an anti-German demonstration, during which they passed in front of the forestry house in which Zimmermann lives, and demanded that the German police should be replaced by Poles. In view of the threatening attitude of the demonstrators Zimmermann was obliged to telephone to the Landjàgers’ office for assistance. On December 5th, 1930, four members of the Cysewski family who took part in these incidents, and another villager, were sentenced by the Lauenburg court to three and six weeks’ imprisonment respectively for insulting Zimmermann. The appeal made to the Stolp district court was rejected, but the sentence on two of the offenders was reduced to three weeks. The appeal was dismissed by the supreme court. It will be seen from the above facts that the entire case has nothing to do with the opening of the Polish school.

(0) According to official enquiries, in September 1930 two panes of a window in the minority school at Grobenzin were broken by unknown persons throwing empty beer bottles. In spite of extensive enquiries on the part of the authorities, none of the witnesses, including the teacher and house proprietor belonging to the minority, could give information or indications regarding the identity of the offenders.

(p) The two persons connected with the incident at Bemsdorf were sentenced for creating disturbances and disorder.

(q) The statement regarding the dismissal of the forest labourers Kulass and Bambynek of Grobenzin is disproved by the reply of the Kôslin administration of December 10th, 1929» which is appended to the petition. Political motives played no part whatever in this case.

(r) According to official enquiries Paul Gutzmer, forty years of age, of Grobenzin, was annoyed by children of the Polish minority school on September 13th, 1930, who shouted after him a rhyme making fun of bakers. Gutzmer was annoyed and struck Felix Fahlberg, aged thirteen years, who on this and other occasions had been particularly provocative. He was therefore sentenced for assault.

(s) Regarding the case at Gross-Friedrichsberg, Kreis of Flatow, the following correction has appeared in the Polish newspaper Glos Pogranicza, No. 36, of the year 1930: “ In this case, seven youths of Gross-Friedrichsberg met children from the Polish minority school who were returning from a children’s party with their relatives on July 12th, 1930, at about 9 o’clock in the evening. One of the young men struck at a burning torch carried by one of the schoolchildren, so that it fell to the ground and went out. The young man’s name was immediately ascertained. There can be no question of any attack having taken place. It is also incorrect to speak in this connection of the destruction of the lantern and to express a fear of ' worse excesses ’. It is evident that further statements based on incorrect or exaggerated accounts are groundless. ”

The incident was regarded by the minority party itself as a trifling piece of mischief, and no person who had been molested lodged a complaint. When after a month the case finally came to the notice of the authorities and they requested the parties to bring a charge, this was not done.

(<) No information was obtainable regarding the allegations made that workmen, whose names were not mentioned, were dismissed at Krojanke. 7 — 1*4 —

(m) The commune decided on November 27th, 1930, to dismiss the village messenger and night watchman Pufahl at Steinau, Kreis of Flatow, because in view of his age of nearly 73 years his failing strength and his inability to read and write, he could no longer satisfactorily fulfil his duties, and because in addition he received a monthly invalidity allowance of about 74 Rjj and there were unemployed persons in the commune who were suitable for the post. His dismissal was not influenced by other reasons, such as the attendance of his grandson and ward at the Polish school.

[Translation.] Appendix 9.

K indergarten T r a i n i n g S c h o o l a t A l l e n s t e i n . ' (Page 11 of the Petition.)

The statements contained in the petition regarding the Kindergarten Training School at Allenstein give an essentially correct account of the matter. An impartial investigation of these statements shows that the desires of the Polish minority are met in respect of the training of Kindergarten teachers in Polish. Permission cannot be given to the minority to open a recognised Kindergarten training school under the direction of a foreign subject.

[Translation.] Appendix 10.

Continuation S c h o o l s . (Pages 11 and 12 of the Petition.)

In the negotiations for the conclusion of the Geneva Convention, the contracting parties agreed that vocational and continuation schools were not suitable for inclusion in special minority school arrangements. It was therefore expressly stated in Article 115 that the contract­ ing parties were not obliged to open such schools. It was merely agreed that members of the minority who received adequate private vocational and continuation instruction should be exempt from the obligation to attend the corresponding State schools. The Union of Polish School Associations inferred that this provision entitled them to open private continuation schools —which are otherwise not admitted as private schools in Germany—within the area covered by the Geneva Convention. The recent application to open such private continuation schools within the area covered by the Geneva Convention has been granted. But this does not ipso facto abolish the obligation to attend State continuation schools, since it has not been proved that private continuation school instruction is an adequate substitute for State instruction, and such proof cannot be given until the schools have been in operation for some time. With regard to the parts of Prussia which are outside the area covered by the Geneva Convention, the statements contained in the petition are incomplete and misleading. The Union of Polish School Associations, in submitting a teaching scheme for rural continuation schools, requested permission to open private rural minority continuation schools and applied both to the Prussian Ministry of Science, Arts and Education and to the District Administrations a t Schneidemühl, Kôslin, Allenstein and Marienwerder. On November 2nd, 1929, this application was discussed in the Ministry in question with the Chairman of the Union of Polish School Associations. The latter pointed out that a rural continuation school in the technical sense was not intended; the school would merely give general education and not vocational training in the technical sense. He was informed in reply that the Minority School Decree did not provide for continuation schools in the technical sense and therefore did not cover the continuation schools which the Union had applied for permission to open when it submitted its scheme for rural continuation schools. In general, it was stated, private continuation schools were not allowed in Prussia. Consequently, the proposed schools (Fôrderschulen—extension sch ools) which were intended merely for general extension classes would not release the scholars f r o m the obligation to attend the State continuation schools. The Chairman of the Union of Polish School Associations then stated that he regarded his application as disposed of and reserved - i i 5 —

the right to make individual applications to the separate district authorities. The Union did not, however, immediately make any new applications to the District Administrations and it thus happened that the Administration at Schneidemühl granted the original application to open the continuation schools before it had been informed of the outcome of the discussion of November 2nd, 1929. It was only on September 23rd, 1931, that these schools were closed on the ground that they were not in accordance with the regulations. No applications have been made to open private Polish trade or commercial schools.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 11.

P r u s s ia 's N e w P o l is h P o l i c y : I n Co n s c io u s O p p o s it io n t o t h e F o r m e r E a s t e r n P r o v in c e s P o l ic y . By Ministerialrat Dr. Fritz Rathenau.

[Extract from the Berliner Tageblatt of November 20th, 1928 ] (Page 7 of the Petition.)

“ The Prussian Government has issued a Decree for the regulation of school questions fo r t h e Polish minority. It permits the Polish minority—that is to say, German subjects of P o li s h race throughout the territory of the State—whenever educational institutions of the k in d do not already exist, to open and conduct Polish private elementary schools so that children r e g u l a r l y attending them are exempt from their obligation to attend German elementary schools. S t a t e subsidies (amounting to 60 per cent of the teachers’ salaries) are provided for private s c h o o l s attended by at least forty children of school age. Even State elementary schools—that is t o say, schools kept up entirely out of public funds—are opened in places where a subsidised p r i v a t e elementary school has existed for three years in succession and its further duration is guaranteed ; during the transitional period. State elementary schools may be opened if the n u m b e r of children attending the subsidised private minority school— i. e., not fewer than f o r t y - amounts to 5 per cent of all children of school age belonging to the school district. Polish t e a c h e r s may be admitted to private schools without having passed a German teachers’ examina­ tio n , while, since the teachers at State schools are Government officials, they may only be Poles in exceptional cases. The Polish minority schools are to be on the same footing as the German elementary schools as regards their curriculum and work, except that due instruction is given in Polish culture and that Polish takes the place of German as the language of instruction. The underlying principle of the Minority Decree is that attendance at minority schools, w h e t h e r private or State schools, does not depend on the children being of Polish race or culture, o n t h e ir speaking Polish at home or as their native language, or on their fulfilling certain conditions in respect of race, religion, customs or other objective characteristics. On the contrary, the principle is recognised that any person who wishes can declare that he belongs to the minority. S u c h a declaration, which is implied when a child is entered for a minority school, may be neither investigated nor contested. As German citizens, persons belonging to the minority are to be n e it h e r hindered nor placed at a disadvantage in asserting the rights thus granted to them. T h e y have the most complete and unrestricted freedom to decide whether they will send th e ir children to the minority school and leave them there or not. Conversely, no child m a y be compelled to attend a minority school against the wish of the persons responsible for h is education, because he speaks Polish at home. These autonomous regulations—the provisions of the Geneva Convention of May 15th, 1922, are under international protection and only apply to Upper Silesia— which are entirely n o v e l for Prussia, will arouse serious objections. It will be pointed out that the ‘ trustful ?,n.rï. utopian policy of conciliation ’, adopted in particular during the reign of Frederick W ill ia m IV and later in the post-Bismarck period, first gave an impulse and encouragement to t h e Poles and that it is only possible ‘ to check the Polish movement by stressing the German v ie w ’. Reference might be made to the danger which such ‘ trustfulness ’ would involve for East Prussia, cut off as it is from the rest of Germany. It would also be pointed out that s o m e perplexity must be felt by the farmers in the eastern provinces when they see and hear t h a t Polish schools are placed on the same footing as German schools, and even receive State subsidies, and that Polish teachers may be employed in them. These and many other objections have been carefully considered and weighed; they c a n n o t , however, be regarded as conclusive. A settlement has been reached, not on the basis idealism with international aims but of calm political consideration based on the experiences of the past—in conscious opposition to the former eastern provinces policy. The o ld e r German methods of cultural competition between the nations have deplorably failed. Neces­ s it ie s of State at present call for a different solution ; the State and the people no longer coincide, the newly-created frontiers have separated the people from the State. Outside the boundaries 0 the German State, there are in Europe alone more than 18 million Germans, while there are — n 6 —

more than 30 millions in the entire world. A living national spirit cannot be crushed; it is a short-sighted and dangerous policy to try to suppress it ; it cannot be destroyed unless it surrender? of its own accord. In spite of our defeat, we Germans will not gi ve in. We have faith in our great future, which was formerly pursued on false lines. We have also confidence in our power of resistance and attraction. We have therefore no reason to shirk the competition between rival cultures. If we demand that the culture of our fellow-countrymen, separated from us by force, should be recognised, and that they should be free to foster and develop it, we cannot deny the same rights to other races. History will have to decide whether, instead of living peacefully with such foreign elements, we must cross swords with them in the sphere of cultur No one who has witnessed the development of the last ten years will think or fear that we should find ourselves the weaker party in the cultural struggle. The experience gained in connection with the application of the Geneva Convention for Upper Silesia and of the first Prussian minority regulations of February gth, 1926, for the frontier territory of Schleswig, gives us reason to hope that we can deal m a friendly spirit with the Polish minority without danger. We can calmly look forward to the outcome of this struggle for the highest good of culture, speech and race, if we fight with an inner conviction and without shrinking from sacrifice. Great interests, even the very highest, are at stake. No one may hold back. On this depends the continued existence of the people. But what will happen if, in a spirit of pusillanimity and timidity, we place fetters on the foreign element in our country? Will it not, sooner or later, break its bonds and sweep away everything in its path ? Will not the pressure by which we hold down the "Polish element produce a counter-pressure under which the German element in Poland would suffer far more seriously than at present ? And who would be better entitled and authorised to take a leading position in the world, not only as regards her own minorities outside the country but also minorities in general, than Germany, whose greatest federal State has now afforded such extensive rights to its strongest minority ? Thus the greatest measure of liberality will be the best protection for German culture. Prussia has become the protagonist of Germany. It has shown the courage to open the field of action for Polish culture instead of allowing it to work discontentedly underground. Prussia has learned a lesson from history. May the German school gain its victory by fair play. ”

[Translation.] Appendix 12.

P arliamentary E l e c t io n s . (Page 12 of the Petition.)

The following information has been obtained officially regarding the election meeting of the Polish People’s Party at Damsdorf : An election meeting of the Polish minority was fixed for September 10th, 1930, in an inn at Damsdorf. The speaker, the well-known leader of the Association of Poles, the clergyman Domanski, of Zakrzewo (Kreis of Flatow), had intended to hold a closed meeting with a charge for admittance, but his agent had inadvertently failed to carry out this arrangement, so that the meeting was a public one and two-thirds of the audience were people of German sympathies; they included forty or fifty members of the National-Socialist Party from other places. The German majority objected to the speech being made in the official Polish language, which they did not understand ; but the policemen present pointed out that it was permitted to speak in Polish. In the further course of the discussion, the Polish part of the audience suddenly left the premises. Shortly afterwards, loud cries for help were heard from outside, so that the German members of the audience ran out of the inn thinking that an accident had taken place. The cries for help proved to be a trick, and the people coming out of the inn were attacked and beaten by the Poles, who were waiting for them. In the struggle which took place, some of the Germans were seriously injured. Before the policemen present in the hall could reach the spot, the attackers had dis­ appeared. Attempts to identify the offenders were unsuccessful. The reports in the Polish Press that “ a veritable pogrom took place in the dark ” are the very opposite of the truth. It is also untrue that " naturally no policemen were present at the place of the disturbance ” ; they were in the hall while the disturbance took place outside. In view of the suddenness of the attack, no reinforcements could be obtained. I t w as subsequently impossible to take action regarding the interference with the meeting, because neither the poHce officials in charge nor the Public Prosecutor were able to establish a criminal act. The attacks which took place after the meeting were not reported by the Polish minority to the authorities for further investigation. It would seem obvious that the Poles in question d id not wish their conduct after the meeting to be investigated by the authorities. It is in a n y case incorrect to state that the matter was not followed up. The Public P r o secu to r m a d e fu ll enquiries into the case, but the proceedings were finally stopped as it could not be proved t h a t a criminal act had been committed. — i i 7 —

[Translation.] Appendix 13.

C h a n g e s i n P o l i s h P l a c e N a m e s . (Page 13 of the Petition.)

The name of the railway station situ a te d in the commune of Zakrzewo at some distance from the village was changed about eight years ago by the German Railway Company into “ Busch- dorf ” (Grenzmark), in order to prevent confusion with two stations of the same name which were transferred to Poland. In connection with this change in name, which was dictated by practical reasons, it was proposed to change the name of the village Zakrzewo into Buschdorf. This was, however, not done in view of the opposition of the commune.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 14.

L e t t i n g o f H a l l s t o P o l i s h S o c i e t i e s . (Pages 13 and 14 of the Petition.)

(a) It is untrue that the landlord of the inn “ Zur neuen Welt ” at Gleiwitz refused to let the hall for a concert of the Polish Choral Society at Gleiwitz, on the ground that the German organisations had threatened to boycott him. The hall was already let to another party on the day when the concert was to take place. A petition was lodged by the Association of Poles on September 29th, 1930, and the matter came before the Mixed Commission in accordance with Article 585 of the Geneva Convention.

(b) The theatrical section of the Polish Catholic School Association proposed to arrange a Polish theatrical performance on March 29th, 1931, at Kosel. The performance did not, however, take place because the lessee of the Schützenhaus at Kosel refused to let the hall. According to his signed statement, he did not let the hall because he was afraid that some material damage might be done by one party or the other during the performance. Moreover, the Poles had not paid the required security of 300 RM.

(c) The Polish Theatrical Association at Guttentag had applied for the Jugendhalle, which belongs to the commune, for a Polish theatrical performance to be held on a Sunday. The commune could not grant this application because the Jugendhalle is placed at the disposal of a private cinematographic undertaking on all Sundays and holidays under an agreement concluded with the Town Council of Guttentag. The commune is prepared to let the Jugend­ to the Polish Theatrical Association on any day when it is not occupied under the above- mentioned agreement. The Association of Poles lodged an appeal on March 23rd, 1931, under Article 149 of the Geneva Convention, but no decision has yet been reached.

(d) T he Polish Gymnastic “ Sokol ” of Berlin-Schôneberg, on May 8th, 1919, obtained permis­ sion to use the gymnasium of the elementary school No. 14 at Berlin-Schoneberg. On January 1st, 1925, new regulations for the leasing of the school premises came into force; these were brought to the notice of the association. As the gymnastic society constantly infringed these regulations, the permission to use the gymnasium was withdrawn on August 28th, 1931. In view of the complaints made by the society, an investigation was held, as a result of which the refusal was maintained. The implication that the withdrawal of the permission was connected with the appointment of a new rector is devoid of foundation.

(e) In virtue of the Decree issued by the President of the Reich on March 28th, 1931, for the suppression of political excesses, the local police at Stuhm refused permission for the celebration of the anniversary of the Constitution of May 3rd, which had been proposed by the Unions of the Polish Minority in Stuhm in 1931 ; in view of the great excitement among the population, it was to be feared that the holding of the festival, which commemorates the Polish Constitution °f 1791 and is a Polish national holiday, would endanger public safety and order.

* * * - Ii8 -

[ Translation. ] Appendix 15.

T h e a t r e s . (Page 14 of the Petition.)

(а) The incidents at Oppeln formed the subject of a petition by the Association of Poles to the Council of the League of Nations. Reference is made to document C. 483. 1929.

(б) A t Rosenberg, after a Polish theatrical performance which passed off without incident, members of the Polish company, together with Poles living at Rosenberg, met at a restaurant on the Ring for supper, at which dance music was played and Polish songs were sung. Some young men standing before the inn sang German songs; thereupon shouts were heard from the room and the excited Germans threw a stone through the open window. The police did not fail to take action with all the means in their power.

(c) A t Goslawitz, in connection with a Polish theatrical performance, serious incidents were prevented by the police. The cries of the Germans who were standing about in front of the station and the theatre were directed not so much against the Polish actors as against the strong German police force present. In connection with the incident at Goslawitz, the Association of Poles made a complaint against the teacher Ploch under Articles 585 and 149 of the Geneva Convention. In the proceedings before the President of the Mixed Commission, it was ascertained that when the wife of the landlord, Czech, who had leased the theatre hall at Goslawitz, said to the teacher Ploch: " I am afraid; why did I let the Poles in? " he replied: " Yes, why did you let them in ? ” In addition, Ploch advised two women not to go to the theatre. For this, he was admonished by the administration. The Association of Poles has withdrawn the complaint it made to the President of the Mixed Commission.

(d) According to official information, it was not a theatrical performance, but a theatrical rehearsal, which took place in the inn at Boiko. Two workmen who were in the inn at the same time were obliged to go through the hall where the rehearsal was taking place; they no doubt laughed and talked when going through. In any case, one of the actresses shouted to the work­ men in a provocative manner: “ Niech zyle Polska ” (" Long live Poland "), to which one of the workmen replied: “ I'll give you ' Long live Poland ' It is not true that after the rehearsal the workmen said to the landlord Sdzuj : “ If you let the Poles use the room, you can look out for yourself According to the signed statement, the landlord expressly denies that such a remark was made. It is also untrue that the landlord said he could not let the hall to the " Community of Mary ” because German associations had threatened to boycott him.

[ Translation.] Appendix 16.

U s e o f t h e P o l i s h L a n g u a g e . (Page 14 and following of the Petition.)

(a) Brawl at Gross-Strehlitz.—The incident was brought before the Mixed Commission for Upper Silesia under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention. Its official enquiries have led to the following result: “ The brawl was caused by the brothers Bannert, two notorious cut-throats and assassins. Wilhelm Bannert, after singing a Polish song, struck one of the customers on the head. The landlord then settled the dispute. About an hour later, the Bannerts attacked Rudner and stabbed him in the head. The other customers then held them back and the knife was taken away from Vinzent Bannert. Nobody was left lying unconscious. During this incident the landlord (Kopytzick) had a pistol for firing warning shots in his hand; he also seized a stick. The brawl was not caused by political reasons (other members of the minority, for instance, not being molested). Proceedings were taken against the brothers Bannert for inflicting bodily injury, for breach of the domestic peace and for causing material damage. The proceedings against Rudner, Kopytzick and others were sto p p e d .” The President of the Mixed Commission has closed the proceedings. — r ig —

The Association of Poles, which must be aware of the true facts from the court documents, deliberately represents a non-political brawl provoked by two notorious cut-throats and assassins as a case of terrorising the minority.

(b) Railway journey from Beuthen.—This incident has been carefully investigated in view nf a complaint made by the Association of Poles, but could not be entirely cleared up. The accused miner Wloch, of Mikultschütz, states that two of the men in the railway carriage, including the Polish leader Weingart, sang songs ridiculing Germany. A short altercation took place at the Mikultschütz station between himself and the two minority leaders, in which he shouted to W eingart : “ If you are fond of Poland you can go there He then left the station and went home. This statement could not be disproved.

(c) Attack on the Matron of a Polish Kindergarten.—In virtue of a complaint by the Association 0{ Poles dated April 20th, 1930, this case was brought before the M ixed Commission under Article cgt of the Geneva Convention. According to official enquiries, the workman Protzek, indignant at the Polish acts of terrorism committed at Hohenbirken in Polish Upper Silesia, met on November 22nd, 1930, Anna Grzegosczyk, a Polish subject, who was carrying a violin. He shouted to her: “ Go and play vour fiddle in Warsaw He emphatically denies having made any other remarks. At the police station Mme. Grzegosczyk was promised every assistance by the police officer on duty and was expressly offered the protection of a police official when returning to her house ; moreover, the steps to be taken for any future eventualities, such as calling up the police station, were carefully explained to her. In a signed statement, she admitted that this account of the case by the police superintendent is correct, and that she had not been previously molested at Ratibor. The workman Protzek was punished for insulting behaviour under an Order from the Ratibor District Court of January 16th, 1931.

(d) Irregularity in the delivery of a Newspaper.—The copies of the newspaper N o w in y Codzienne are sent out by the publishers in a wrapper as printed matter. Frequently the news­ papers for two successive days are sent in one parcel, so that the subscribers only receive them e v e r y other day. This explains the irregularity in the delivery of the newspapers. There was n o neglect in the delivery. It has been impossible completely to clear up the remarks alleged to have been made by t h e postmaster’s wife to Jarasch, as the statements of the parties are diametrically opposed. I t h a s , however, been ascertained that the entire incident was caused by the noisy and insolent behaviour of Jarasch, which the latter is unable to deny. This was also found by the M ixed Commission which examined the case in virtue of a complaint of March 19th, 1931, made by t h e Association of Poles under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention.

(e) A t Nagladden, in the Kreis of Allenstein, a regrettable case similar to that mentioned in t h e Petition occurred in the year 1922. The board, however, did not bear the inscription Pollack ” , but “ Saturday eleven o’clock ”, which meant that the child who was in possession o f t h e board at that time should be warned to speak German in future. The teacher was p u n i s h e d at the time by the authorities. In the last ten years there has been no recurrence o f such a case.

(/) The sports ground at Wanne-Eickel, which was let under certain conditions to the Polish Catholic Young Men’s Sports Club, belongs to the Town Council. After careful examination o f t h e case mentioned in the petition, the Town Council was notified by the State inspection authority that it was in principle inadmissible to forbid members of the Polish minority to use t h e Polish language in private conversation or in giving orders during the exercises; no p r e s s u r e should be exercised or prohibition issued by the authorities regarding the language t o b e used. The Prussian authorities have no knowledge that any young men, members of that^ club, were dismissed some weeks later on account of " the prevailing industrial depression ; no complaint has been addressed to any authority on this subject.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 17.

U s e o f t h e P o l is h L a n g u a g e i n Co u r t P r o c e e d in g s . (Page 14 and Appendix 16 of the Petition.) I. General.

According to Article 184 et seq. of the Law for the Constitution of the Law Courts, German is the only language used in the courts. If, however, a person taking part in the proceedings does not know German, an interpreter must be called in. The question as to whether a person knows German must be examined and decided by the court in each case. — 120 —

It is the general opinion of the legal authorities that this rule has not been made inoperative by Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich. According to the text-books and practice, persons can be compelled to use German in the court if, in the view of the court, they have an adequate knowledge of that language but deliberately pretend that they have not. The Polish minority in Upper Silesia comes under the provisions of the Geneva Convention, which depart from this practice.

II. Individual Cases.

1. Berlin Case.—The judge concerned, Amtsgerichtsrat Dr. Büchert, has made the following statement on this case:

“ At the hearing of January 22nd, 1931, in the action Dr. Kaczmarek v. Dr. Ruhkopf, the plaintiff stated at the beginning of the proceedings that, as a member of the Polish minority in Germany, he would on principle use the Polish language during the subsequent proceedings. He referred expressly to the provisions of Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich. “ The plaintiff made his statements in fluent and correct German, so that there was no question from the outset of applying Article 185 of the Law regarding the Constitution of the Law Courts (the calling in of an interpreter), nor did the plaintiff propose this course. He did not make any formal application calling for a judicial decision. “ I informed the plaintiff in reply that, under the provisions of the Law regarding the Constitution of the Law-Courts, the language of the court was German. This provision had not been made inoperative by the Constitution of the Reich. The plaintiff could not, therefore, invoke Article 113 of the Constitution of the Reich, since it only contained the general principle that foreign elements may not be prejudiced in the use of their native language. In his case, there could be no question of any prejudice, since the court had convinced itself that he had a perfect knowledge of German. “ The plaintiff then stated that as the court held this opinion he withdrew his request, but did so under protest—that is to say, while maintaining his point of view in principle. He consequently spoke in German during the subsequent proceedings. " This discussion only took up a short time and was conducted in a calm and objective tone. "

2. Breslau Case.—No information has been obtainable regarding the refusal to call in a Polish interpreter at proceedings in the Breslau court. The case referred to is evidently one which has been frequently discussed in the Polish minority Press—namely, that of the Wendish editor Skala, who asked for permission to speak Wendish in a civil action in the Breslau court. This request was refused by the court because Skala has a perfect knowledge of German ; this is proved by the fact that, in his capacity as responsible editor of the journal Kulturwehr, which appears in German, he has published long articles written by himself in German. Skala did not deny his knowledge of German, and finally spoke German fluently in the court proceedings.

3. The case in East Prussia did not take place at Allenstein, but at Hohenstein, in 1924, and led to a protest in 1927 from M. Baczewski, who was at that time a member of the Diet. The Prussian Minister of Justice gave the following reply : “ The enquiries made have given no reason to believe that the court at Hohenstein refused in principle to allow an interpreter to be called in ; on the contrary, an interpreter is always called in if this is required by the law. It has been proved by impartial inquiries that the landowner, Johann Burchert, whose attitude is the cause of the present complaint, unquestionably knows German ; this is shown by various negotiations conducted with him, and in particular by a purchase contract which he himself made in German. The action of the Hohenstein court is therefore entirely in conformity with Article 187 of the Law regarding the Constitution of the Law Courts, and gives no cause for complaint. ”

4. With regard to the Kamler case at Rosenberg, M. Klimas, member of the Diet, and the Association of Poles in Germany, protested at the time. The statements made by the President of the Court of Appeal at Breslau on October 23rd, 1926, and by the Prussian Minister of Justice on February 28th and May n th , 1927, show that representations were made to the judge in so far as his action was not in conformity with Article 140 of the Geneva Convention. The enquiry did not, however, show that the judge had intended to compel the defendant to speak German by referring to the amount of the penalty to be imposed. Kamler was pensioned off on May 1st, 1930. — 121 —

5. Streubel Case at Beuthen (Upper Silesia).—The detailed enquiries made into this case have shown that an infringement of the provisions of the Geneva Convention couldnot be definitely established; nevertheless, the necessary official steps have been taken against the Amtsgerichts- rat in question on account of his action.

[Translation.] Appendix 18.

A l l e g e d I nterference w it h R e l ig io u s Manifestations .

(Pages 15 and 16 of the Petition.)

(a) It may be assumed that the facts relating to the obstacles put in the way of th e pilgrimage to Czenstochau, mentioned in the petition, are known, as the matter has already come before the Council of the League of Nations (see documents C. 28. 1929. I and C. 106. 1929. I).

(b) Breaking up of a Polish meeting at Beuthen-Rossberg.—This incident has been the subject of proceedings under Articles 149 and 585 of the Geneva Convention, and has also come before the Council of the League of Nations. Reference is therefore made to League documents C. 212, 249 and 282. 1 9 2 8 .I.

(c) On March 12th, 1930 (not 1929), at a cinema performance arranged by the Association of Poles a t Alt-Cosal showing a film of the life of St. Francis of Assisi, some members of the audience laughed and sang. The disturbances were, however, so trifling that the performance could be carried to an end in accordance with the programme. The incident has been the subject of a complaint by the Association of Poles in accordance with Article 585 of the Geneva Convention.

(d) Erection of an image of the Czenstochau Mother of God in the Church of St. Andrew at Hindenburg in Upper Silesia.— The petition states that this image was contemptuously called “ The Black Mother of God ” by the population because it came from Poland. The name “ Black Mother of God of Czenstochau ” has been used from time immemorial, even by good Catholics, for this famous image. The original of this image at Czenstochau is in the at Oppeln, and is there also called “ The Black Mother of God ” ; this expression has never been used by the population in a contemptuous sense, but is always used in religious and Church circles with the same reverence as the names of other images of saints.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 19.

Co m p l a in t s a g a i n s t t h e C l e r g y .

(Page 16 of the Petition.)

It is incorrect that there is an insufficient number of services in Polish in the St. Sebastian parish of Berlin-Wedding. The St. Sebastian parish includes (without the district of the Church of St. Paul, which belongs to it and has about 20,000 inhabitants) a population of about 23,000. Out of this number there are about 500 who speak Polish in addition to German. There is always a chaplain available to hear confessions in the Polish language ; Polish services are fre­ quently held, and mass is celebrated by Father Rosier, the Catholic prison priest, who speaks Polish, and who naturally also hears confessions. The fact that a prison in Berlin has a Catholic priest who speaks Polish shows the consideration given to the Polish language in spiritual m atters. In the church district of St. P aul, which has about 20,000 inhabitants, the Polish-speaking members have, contrary to the statement made in the petition, had services in Polish twice a month since October 1931 in accordance with the instructions of the Bishop. The census for 1925 shows that, out of 450,000 Catholics in Berlin, there are about 10,000 German subjects who speak Polish and German as their native languages, and 2,516 nationals of the Reich who stated that Polish alone was their mother tongue; 1,719 of these, however, expressly stated that they also knew German. In addition to these German subjects, there are about 5>800 foreigners in Berlin, of whom 3,500 gave German and Polish as their native languages, and — 122 —

2,300 Polish. About 1,200 of the latter also know German. In Berlin, there are Catholic Mass and sermons in Polish every Sunday in five churches, and on two Sundays in the month in three churches; in addition, Polish-speaking Catholics can confess in 23 Berlin churches Thesë facts show that the religious needs of the Polish-speaking population are given adequate consideration in Berlin and afford evidence of the exceptionally friendly spirit of the clergy. Adequate provision in also made for confession and communion instruction in Polish in Greater Berlin in keeping with the other facilities for the exercise of religion. Outside Berlin, particularly in the Rhineland and Westphalia, and also in East and West Prussia and Silesia, adequate provision is made for the Polish language in spiritual matters by the German Episcopate.

[Translation.] Appendix 80.

L a n d S e t t l e m e n t . (Pages 16 and 17 of the Petition.)

i . Saenger Case (Zakrzewo) .—On July 30th, 1928, the innkeeper Saenger purchased a Rentengut from the married couple Frank, and was registered as the owner on July 20th, 1929. The estate was encumbered by a right of repurchase in favour of the Prussian State (Settlement Commission), which could be exercised inter alta if the owner failed to carry out his contractual obligation to live on and cultivate the property. As Saenger let the estate for a long period and lived in Berlin, the Grenzmarksiedlung, under an assignment granted by the Prussian State on November 2nd, 1929, and entered in the land register on November 19th, 1929, exercised the right of repurchase by a declaration of December 29th, 1929. Saenger applied to the Flatow district court in February 1930 for the issue of a temporary order against the Grenzmarksiedlung to the effect that a protest against the entry of the assignment of the right to repurchase should be entered in the land register, and that the opposing party should be prohibited from exercising that right. The Flatow district court refused this application in its judgment of March 7th, 1930; an appeal against the judgment was rejected on May 28th, 1930, by the Schneidemtihl provincial court. The judgments show that the right of repurchase was exercised because Saenger did not fulfil his undertaking to live on and cultivate the property. On July 26th, 1930, the Grenzmarksiedlung brought an action against Saenger in the Schneidemtihl provincial court for conveyance of the property. On the other hand, Saenger brought an action in the same court, on December 30th, 1930, against the Grenzmarksiedlung to secure the cancellation of the right of repurchase. Judgment was given in both cases on March 13th, 1931; the judgment given in the latter action is contained in Annex 17 of the petition, while in the former action Saenger was ordered to give possession of the property to the Grenzmarksiedlung. As regards the points with which we are concerned here, the decision only contains the following passage, which is given in the statement of reasons for the decision: “ The objections raised by the defendant against the maintenance of the right of re­ purchase and the admissibility of exercising that right in principle, are unfounded. This is made clear in the judgment given on March 13th, 1931, in the action brought by the defendant against the plaintiff, to which judgment we would refer. ” The judgment became legally operative without any appeal having been made. Saenger appealed against the judgment of March 13th, 1930 in the case Saenger v. the Grenzmarksiedlung. The appeal was rejected by the Provincial Court of Appeal at Marienwerder on June 30th, 1931, on the grounds that the action for cancelling the right of repurchase was opposed by the judgment with final effect given in the other case, by which Saenger was compelled under the same right of repurchase to give up possession of the property to the G renzm ark- stedlung.% An appeal brought before the Supreme Court of the Reich was rejected on J a n u a ry n th , 1932, on the ground that Saenger was compelled by law to comply with the claim arising out of the repurchase and could therefore not dispose of the property without failing in this obliga­ tion; the entry of the right of repurchase in the register did not therefore affect his property rights, so that he had no justified interest in the cancellation of the right of repurchase, in view of the manner in which the statement of reasons was set forth, the judgments given in the Court of Appeal and in the Supreme Court contain no statements regarding the validity of the right of repurchase. The allegation contained in the petition that “ the Prussian court of law thus confirmed that equality of rights, in the sense of Article 109 of the Constitution of the Reich, did not exist if it were a ease of applying the provisions to subjects of other than German race " is not supported by any of the judgments given in the cases between Saenger and the G renzm ark­ siedlung. It. may be stated in conclusion that the Saenger case is not in any way connected with the fact that the lessee i n question was of Polish race. The case has been discussed so frequently and in such detail in the Press that this fact must be known to the petitioner. — 123 —

2. In districts with a large Polish population— e.g., Upper Silesia, a great many applica­ tions made by persons of Polish origin have been granted for years past in connection with the Anliegersiedlung— i.e., the allocation of land to smallholders belonging to the district. Tt is not true that the Allotment Department (settlement undertaking) makes a practice of rforming applicants that it can only make allotments to Protestants. For obvious reasons, however, as far as possible only settlers of the same faith are granted land in the same settlement. T addition, when land is sold by private persons, applicants of Polish race are given consideration, with the approval of the competent authority (L andrat), both in Upper Silesia and in the province of Grenzmark Posen, Westpreussen, and the neighbouring districts. For instance, Polish farmers from the village of Neu-Kramzig bought parcels of land on the estate Voynowo (Kreis of Bomst) ; in the same way, at Neu-Kramzig and a neighbouring estate, parcels of land were sold to Polish applicants with the approval of the Landrat. The statements to the contrary m ade in the petition are incorrect. For the rest, any private owner can naturally decide freely to whom he will sell the whole or part of his property; the authorities have no reason to exercise any pressure. This statement also disposes of the Gross-Dammer case mentioned in the petition.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 21.

A l l e g e d S y s t e m a t ic R estrictions im p o s e d o n B a n k s . (Pages 17 and 18 of the Petition.)

(a) The police have made careful enquiries as to the persons who, in the night of November 2Qth-3oth, 1930, smashed two windows-panes at the People s Bank in Gross Strehlitz ; in particular, the persons belonging to the minority whose names were given at the time by the Association of Poles were heard as witnesses. In spite of the unremitting efforts of the authorities, it has been impossible to clear up the matter. All the witnesses agreed that it was so dark on the night in question that no footprints could be seen and no one could be recognised. Under these circumstances, it is not clear how, as stated in the petition, members of the minority recognised the comparatively small Stahlhelm badges worn by the offenders. On a complaint by the Association of Poles dated December 12th, 1930, the incident was made the subject of proceedings under Article 5S5 of the Geneva Convention.

(b) Investigations as to the identity of the persons who, in the night of December ist-2nd, 1930, broke window-panes in the dwelling of M . Gadczinski, bank manager, Gleiwitz, have given no result. The Public Prosecutor at Gleiwitz has stopped the action taken for material damage.

(c) After a meeting of protest against the well-known acts of terrorism committed against the German minority in East Upper Silesia, held on the Ring at Gleiwitz on November 30th, 1930, the crowd marched past the People’s Bank. A number of persons taking part in the demonstration raised their sticks threateningly and shouted “ Turn out the Poles ! The incident was to some extent due to the conduct of the wife and daughter of M. Aulich, Secretary of the Polish Syndicate, who leant out of the window of their apartment on the first floor above the Bank and laughed in an ostentatious manner, thus irritating the people taking part in the demonstration. M. Gadczinski, manager of the Polish Bank, in a statement made to the police, described the conduct of Mme. Aulich and her daughter during the procession on November 3°th as tactless and irresponsible. It is therefore possible that the stones which broke the windows of the People’s Bank were intended for the Aulich family. The Association of Poles, on December nth, 1930, made a complaint under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention. The official investigations carried out by the Mixed Commission gave no result. The President of the Mixed Commission thereupon closed the proceedings.

(d) It is true that on November 16th, 1930, during a meeting of the Rolnik Society, a stone was thrown which broke the window of the People's Bank at Gross S trehlitz The offender, a workman aged 20, was sentenced by the district court at Oppeln for committing material damage.

(e) The statement regarding an alleged explosive bomb in reality refers to a harmless incident which has already been the subject of a petition from the Association of Poles to the Council of the League (see League document C. 335. 1929. I).

(/) The Mayor of Rosenburg was informed at the time that he was not entitled to request the manager of the Polish Bank to remove the Polish signboard. — 124 —

The Association of Poles made a protest on August 5th, 1929, under Articles 1 4 9 and 53 r of the Geneva Convention, The German representative on the Mixed Commission suggested to the .President, M. Calender, that, in view of the conditions in East Upper Silesia, where it is particularly impossible to put up German signboards, he should use his good offices with the Association of Poles so that the signboard in the purely German town of Rosenberg should contain a German translation.

(g) Threatening Letter to the People’s Bank at Rosenberg.—The investigations as to the identity of the offender proved unsuccessful. The Public Prosecutor at Oppeln therefore stopped the proceedings. The Association of Poles on Novembër 29th, 1930, made a complaint under Article 58* of the Geneva Convention. The enquiries made by the Mixed Commission also led to no result

(A) Breaking of Window-panes at Ratibor.—The police enquiries as to the identity of the offender were unsuccessful. Director Malczewski, at a police enquiry in connection with this m atter on December 4th 1930, made the following statement :

" In view of the insignificance of the matter, I do* not propose to bring an action for material damage. I have reported the m atter to the Association of Poles at Oppeln merely for their information. In doing so, it was not my intention to make a complaint on a political question. I have no interest in the m atter being cleared up. I am entirely satisfied with the protective measures hitherto taken by the German police. Up to the present I have not been insulted or otherwise molested personally as head of the People’s Bank and of the ‘ Rolnik ’ in my capacity as a member of the Polish minority. ” The Association of Poles, on November 29th, 1930, lodged a complaint under Article 36 - of the Geneva Convention. The enquiries of the Mixed Commission also led to no result.

(*) The workman Maron was sentenced by the Kreuzburg District Court to a fine of 30 RM. for causing material damage, having thrown a stone at the window of M. Suchanek, bank cashier at Rosenberg, who is a member of the Polish minority. Contrary to the statement made by the petitioner, the sentence does not, in any way, mention the position of the German minority in Poland. The smallness of the fine is explained by the fact that Maron had not previously been convicted and had committed the act when in a state of intoxication. Maron had no political motives, but acted out of personal hostility towards Suchanek. The incident was the subject of proceedings before the Mixed Commission, taken on the basis of a complaint made by the Association of Poles on November 29th, 1930, under Article 585 of the Geneva Convention.

(k) It is true that the illuminated sign of the Polenhaus at Oppeln was broken on several occasions. In the case on October 10th, 1930, the offender was punished. W ith regard to the incident on April 29th, 1931, action was taken by the Public Prosecutor at Oppeln against a person unknown. The proceedings were stopped because the identity of the offender could not be ascertained. As regards the incident on October 25th, 1931, neither the Association of Poles nor the owner of the damaged premises took action or reported the case to the authorities. Consequently, no further enquiries Were made as to the identity of the offenders. Enquiries made as to the authors of the two threatening letters led to no result. The Public Prosecutor at Oppeln therefore stopped the proceedings.

(I) Nothing is known as to the refusal by the innkeeper Skorka of Bauerwitz to let rooms in January 1930. The reference is probably to Skorka’s refusal, in January 1 9 3 1 , to let rooms on his property for establishing a Rolnik at Bauerwitz. The matter has been the subject of a petition from the Association of Poles to the Council of the League under Article 147 of the Geneva Convention (document C. 334.1931. I). The Council referred the petition to the local procedure. On November 19th, 1931, the President of the Mixed Commission stated that the complaint was disposed of, since the Association of Poles had informed him that, in view of the admonition given by the Mayor of Bauerwitz, it regarded the matter as closed.

(m) People’s Bank in Flatow.—The right to purchase or sell foreign currency or claims in foreign currency was granted by the Reichsbank under § 2 and § 23, sentence 4, of the Foreign Exchange Decree of August 1st, 1931 (Reichsgesetzblatt, I, page 421), in conjunction with No. I of the Notice of July 18th, 1931 (Deutscher Reichsanzeiger und Preussischer Staalsanzeiger, No. 166), to all credit institutions possessing an account at th e Reichsbank. By No. I l l of the same Notice this provision was not, however, to ap p ly to transactions in Polish currency and claims in that currency. On account of this exception, the Foreign E xchange Offices occasionally took the erroneous view that the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Decree did not apply to Polish currency. — 125 —

The People’s Bank, in its letter of August 4th, 1931, applied to the branch of the Reichsbank t Schneidemühl for permission to purchase and sell Polish bank-notes. The branch of the Reichs- vTflnk transmitted this application to the Foreign Exchange Office at Stettin which, however, 1 pine under a misapprehension, returned it to the Reichsbank at Schneidemühl with the in co rrect reply that, under § 2, paragraph 3, of the Foreign Exchange Decree, the Reichsbank was competent to take the decision. The Minister for Economic Affairs of the Reich, in a letter of September 7th, 1931, informed the People’s Bank at Flatow, in reply to its complaint, that the Landesfinanzamt which was the department dealing with foreign exchange questions, was competent to decide on the appli­ cation for permission to purchase and sell zloty notes. In a circular of September n th , 1931, the Minister took the opportunity of pointing out to all Foreign Exchange Offices that Polish currency came under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Decree, except for § 2, paragraph 1, of that Decree, which provides that purchases and sales must be made through the Reichsbank or a foreign exchange bank. This made it clear that the exception to No. I of the Notice of the Board of the Reichsbank of July 18th, 1931, created by No. Ill of that Notice, merely meant that foreign exchange banks should be permitted to purchase Polish currency in their own name, and not exclusively on commission for the Reichsbank. As on the other hand it appeared highly desirable that the Foreign Exchange Offices should not permit the public in general, or every small firm, to deal in foreign currency left free by the Reichsbank, the Minister for Economic Affairs issued a circular to the Foreign Exchange Offices on September 14th, 1931, instructing them to grant permission for the purchase and sale of such currency only to foreign exchange banks. It subsequently appeared that the People’s Bank in Flatow was not a foreign exchange bank, as it had no account with the Reichsbank (No. I of the Notice of the Board of the Reichsbank of July 18th, 1931).

It is therefore not true that the People’s Bank at Flatow was refused permission because it was managed by members of the Polish minority.

(n) People’s Bank at Bernsdorf.—The “ Bank Ludowy-Volksbank ” (People’s Bank) at Bernsdorf, which was founded on April 12th, 1930, as a co-operative society with unlimited liability, applied on April 30th, 1930, to the head of the district court at Bütow for registration in the register of co-operative societies. An official request was not made to the bank and was unnecessary, because the bank itself is responsible for giving notice. A printed form was used for the purpose. The district court, by a decision of June 4th, 1930, took objection to the statutes attached to the application, because the amounts and shares were not expressed in Reichs­ marks. In letters of June 21st and 22nd, 1930, the teacher Bauer, of Bütow, member of the Board (subsequently sentenced to one year’s imprisonment for perjury), returned the statutes after correcting them, and stated that all the members had been informed of the alterations. On August 19th, 1930, the district court informed him that, after further examination of the statutes, fresh objections had arisen. Bauer made the necessary alterations and the registration was ordered by the district court on October n th , 1930, and took place on October 15th, 1930. Subsequently, the Chamber of Commerce and Industry at Stolp requested the district court to make a further investigation as to whether the expression “ Bank ”, or even “ People’s Bank ”, was legal. As an account for court costs addressed to the “ Bank Ludowy-X olksbank ” at Bernsdorf had been returned because the bank had no business premises at Bernsdorf, Bauer, member of the Board, was requested to appear at the district court to give verbal explanations. On this occasion he stated that credit was to be granted to the members with the help of the shares, amounting to 500 RM. each; up to the present no banking operations had been carried on. Business premises were to be opened at Bernsdorf. The bank had also applied to an auditing society in Berlin. The Chamber of Commerce and Industry, when informed of this statement, held the view that, if a co-operative society had only eleven members paying annual instalments of 5 RM. each on shares of 500 RM., so that each member would have to make payments for 100years, it was quite evident that the name “ Bank ” was highly misleading; moreover, the name “ People’s Bank ” wrongly gave the impression of an extensive undertaking of general utility. The district court agreed with this view and informed the co-operative society on October 3°th, 1931, that, subject to a disciplinary penalty of 100 RM., it should cancel its business name and replace it by one in accordance with the regulations, or that it should justify its right to use the previous business name within two weeks by entering a protest, since the previous name was misleading. Thereupon the co-operative society proposed that this decision should be cancelled, as the registration had not been opposed. It was then requested by the district court to give reasons for this objection. Up to the end of January 1932 no reply had been received from the co-operative society.

(0) The complaint that “ credit obtained by public institutions ” was not granted to members of the minority is quite unfounded. In reality, adequate credits are granted by the German public institutions to the Polish minority.

* * * — 1 2 6 —

[Translation.] Appendix 22.

Po lish Min o r ity P r e s s in Germ any. (Pages 18 and 19 of the Petition.) 1. Newspapers: Gazeta Olsztynska, published daily at Allenstein. Supplement: Glos Pogranicza (i.e., The Voice of the Frontier District) for Grenzmark Posen-Westpreussen, appears twice week. Mazur, for , published at Ortelsburg twice a week and printed by the Gazeta Olsztynska at Allenstein. Dziennik Berlinski, published daily in Berlin and printed by the publishing firm Nowinv G.m.b.H. at Oppeln. Glos Polski z Berlina, published once a week and printed by Wojcisch Slowinski in Berlin. Nowiny Codzienne, published daily at Oppeln and printed by the publishing firm Nowiny G.m.b.H. at Oppeln. Nowiny is the smaller edition of the Nowiny Codzienne and is published three times a week at Oppeln. Dziennik Ratiborski, published daily at Ratibor and printed by the publishing firm Nowiny G.m.b.H. at Oppeln. Narod, published daily at Herne; printed and published by Narod a t H em e.

2. The organ of the Association of Poles in Germany is the Polak w Niemczech (The Pole in Germany), which appears once a month in Berlin.

3. The Association of Poles in Germany also publishes: (a) The children’s journal Maly Polak w Niemczech (The Little Pole in Germany); (b) The journal Mlody Polak w Niemczech (The Young Pole in Germany) for youths who have left school. Both journals appear once a month in Berlin and, as the Gazeta Olsztynska stated on N ovember 18th, 1930, form an indissoluble whole " with that newspaper.

4. The Polish minority takes a considerable part in the publishing of Kulturwehr, a journal for minority culture and policy, the organ of the national minorities in Germany, which appears in the German language.

5. The Polish professional union at publishes the periodical Zjednoczenie ; it appears once a month in an A edition at Bochum and a B edition at Oppeln. The organ of the Polish socialist movement (P.P. S.) is the Glos Ludu, which appears twice a month at Hindenburg (printed at Kattowitz).

6 . Lastly, the Polish Communists in Germany publish the following four newspapers: Glos Pracy (The Voice of Labour), Glos Emigranta (The Voice of the Emigrant), Na przeboj ( Through Thick and Thin), Nowy przeglad (The New Review).

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 83.

N e w s p a p e r P rohibitions . (Page 18 of the Petition.) T h e following publications were prohibited under the Decree of the President of the Reich of July 17th, 1931, and March 28th, 1931, for the Suppression of Political Excesses, for the reasons given below:

The Polish newspaper Katolik, published at Beuthen, was suspended for two weeks, from July 31st to August 13th, 1931; the monthly periodical Zjednoczenie tor three months from September 1st to November 30th, 1931 ; and the newspaper Gazeta Olsztynska', published at Allenstein, for four weeks from July 29th to August 25th, 1931.

1. On July 26th, 1931, the Katolik published an article entitled “ A Decree on P a p er , referring to the recently published decree of the German Government regarding a tax on journeys abroad, which provided for an exemption from the tax in the case of the members of certain tourist associations, and stated that “ the removal of the restrictions imposed by this decree for th e mere purpose of ' health ' trips for rich people is causing great excitement among the working classes ”. On July 28th, 1931, the same paper published an article entitled “ The Rural Population is laying in G oods ” , in which the following sentence occurred: — 127 —

“ The purchase of goods in large quantities proves that the people who have saved any money have lost their faith in the Government’s assurances that German currency is in no danger and that the present state of affairs is merely a temporary crisis

The Oberfirasident of the Province of Upper Silesia thereupon suspended the K atolik by an order of July 29th, 1931, as th e statements created an impression that the measures taken bv the Government of the Reich to pro tect the currency in the interest of the entire nation were not serious, and were unjustly and onesidedly directed against certain sections of the population ; the statements were calculated, especially at the present time, to create dangerous unrest among the population, to incite the workmen against the other classes and against the Government, and thus to endanger public security and order.

The appeal made against this decision was rejected by the supreme court, which also came to the conclusion that the Katolik had obviously intended by its statements to create bad feeling and excitement among the poorer classes of the population. The supreme court further pointed out that newspapers representing all shades of opinions had endeavoured in this period of severe economic depression to show that German currency was in no danger in view of the steps taken by the Government of the Reich and the Board of the Reichsbank ; the Katolik was the only paper which had stated that the population had lost its faith in the Government's assurances regarding currency conditions.

2. The periodical Zjednoczenie made the following statement on August 15th, 1931 :

“ The emergency decrees have proved to be nonsense; the German people, which has lost all restraint, is not one that understands how to live on its own work and efforts, but is always imagining that other nations must support it, to their own disadvantage and for the good of Germany. The financial position of Germany is not so black as it is painted, and it may be assumed that this is merely a plan to avoid paying war debts. "

The prohibition order issued by the Oberprasident of the Province of Upper Silesia stated that these remarks were calculated at the present time to create dangerous unrest among the population, especially in the frontier territory of the Province of Upper Silesia, in which two languages were spoken. In particular, the malicious and disparaging remarks against Germany —e.g., the “ German people, which has lost all restraint and does not understand how to live on its own work ”—helped to stir up national enmity among the dual-language population, thus creating unrest and endangering public security and order. Moreover, the remarks were calculated to create wrong impressions in neighbouring countries as to Germany’s position and the steps taken by the German Government, thus indirectly endangering public security and order in the frontier districts. No appeal was made against this prohibition.

3. The first article objected to in the Gazeta Olsztynska was published on July 16th, 1931, under the title “ Is this the Death Agony ? ” It refers first to the panic created among the German population by the closing of the Darmstâdter und Nationalbank, which it considers unjustified, because :

. the Government of the Reich, in closing German exchanges and banks, pursues the aim of exercising pressure on foreign financial circles on order to obtain easy loan conditions

After further developing this idea, the newspaper remarks :

“ The high stake for which Germany is playing is seriously injuring the economic life of the country ; the suspension of payments by the Danat Bank and the closing of the German banks for two days should not be regarded as an economic necessity, but only as a tactical move ; this alarm is merely a definite means of extortion and aims at obtaining reparation facilities and foreign loans; the financial collapse of the banking institutions is artificial ; the Darmstâdter Bank will again become sound and solvent, as soon as it receives ' a hint from above

A further article to which objection was taken—namely, “ Enough Dirt before the Door ”, of July 19th, 1931—says that “ the State machine of Germany is deeply sunk in the mire ", and cannot by its own efforts escape " from the morass of bankruptcy It adds that the Chancellor of the Reich is *' begging for mercy ” in Paris, and that the German Ministers are proceeding to London to request that Germany may be saved from the ultimate catastrophe”. Foreign countries, it said, would only help in return for guarantees; France and saw a big heap of dirt ”, which Germany must first clear away.

“ The Germans will not improve their position by maliciously looking for faults in other countries, but by finally beginning to clear away the filth at their own doors. ” — 128 —

T he Oberprasident of East Prussia rightly regarded each of the above articles as insulting and derogatory to the Government of the Reich, and also decided that the contents of the articles were calculated to endanger public security and order; the newspaper was thereupon suspended. The supreme court rejected the appeal made against the prohibition, and stated that the articles in question wilfully charged the Government of the Reich with unscrupulous and deceit­ ful operations towards its own people and foreign countries having business connections with Germany. Such statements were calculated to excite the German population, which was already suffering from the burdens of the crisis; they were, further, intended to be provocative and to incite political passions by the use of particularly insulting expressions to opponents. These actions endangered public security and order, and justified the prohibition which had been issued.

4. When the printing works of the Gazeta Olsztynska were visited by the municipal police at Allenstein on August 13th, 1931, it was found that a document “ O Przystosci gospodarcza ludu polskiego ” had been printed there. The local police assumed that this was intended to replace the newspaper which had been prohibited, and therefore placed about 2,500 copies of this document under temporary police security, reporting the matter to the Regierungspràsident at Allenstein for his decision. The latter, in an order dated August 19th, 1931, instructed the local police to release the copies of this document without delay, as their assumption had been erroneous. The copies were thereupon released on August 22nd, 1931.

[Translation.] Appendix 24.

E x t r a c t s f r o m t h e P o l is h M i n o r i t y P r e s s .

1. Dziennik Berlipski, of January 10th, 1930: “ The facts show that it is a fundamental mistake to trust the Germans. It is not in their character to keep their promises. ”

2. N arod, of Herne, of June 6th, 1930: “ A person of Polish origin and language who says that he is a German is abnormal and weak-minded and should be immediately placed under guardianship

3. Gazeta Olsztynska, of March 23rd, 1930: “ Poles do not buy up land belonging to Germans, but Germans force their land on the Poles because they have evidently^ no confidence in the honesty of their own race. ”

4. The same paper wrote, on October 23rd, 1930: “ German capital is working against us in order to injure the Polish people and to rob them of their means of existence. ”

5. The same paper wrote, on January 28th, 1932: " If the Polish people propose to take advantage of their rights and open a Polish school, heaven and earth are set in movement and permission is not granted. The janissaries of the renegades are let loose on the Polish people in order to prevent us from carrying out our intentions. ”

6. Mazur, of Ortelsburg, March 16th, 1932: " . . An important Polish newspaper in Poland wrote: * The Polish people must ruthlessly close German schools in Poland one after the other until the German Government makes good the injustice inflicted on the and gives a network of Polish schools to the whole of Masuria. ' Think of this, you German national agitators! The German schools in Poland will be only saved from destruction when every Masurian village can open a Polish school. "

7. In the same number of Mazur the following sentence occurs:

" Will there be no end to the reign of foolishness—that is to say, to the g o v e r n m e n t o f our people by foreigners ? There is no doubt that it must come to an end. ”

* * * — 129 —

[Translation.] Appendix 25.

St a t e m e n t b y the Entire German Population (from the German Nationals to the Social Democrats) in the Ost-Deutscher Heimatdienst, at Allenstein, o n February 8th, 1932.

The Prussian Minority Schools Ordinance, in spite of the criticism levelled against it from many sides, will be faithfully observed by the population of the East Prussian frontier territory as valid law. In the same way, our frontier population show complete comprehension for the cultural aspirations of their Polish fellow-citizens, in so far as such aspirations would really appear to be justified by actual requirements. This fundamental attitude of our population presupposes great self-restraint and tolerance in fare of the constant persecution and oppression to which Germans in Poland are subject. Consideration must be given to the close personal and family relationships which still exist between Germans on both sides of the frontier, particularly in the Kreis of Neidenburg, from which the Soldau area was separated against the wishes of the population. The population of the former plebiscite area of East Prussia expects the competent authorities to apply the rights granted to Polish cultural aspirations with the loyalty and generosity customary in Germany, although experience shows that this German example will not induce the Polish authorities to refrain from evading the internationally guaranteed provisions for the maintenance of German culture and from interpreting and applying those regulations to the prejudice of the German population in Poland. On the other hand the population of Masuria and Ermeland must strongly urge the authorities to take rapid and effective action against the abuse of the Prussian Minority School Ordinance by the Polish organs. Such abuse is to be found in the opening and maintenance of ' dwarf ’ schools for which the need cannot be justified and, more particularly, in the constantly recurring attem pts to apply pressure with a view to creating Polish schools artificially in places where there is no Polish population and where such aspirations must rightly be regarded by the population as an attempt to disturb peace and order and as a provocation. This applies in general to recent Polish attem ps to found schools in Masurian villages, and wehave no hesitation in stating that the incidents at Jedwabno are to be explained by the pardonable excitement and exasperation of the frontier population at such an abuse of the Prussian minority law by the Polish population. The East Prussian frontier population, which is still prepared to make the greatest sacrifices for its German culture and to maintain order in spite of the unrest created by the Poles, is entitled to demand that the Government should take such steps as will prevent the Poles in future from creating harmful incidents which, from a political point of view, are to be deplored.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 26.

Polish Attempts to influence Persons legally responsible for the Education o f C h i l d r e n .

1. Highly interesting material with regard to Polish attempts to influence persons legally responsible for the education of children will be found in the cases of the teachers, M arjan Karaskiewicz an d J a n Bauer, which are dealt with in A p p en d ix 6 (b) and its Sub-Annex and in A ppendix 6 (f), and in the case of Pakalski, which is dealt with in A p p en d ix 8 (j). From the criminal proceedings against Bauer, which are dealt with in A p p en d ix 6 (f), the following further particulars may be cited in this connection : The witness Pela, from Oslau-Damerow, who formerly sent his children to the Polish minority school, stated on oath that he had received a loan from the Bank Ludowy in Biitow of 70 RM., a loan of 120 RM. from the Polish teacher Labon, in Oslau-Damerow, and another of 200 RM. from the Polish Schools Association in Berlin. He had been told in writing that he need not repay the 200 RM. from the Polish Schools Association. The correspondence on the matter was read in court. The evidence in the proceedings against Bauer further shows that, in connection with the propaganda for the Polish minority school in the Kreis of Bütow, the parents of the school­ children were told that only Poles could be true believers of the Church, and only those who sent their children to the Polish school would go to heaven : those who sent them to the German school would go to hell. A woman whose children do not go to the Polish minority school was told by Poles, when attending a funeral at the Catholic churchyard, that she had no business there. — 1 3 0 —

2. In the criminal proceedings in court against Cysewski and others (see A p p en d ix 8 [n]), Labon, the teacher of the Polish minority school in Oslau-Damerow, a Polish subject, to whoiu reference has already been made, admitted that the interest of the people in the Polish minority school had been stimulated by occasional presents to the children attending— e.g., watches knives and forks, and the like—at their confirmation. The funds for these presents were derived from Polish Associations.

3. In Flatow, in the presbytery of the parish priest Domanski, Chairman of the Association of Poles in Germany, is a branch of the “ Rolnik ”, of which the priest’s sister is the head. A farmer who had been lent 1,200 RM. in 1930 by this branch wished to pay his interest shortly before the Polish school in Zakrzewo was founded. The sister of the priest Domanski then told him he must pay back the money at once, if he did not send his children to the minority school. When the farmer would have nothing to do with this suggestion, he was told he must in that case pay 14 per cent instead of 11 per cent, which he was paying at the time. It was only thanks to his obtaining the money from elsewhere that he was able to repay the Polish bank and free himself from its economic fetters.

4. Paul Stachnik of Zakrzewo deposed as follows: In October ^1930, the Chairman of the Polish Parents’ Advisory Board, Stanislaw Kulpa of Zakrzewo came to him and urged him to send his children to the Polish school. He said that if Stachnik would do this, he would find it easier to obtain a relief grant : he (Kulpa) was on the communal council and would see that the grant went through. Stachnik added that he send his children to the Polish school in October 1930, but took them away again after six months, for the reason that for months on end they were given no instruction in German. Mme. Marja Stachnik gave evidence to the effect that on April 1st, 1931, Kulpa and M. Cezerski, of Flatow, who is at the head of the minority schools in the Kreis, visited her house in the absence of her husband. M. Cezerski asked her why her children had been taken away from the Polish school. She answered that the reason was because they did not learn German there. Cezerski then said she and her husband would do well to reconsider the matter: there was a rich Easter egg-coming which would put m atters right again. He would call again. Kulpa added that they should stop supporting the German cause, and take their children away from the German school. If they did that, the effect would be that one German teacher would be dispensed with. They were entitled not only to have Polish teachers and Polish schools, but also Polish judges, to enable them to continue the struggle for their rights. Mme. Stachnik states that she has frequently been pestered in the matter. In the end, she asked the authorities to protect her from further attempts by these gentlemen to influence her. 5. The above-mentioned Paul Stachnik made the following statement on oath: On March 19th of last year, his wife was asked in confession by the parish priest Domanski, in the church at Zakrzewo, whether she had a German prayer-book in her possession. She replied that she had a Polish prayer-book. The priest then said she must certainly be a “ German ”, because she sent her children to a German school : he said she ought to send at least one child to the Polish school. When the priest asked her who was responsible for her children having been taken away from the Polish school, she replied that she could do nothing in the matter. On this, Domanski remarked: “ It is too bad that you should have a husband who sends his children to the German school ”. On March 21st, of last year, Domanski sent the nursing sister of the village to his (Paul Stachnik’s) wife and asked her to send her children on the following Sunday for a photograph in the infant school. The priest then again took occasion to question Mme. Stachnik about her children’s school attendance, saying, amongst other things: “ People who send their children to the German school will have to clear out of the commune After this, Paul Stachnik was given notice by his landlord Mielke, a mason in Zakrzewo, as from April 1st, 1 9 3 1 , the latter acting clearly under the priest’s influence. On March 24th, of this year, he (Paul Stachnik) was pestered in the same way as his wife by the priest Domanski, in the course of his Easter confession. The priest asked him why he had taken his children away from the Polish minority school. When he answered, “ B eca u se they were not getting any German teaching ”, the priest asked him whether he believed his own children rather than his parish priest. He (Stachnik) replied that he saw all the homework which the children did for the school, and he never found any of it in the German language or in German characters. Thereupon, the priest again insisted that this could not be his reason : he must have been talked round by somebody. When Stachnik denied this, saying it was he who had to decide about his own children, the priest rebuked him saying: “ What kind of a man are you? You are worse than a Bolshevik : You don’t want to get used to speaking Polish. Are you a heretic, or a Communist, or a Social Democrat ?” In the end the priest a sk ed him to call at his house soon to talk the matter over again. From further evidence taken with Mme. Stachnik, it appears that the priest Domanski at a later date actually refused to hear her confession, because he was angry with her for telling her husband of the conversation which had taken place in the confessional. — 131 —

6. Anton Dorsch, a farmer, of Zakrzewo, deposed that at the beginning of 1931, Kulpa interviewed him on the subject of his daughter’s school attendance. The priest also asked him whether he could not manage to send his child to the Polish school.

7. According to the deposition of Paul Tessner, farmer, of Zakrzewo, Kulpa and theorganist, C ylinski, endeavoured to induce him or his wife to send their child to the Polish school. The p riest also put the same point to him with emphasis and let it be seen that, if he did not comply, his land, which he rented from Cylinski, might be taken from him.

8. Thomas Bankert, of Zakrzewo, formerly a miner, deposed as follows : In December 1930, he applied in writing to the Kreis Welfare Office for a grant. Before his application was settled, Stanislaw Kulpa visited him and advised him to send his children to the Polish school, as he would undoubtedly get a higher grant if he did, as well as other advantages. Some days later, he was called to see the head of the commune, who recommended him to discuss the question of his child’s school attendance again with Kulpa.

9. Karl Osigus, farmer, of Piassutten, received a visit in the late autumn of 1931 from the Polish teacher Bônigk employed by the Polish Catholic School Association. Bônigk endeav­ oured to induce him to send his children to the Polish school, which Osigus declined to do. Bônigk on this occasion told Osigus he had heard the latter’s daughter was anxious to get married, and offered him money from the Polish bank to defray the costs of the wedding. Osigus declined to accept the money, saying that he would get the money, if he needed it, from a G erm an savings bank. Some days later, the teacher Bônigk, in company with the teacher Lane, who has since died (on March 1st of this year), again endeavoured to get Osigus to send his children to the Polish school. In this connection he said, according to Osigus’s deposition, th at if his children attended the Polish school, they would be able later to go to a Polish training college and get posts as teachers in Masuria. East Prussia would, in any case, shortly be incor­ porated in Poland, and it would then be to his (Osigus’s) advantage if his children had attended the Polish school, or words to that effect.

10. About the middle of November 1930, Wilhelm Stank, farmer, of Piassutten, was summoned to the Polish minority school in Piassutten, where he met the Polish teachers Bônigk and Lane, referred to above. Bônigk blamed him for having instituted proceedings against another farmer for repayment of a loan, and urged him to withdraw the case, as he could get the money from the Polish bank. In that case, however, he must undertake to send his children to the Polish school. Lane at the same time pointed out to him what a fine room the Polish schoolroom was, and added that it was only a short distance for the children to go to school, and that at Christmas they would be given presents, the girls getting shoes and a dress, and the boys shoes and a suit of clothes. Stank indignantly rejected these overtures. The above deposition was made by Stank to the Landrat.

11. The teacher Lane further visited the farmer, Jerosch, of Piassutten, in company with the Polish agitator Habandt of Ortelsburg, who has since been sentenced to one month’s imprisonment for making accusations knowing them to be false. This was shortly before the opening of the Polish school in Lonk, and the two made the attempt to induce Jerosch to send his children to the Polish school. Lane and Habandt repeatedly stated that the children would be given books and writing material free of charge. The evidence in Jerosch’s case was taken by the Landrat’s Office in the Kreis of Ortelsburg.

12. In the summer of 1930 vigorous Polish propaganda in favour of the Polish school was set on foot in the village of Skaibotten in the Kreis of Allenstein. The Polish agents were so insistent that one farmer’s wife lamented: “ Every day I say a paternoster that I may be out when the Polish agents come The persons generally visited were those needing money for paying their debts or building. They were promised loans on favourable terms if they would undertake to send their children to the Polish school. Johann Gnatowski, a fruiterer, and Franz Makoller, shoemaker, accepted such loans. The feeling against the agents was so great that the inhabitants threatened to do them an injury, and the Landjâger had to intervene to protect them from violence.

13- In the autumn of 1930, the Polish kindergarten teacher in Altmark in the Kreis of Stuhm endeavoured by material inducements to get the unemployed workman Mross to send his two children to the Polish school. She said that, if he would do this, he would get work on the estate of the Polish landowner at Gross-Waplitz. The estate management at-Gross- Waplitz also promised him the lease of a piece of land. Mross thereupon transferred his children to the minority school.

1 — 132 —

14- In October 1929, the Pohsh teacher Allery of Gross-Waphtz endeavoured in every possible manner to get parents whose children still attended the German school to send them to the minority school. He visited parents in their homes, and told them it was their national duty to send their children to the Polish school. He had the vigorous support in these efforts of Ruczkowski, a workman, of Gross-Waplitz.

15. On December 3rd, 1930, the Pohsh Secretary Golisch, in company with the Chairman of the Pohsh Association, Ruczkowski, of Gross-Waplitz, made a house to house canvass foi the Pohsh school. In the course of their propaganda they referred to the coming Christmas and promised the parents that those children who were prepared to attend the Pohsh school at Easter should have the same presents at the 1930 Christmas as the other children already attending the Pohsh school.

16. On July 24th, 1929, Countess Sierakowska, the wife of the well-known Polish leader, of Gross-Waplitz, visited the infant school in Honigfelde, gave presents to the children, and told them to be diligent, so that later they would not find the instruction at the Polish school so hard.

17. In Koniglich-Neudorf the minority school has been in existence since June 22nd, 1930. Immediately after his arrival, the Polish teacher Lujka, together with the landowner Smolir ski, went from house to house to canvass for it.

18. In Mirahnen, the Polish agitator Smohnski endeavoured, in the spring of 1931, to obtain the support of the parents for the creation of a minority school. The workmen were threatened with dismissal, but the agitation was unsuccessful.

19. The Pohsh kindergarten teacher, Marja Wroblewski, of Neumark, endeavoured to induce the children of the workman Ruczkowsk i to attend the Pohsh instruction. This she admitted on evidence.

20. The Pohsh teachers, Bônigk and Gebel, conducted a vigorous agitation on behalf of the minority school in Honigfelde on its establishment in the summer of 1929. They visited the parents in their homes and threatened them in various ways that they would be brought into court if they had declared in writing in favour of the Pohsh school and later failed actually to send their children there.

21. The schoolboy, Franz Olschewski, of Honigfelde was rem oved on Novem ber 23rd of last year from the minority school to the German school. On the evening of the same day, the minority school teachers, Klisczynski and Lewandowski, visited the boy’s parents and induced them to send him back to the Pohsh school.

22. On August 19th, 1929, a minority school was opened in Pestlin. Each child was paid 8 RM. to get the necessary Pohsh schoolbooks. Poor children were promised free clothing, and gifted children were to receive free education at a Pohsh university.

23. In September 1930, Mme. von Donimirska, of Klein-Ramsen, endeavoured to influence the mothers of the school district of Pestlin, through the Polish Women's Union “ Kinga ”, to send their children to the minority school in Pesthn. She promised the women to give new clothes to all children who were prepared to attend the minority school for three years.

24. On May 25th, 1930, the Polish teacher Bônigk, together with the Polish agent Dorsch, conducted vigorous propaganda among the workmen in Micherowo on behalf of the minority school in Pestlin. The two went from house to house, and endeavoured to induce the parents to send their children to the Pohsh school. Each child was to receive a present. At the outset, nine children’s names were entered for the school; but these were later withdrawn, owing to the bad condition of the road leading to the Pohsh school. Thereupon, the teacher Bônigk promised to approach the Pohsh landowner, von Janta-Polczyfiski, to arrange for the children to be driven daily to the minority school.

25. In July 1931, the Pohsh secretary Golish promised the parents of Cygus 50 RM. for each child, if they would apply for the creation of a minority school.

26. Golisch also visited the families of the workmen Umerski, Brandt, Wiewald, Rafalski and Nawrotzki, in Cygus, on July 9th, 1931, to obtain their support for the Polish m inority school He approached them in the usual way, promising a complete set of clothing and free schoolbooks. Only the estate employees Brandt and Umerski, however, allowed th e m s e lv e s to be convinced. The other workmen agreed, from fear of dism issal, to send their children to the Polish school; but the children themselves refused to go, and asked their parents to leave them in the German school. — 1 3 3 —

27. From a deposition made to Schulrat Olbrich on November 16th, 1931, it appears that the Polish secretary Golish visited Mme. Pogorzalski of Kollosomp on August 7th, 1931, and on a number of occasions before that as well, and promised her a potato plot, clothing for her children and work for her daughter if she would send her children to the Polish school.

28. According to a statement made on oath, which is in the hands of the authorities, the teachers Stephan Bentsch of the minority school in Blankwitt asked all present at a singing lesson for young persons and adults in the minority school on April 23rd, 1931, to bring over six to eight more children from the German school to the minority school. He promised that jl Rozinski, of Flatow, would pay 50RM. to anyone who succeeded in getting children for the m inority school. Bentsch asked the meeting to treat the matter as strictly confidential, as he would be put across the frontier at once if the authorities were to hear about it.

29. In connection with the agitation for the minority school, in Krojanke, the families of Mirr and Placzek and Mme. Stachnik, who are not well off, were approached. In return for their consent to send their children to the Polish minority school, Mirr and his four children were given free lodging in the Polish school building, while Placzek became school porter and Mme. Stachnik became the teacher’s housekeeper.

30. A farmer in East Prussia who is not a Pole, having fallen into financial difficulties to such an extent that his property was threatened with distraint, accepted a loan of 1,000 RM. from a Polish bank at 6 per cent interest on mortgage, at the same time undertaking to send his children to the Polish school. He would be glad now to bring them back to the German school, but is afraid that his loan will be at once called in if he does.

31. In another case in East Prussia, a married couple deposed that they had received a mortgage loan at 6 per cent from a Polish bank, in connection with which they had to agree to send their children to the Polish school. When later they saw that the children would lose their knowledge of the German language there, they wanted to bring them back to the German school. As however they are not in a position to repay the loan, they are compelled against their will to leave the children in the Polish school.

32. As a result of perpetual arguments and promises of presents, Mme. Gorski, wife of a landowner of Neumark, induced the wife of the cowman Umalski to take her two children from the German school and send them to the minority school without the knowledge of her husband. When the husband heards of this, he brought the children back to the German school. Thereupon Gorski threatened Mme Umalski that it would be “ the worse for her ”, if she did not send the children back to the Polish school.

33. Paul Prass, mason, of Dietrichswalde, in the Administrative District of Allenstein, was sentenced on December 18th, 1931, to a fine of 50 RM. for insulting a Polish minority school­ teacher. As he left the court in Allenstein, a gentleman came up to him and asked him: “ And will you be able to pay the 50 RM. ? ” Prass answered : “ That’s my business Upon which the gentleman answered : “ You send your children to the Polish school and we’ll pay the money for you.” According to Prass’s deposition before the Landrat of the Kreis of Allenstein, the gentle­ man who made this suggestion was the secretary of the Bartsch Polish Catholic School Association in Allenstein.

* * *

[Translation.] Appendix 27.

Incidents at Gross-Dembowitz and Jedwabno in the Kreis of Neidenburg.

In the winter of 1931, Polish propagandists turned their attention to the Masurian Kreis of Neidenburg (administrative district of Allenstein) and, in particular, to the Jedwabno area. The population of that area soon learned of the Polish activities at Gross-Dembowitz Narthen, Schuttchen, Jedwabno and other villages in this Kreis; they often saw the " Polish motor­ car ”; they also knew that the tenant of a small room of 4x4 metres had been offered 30 RM. per month for the use of this room as a school at Gross-Dembowitz ; it was commonly said that the ten children alleged to belong to the Polish minority had only been won over by a payment on the part of the Poles of 50 Rpfg. per child per day. The feeling among the population became more excited from day to day. On the evening of December 10th, 1931, at Gross-Dembowitz, snowballs were thrown at the motor-car with the Polish agitators by persons whose identity could not be discovered. on the same evening, several windows were broken by unknown persons in the house p e landowner Posny, Polish agent at Gross-Dembowitz. In connection with this incident, osny went to Olschewski, the Gemeindevorsteher, in the morning of December nth, 1931. — 134 —

H e did not find Olschewski at home, but saw his sons, whom he accused, without any reason of having broken his windows. As Posny was unduly noisy and, when requested to leave thé room, refused to do so, he was forced out of the house by the brothers Olschewski and received some injuries. In reporting this incident, the Pohsh Press said that " the old man Posny had been half-killed ”. On the next day, December 12th, 1931, the Polish agitators Bartsch and Bonigk, together with Jankowski, editor of the Gazeta Olstynska, drove to Gross-Dembowitz in order to inspect and report on the damage. On their return journey they stopped at the Hotel Welskop at Jedwabno. Their stay of several hours became known, especially as they spoke Polish part of the time and the inn was full of people. When leaving, ther German chauffeur, Salewski who was attending to the motor while the other three had already taken their seats, was suddenly attacked and injured by blows from sticks and knives; he has since quite recovered. An unsuccessful effort was also made to overturn the motor-car. Energetic attempts were immediately made by the police to identify the offenders. Two citizens of Jedwabno—namely, Demitrowitz (butcher) and Sawitzki (blacksmith)—were suspected. The investigations instituted by the Public Prosecutor at Allenstein were conducted on the spot by the competent officials on January 8th and 9th, 1932, in the Hotel Welskop at Jedwabno, and gave the sam e result. The Public Prosecutor then decided to arrest Demitro­ witz and Sawitzki provisionally, in order to prevent anything being done to interfere with the course of justice. The news of the arrest spread through the village like wild-fire. When the arrested men were taken by two policeriien through the village to their homes in order to arrange their affairs , they were joined by an excited crowd. It was impossible to take the prisoners back immediately, as a motor-car could not be hired on account of the feeling among the village population. Thé crowd before the hotel increased and became more excited. When the Public Prosecutor refused to release the arrested men, excesses were committed by the crowd. It was only after police reinforcements arrived that the prisoners could be conveyed to Neidenburg. On account of these excesses, summary proceedings were taken against 105 citizens of Jedwabno, who were charged with a “ breach of the public peace ”, in some cases even with “ grave breach of the public peace The proceedings lasted three weeks and ended with the acquittal of most of the defendants, thirteen persons being sentenced. The case caused a great sensation and widespread unrest among the Masurian population, who thought that they were treated more harshly and severely than members of the Polish minority. The general ill-feeling and exasperation were increased when, shortly afterwards, the two men (Demitrowitz and Sawitzki) were, in the absence of proof, acquitted of the charge of inflicting bodily injury on the chauffeur. This acquittal led the population to the erroneous conclusion that the suspicion against these two Germans had not been well-founded from the outset, and they regarded this as a further proof that members of the majority were treated with unusual harshness as compared with the minority.

[Translation.] Appendix 28.

R e p o r t b y t h e O berprasident o f t h e P r o v in c e o f U p p e r S il e s ia , of February 25TH, 1932.

From November 21st to December 22nd, 1931, a course of lectures for persons belonging to the Polish minority in Germany was given at Rabka, near Zakopane, in the Pohsh Tatra. The following persons took part: 1. Bawohl Josef, Nakel, Kreis Oppeln. 2. Bawohl Franz, Nakel, Kreis Oppeln. 3. Kulik Paul, Mahno, Kreis Oppeln. 4. Krafczik Norbert, Mikultschütz, Kreis Beuthen, Gltickaufstr. 4. 5. Dobis Johannes, Grudschiitz, Kreis Oppeln. 6. Papiorek Thomas, Friedrichswille, Kreis Berthen, Upper Silesia, Waldstr. 1. 7. Witzak Reinhold, Beuthen, Upper Silesia, Scharleyerstr. 68. I. 8. Ciupka Franz, Gleiwitz, Kieferstâdtlerstr. 64. 9. Grzibiella Wilhelm, Gleiwitz, Passonstr. 20. 10. Gorzolka Viktor, Laband, Kreis Gleiwitz, Waldenaustr. 17. 11. Zlotos Josef, Hindenburg, Uferstr. 2. 12. Burdzik Erich, Hindenburg-Zabarze, Wiesenstr. 17. 13. Freier Norbert, Miechowitz, Kreis Beuthen, Feldstr. 19. 14. Zyzik Franz, Sandowitz, Kreis Gross-Strehhtz. 15. Gatzka Vinzent, Markowitz, Kreis Ratibor. 16. Lucyna Alfons, Budzisk, Kreis Ratibor. 17. Janetzki Wilhelm, Rosenberg, Landsbergerchaussee (Rolnik). 18. Jatzkowski Bernhard, Gross-Bertung, Kreis Allenstein, East Prussia. 19. Posny Friedrich, Gross-Dembowitz, Kreis Neidenburg, East Prussia. 20. Bôhm Anton, Dietrichswalde, Kreis Allenstein, East Prussia. 21. Tolksdorf Josef, Schônfelde, Kreis Allenstein, East Prussia. 22. Kowalewski Josef, Gross-Bertung, Kreis Allenstein, East Prussia. 23. Cisek Stefan, Zakrzewo, Kreis Flatow, Grenzmark. — 135 —

On November 20th, 1931, all the persons from West Upper Silesia taking part in the course arrived at Kattowitz under the leadership of M Kawik, of Oppieln, Chairman of the Pohsh Catholic Youth Society. They were there joined by the six persons from East Prussia, who had arrived previously. All the participants were received by the Voivod Grazynski and by the Starost of Sehwientochlowitz and were entertained on behalf of the Voivodship.

T h e Voivod said, in his speech, that he was glad to see such sturdy Pohsh youth from “ the part of Poland not yet freed ”, who were desirous of fighting for their fathers and for a untied Poland*. The Starost, in his speech of welcome, pointed out that the students should not regard themselves as members of a Pohsh minority in Germany, but should act as Poles towards Poland, since West Upper Silesia was not Germany, but Poland. Under the direction of Professor I on, well known in connection with Polish broadcasting, the students then proceeded to Rabka and were lodged in a villa specially prepared for them in the watering place of Rabka Zdroj.

Instruction was given daily by six teachers from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., with short intervals. It mainly included the organisation and direction of Pohsh societies, oratory, sport and the management and production of theatrical performances, together with lectures on politics. In the last subject, each student had to give three lectures of two hours each during the course.

The director of the course was Professor Czeslaus Zagorski, of Warsaw. He was in charge of the pohtical teaching, which was regarded as the principal subject.

Other teachers were: Ceslaus Drosdowski, of Scharley-Piekar, Eastern Upper Silesia, teacher at the Pohsh gymnasium there; Karl Scholtys, teacher at the Pohsh gymnasium in Scharley-Piekar, Eastern Upper Silesia; Stanislaus Blasinski, of Kattowitz, head of the Westmarkenverein Kattowitz; Stanislaus Severinski, of Warsaw; Professor Ligon, of Kattowitz; Kuliga, teacher, of Kattowitz.

Professor Zagorski discussed in detail the pohtical situation in Germany and gave prominence to what he considered to be the unhappy position of the Pohsh minority.

In his lectures, Zagorski constantly stated that Germany did not observe the existing treaties, and that the Polish minority suffered as a result. The members of the Polish minority were therefore morally bound to combine in Pohsh organisations, since Germany could only be compelled by joint action to observe the existing treaties.

Detailed lectures were given on the movement to the right in Germany and, in particular, on the Stahlhelm and N.S.D.A.P. It was stated that these organisations were the greatest enemies of Poland and must be combated with the severest measures. Incidents which had taken place in East Prussia and the Grenzmark, together with the case of the Pohsh minority teacher Karaskiewicz at Wendzin were fully discussed, and the students had to give long lectures on them from the Pohsh point of view. In cases where members of the Pohsh minority were alleged to be oppressed, great importance was attached to the matter being reported immediately to the Polish authorities. During the course, sham incidents were frequently acted (such as attacks on the Pohsh minority by the Stahlhelm, etc.), and in one case this took place at night in the fields. The students had to proceed to the spot immediately, establish the fact that the Poles had been illegally attacked, and transmit a report describing the wretched position of the Polish minority. A few days later this fictitious attack would be used as the subject of a lecture, followed by a full discussion. Outsiders were not allowed to take part in these specially prepared incidents. Particular prominence was given in the course to the treatment of the Free City of . Professor Zagorski endeavoured to prove that Danzig had always been Pohsh territory. He stated that a number of the objects of interest in Danzig were Pohsh buildings. Zagorski impressed on the students from East Prussia that their lectures should always take the view that Danzig was Pohsh territory and must therefore again be included in Poland. Danzig was Poland’s access to the sea and must remain in her possession.

In other lectures, Zagorski said that Pomereha also was and must remain a part of Poland. The teacher Drosdowski referred in his lectures to the necessity of forming Polishassociations. He pointed out that the Poles in West Upper Silesia should only meet in Pohsh youth and sport societies. He attached particular importance to the encouragement of Polish smgiof. and the Polish theatre. This should be the main object of the leaders in order to counter the monotony of life in the associations. There should be Polish youth societies in every village in which Poles hved, for this was the only way to train the rising generation in their duties to their Polish Fatherland. Questions connected with Polish schools formed a further subject of instruction. Drosdowski endeavoured to show, by means of a text-book by Dr. Ludwig Regorowiscz, that the German minority m East Upper Silesia formed only a fraction of the entire population, and that in all districts the children wished to attend only Polish schools. In West Upper Silesia the condition — 136 — were reversed, as the majority of the population was compelled to be German and wished to have Polish schools. The Polish wishes were, however, frustrated by Hakatist German teache: and German authorities. The most sacred duty of the students in their own districts was to bring home to the people the necessity of opening Polish schools. The teachers Scholtys lectured on sport and the foundation of " Sokols Sport enabled the young men to prepare for their difficult task. A spirit of comradeship was most suitai i fostered by the sport associations. The Germans should be made to see the manly spirit existing in the Polish sport and “ Sokol" associations. In the lectures on ideology, Scholtys pointed out that the Polish youth should be brought up to idealism. The Polish national sentiment must be raised and must not be dependent materialism. Scholtys also gave instruction in the Polish language. The most odious statements were made in the lectures by the teacher Blasinski of Kattowitz He based his teaching on the book " Silesia—Past and Present ” published by the Westmarket verein. He devoted special attention to the article on “ The Polish Character of the Oppeln District of Silesia and its Polish Destiny The teacher Severinski lectured on Polish libraries and drew attention to various Polish authors. The Poles living in West Upper Silesia must, he said, be taught to take greater interest in the reading of Polish books. The students should endeavour to increase the number of Polish libraries since books were available. Professor Ligon gave several lectures on the necessity of developing the Polish theatre He pointed out that theatrical performances would awaken the minds of the Polish people and remind them of their Polish habits and customs. As it was difficult for their brothers living in W est Upper Silesia (which Professor Ligon called " unredeemed Poland ”) to pay for professional actors from Kattowitz, such theatrical performances should be arranged within the association? or independent theatrical groups should be formed. It was intended to found theatrical associations in East Upper Silesia in the same way as in Poland. The teacher Kuliga gave instruction in running and ski-ing, on which there is nothin to report. The final examination, which took place on December 22nd, 1931, was attended by a representative of the Pohsh Ministry of Education, the President of the Association of Poles, Wesolowski, of Oppeln, the Landrat of Schwientochlowitz and M. Kozur, Governor of K attow itz. The representative of the Government made a short speech in which he stated that the students w ere to be regarded as emissaries of Poland, and were now under an obligation to work for Poland. The students should convey the greetings of the Polish Fatherland to th e P oles livin g in the Oppeln district of Silesia and say that the Fatherland would not forget its children in Germany. M. Wesolowski also made a short speech in which he informed the students that they would have a difficult but a grateful task in Germany. In connection with the election preparations for the Prussian Diet which would begin within a few weeks, they could show that they were good workers for the Polish cause, as they would find many opportunities of putting what they had learned in their mother country into practice.

[Translation.] Appendix 29.

D e a t h o f t h e T e a c h e r L a n c .

M. Lanc, teacher at the Pohsh minority school, died suddenly on March 1st of this year at Piassutten, in the administrative district of Allenstein. The Polish newspapers, publish' d in Poland, took advantage of the teacher's sudden death to describe it as the 1 brutal murder of a Polish teacher in Ermeland ” and a “ further astounding Prussian crime intended to destroy the Polish movement ”, The Cracow newspaper IUustrowany Kurjer Codzienny invented an “ attack by National Socialist storm troops ", and ascribed the death of the teacher to a brutal assault A particularly odious attitude was taken up by the Kattowitz newspaper Polska Zachodnia, which made the following remarks in No. 67 of March 7th, 1932: “ The Hakatist organisation of the Heimatdienst has sworn to destroy this first outpo; of the Polish private schools in East Prussia. The crusading assassins will not, however, succeed in hushing up this dreadful cnme. The body will be brought to Poland and a post mortem exam ination w ill tak e place here with a view to ascertaining the cause of death. — 1 3 7 —

" The entire Polish population in East Prussia has been deeply moved by the murder of M. Lanc. After the attack on the aged Polish leader Pozny at Gross-Dembowitz and on the Polish chauffeur Zaleski at Jedwabno, this dreadful new crime, committed against the person of the teacher of the only Polish private school in East Prussia, is a loud and dis­ quieting warning that Prussian Hakatism has decided by terrorism of all kinds to destroy every manifestation of Polish life in East Prussia. This last crime fills the cup of Polish patience to overflowing. Throughout the length and breadth of Poland a resolute protest must be made and such counter-measures must be taken as will compel the crusading assassins to stop their acts of terrorism. The reaction on the Polish side must, however, be very strong; otherwise the fanatical crusaders will murder all the Polish leaders in succession before our eyes, and suppress every spark of cultural life among our countrymen in Germany. “ We appeal to the pride of the entire people. We must no longer allow Prussian crimes to go unpunished. We must organise action for protecting our tortured countrymen. ” In actual fact the official investigations give the following result : The teacher Lanc, 31 years of age, who had been engaged at Piassutten, in the Kreis of Ortelsburg, at the Polish minority school since April 1931, was found dead in bed. The body was examined by a private doctor and the Kreis medical officer of Ortelsburg. There were no signs of a violent death. The Public Prosecutor therefore permitted the burial of the body. Lanc had been in bed for some days before his death on account of violent pains in the chest and difficulty in breathing. The cause of death was presumably consumption or possibly carbonmonoxide gas poisoning. There had been no brawls during the period in question at Piassutten nor had any persons been attacked. The sensational report on the “ brutal attack ” was thus invented from beginning to end except for the actual death of the teacher, so that a few days later the Polish Westmarken- w nin was obliged to deny this alarming statement. In the meantime the body was taken to Poland and a post mortem examination took place. The examination showed that the cause of Lane's death was carbonmonoxide gas poisoning.