Death Certificate Index - O'brien (July 1919-1921 & 1936-1939) 6/6/2015
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1891-1957, Record Group 85 New Orleans, Louisiana Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving at New Orleans, LA, 1910-1945
Records of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1891-1957, Record Group 85 New Orleans, Louisiana Crew Lists of Vessels Arriving at New Orleans, LA, 1910-1945. T939. 311 rolls. (~A complete list of rolls has been added.) Roll Volumes Dates 1 1-3 January-June, 1910 2 4-5 July-October, 1910 3 6-7 November, 1910-February, 1911 4 8-9 March-June, 1911 5 10-11 July-October, 1911 6 12-13 November, 1911-February, 1912 7 14-15 March-June, 1912 8 16-17 July-October, 1912 9 18-19 November, 1912-February, 1913 10 20-21 March-June, 1913 11 22-23 July-October, 1913 12 24-25 November, 1913-February, 1914 13 26 March-April, 1914 14 27 May-June, 1914 15 28-29 July-October, 1914 16 30-31 November, 1914-February, 1915 17 32 March-April, 1915 18 33 May-June, 1915 19 34-35 July-October, 1915 20 36-37 November, 1915-February, 1916 21 38-39 March-June, 1916 22 40-41 July-October, 1916 23 42-43 November, 1916-February, 1917 24 44 March-April, 1917 25 45 May-June, 1917 26 46 July-August, 1917 27 47 September-October, 1917 28 48 November-December, 1917 29 49-50 Jan. 1-Mar. 15, 1918 30 51-53 Mar. 16-Apr. 30, 1918 31 56-59 June 1-Aug. 15, 1918 32 60-64 Aug. 16-0ct. 31, 1918 33 65-69 Nov. 1', 1918-Jan. 15, 1919 34 70-73 Jan. 16-Mar. 31, 1919 35 74-77 April-May, 1919 36 78-79 June-July, 1919 37 80-81 August-September, 1919 38 82-83 October-November, 1919 39 84-85 December, 1919-January, 1920 40 86-87 February-March, 1920 41 88-89 April-May, 1920 42 90 June, 1920 43 91 July, 1920 44 92 August, 1920 45 93 September, 1920 46 94 October, 1920 47 95-96 November, 1920 48 97-98 December, 1920 49 99-100 Jan. -
An X-Ray of Chilean Right-Wing Attitudes Toward Jews, 1932–1940
chapter 3 Indifference, Hostility, and Pragmatism: an X-Ray of Chilean Right-Wing Attitudes toward Jews, 1932–1940 Gustavo Guzmán 1 Introduction Convened to discuss the issue of Jewish refugees, the Évian Conference (July 1938) raised two main positions in Chilean politics. While leftists and centrists sympathized with Jews, asking President Alessandri to increase their immigration quotas, rightists remained indifferent to the Jewish plight, reject- ing any attempt to expand their numbers. A leading voice in this regard was Conservative senator Maximiano Errázuriz Valdés, according to whom Chile did not need traders or intermediaries but farmers. “Sadly,” he said, “Jews are not farmers but traders who will come to compete [with our businessmen] and become intermediaries.” Additionally, echoing a discourse that was com- mon at the time in other countries as well, their religion made them “elements difficult to assimilate” and likely “to create a hitherto unknown ethnic prob- lem.” Indeed, the ultimate responsibility for Jew-hatred, he stressed, lay with “the Jews themselves,” as “they create problems where previously they did not exist.” Consequently, Errázuriz Valdés asked the government “to restrict as much as possible the arrival of Jews and not to increase their quotas.”1 Similarly, after Kristallnacht (November 1938), while the leftist and centrist press largely condemned the pogrom, speaking of “barbarism” and “savagery,”2 influential right-wing media such as El Mercurio and El Diario Ilustrado embraced a less sympathetic approach. Although it might be “painful from a human point of view,” El Mercurio stressed, “the reasons that led the German government to expel members of the Jewish race are not for Chileans to dis- cuss because they belong to the right of every nation to govern itself.”3 El Diario 1 Senado de Chile, Boletín de sesiones ordinarias 1938, vol. -
235 II.3. the Deepening Crisis: March 1938
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Ghent University Academic Bibliography 235 II.3. The Deepening Crisis: March 1938 – October 1938 1938 is always seen as a watershed in the persecution of the ‘Jews’1 as it was the year when geopolitical changes brought more ‘Jews’ under German rule and when antisemitic policies were substantially radicalized. Yet even before the Anschluss, the Nazis were becoming increasingly worried about the slow pace of Jewish emigration. Their own policies, combined with immigration restrictions elsewhere, had served to limit the numbers able to leave. At the same time, Nazi strategy itself was contradictory, with the ‘Jews’ being pressed to leave while simultaneously being stripped of the assets that would have made them acceptable immigrants in other countries. Nevertheless, individual emigration remained the Nazi strategy for making Germany judenfrei and in general, everything possible was done to hasten the emigration of the – albeit increasingly impoverished – ‘Jews’. A number of official instructions were issued to facilitate this. For example, the police record of Jewish emigrants could be ‘cleansed’ to make them more acceptable to countries of immigration. Professional qualifications that were in demand were also included on passports, and the Handwerkskammern were authorised to issue papers certifying the professional knowledge of Jewish emigrants.2 A partial solution to the fundamental contradictions in Nazi policy was found in more overt state violence and schemes for collective forced emigration that removed individual initiative or choice in destination. The latter element was tried at the beginning of 1938. -
Escape to Shanghai: 1938-1940
Flight to Shanghai, 1938-1940: The Larger Setting Avraham Altman and Irene Eber Between November 1938 and August 1939, approximately 20,000 Central European refugees, most of them Jews, landed in Shanghai. They had sailed on German, Italian, and Japanese ships and, in the short span of eight months, constituted a massive exodus. What, however, is the background to this phenomenon, and, moreover, why did it rapidly diminish after August 1939?1 In order to answer these questions, we must look at the larger setting within which this process took place—something that, until now, has not been investigated. The Background In 1933, when Hitler came to power, there were around 500,000 Jews in Germany and 185,000 in Austria.2 In contrast to the gradual pressure over several years that had been exerted on the Jews in Germany to leave the country, when Austria came under German rule in March 1938, the Jews were immediately and ruthlessly persecuted. By launching an organized terror campaign against them—confiscating their property, depriving them of all means of livelihood, and incarcerating Jewish men in concentration camps—the Nazis forced the Austrian Jews to 1This paper is part of a larger project on the Jewish communities in modern China under Japanese occupation. The authors wish to thank the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and its Truman Research Institute for their partial support of this research. Irene Eber thanks the J.K. Fairbank Research Center, Harvard University, where additional research was carried out in 1996-1997, and the Andover Newton Theological School where she was Visiting Judson Professor. -
British Appeasement 1936-1939: the Debate Between Parliament and the Public
University Libraries Lance and Elena Calvert Calvert Undergraduate Research Awards Award for Undergraduate Research 2017 British Appeasement 1936-1939: The Debate between Parliament and the Public Kylie D. Johnson College of Liberal Arts- History and Political Science, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/award Part of the Diplomatic History Commons, European History Commons, Military History Commons, Political History Commons, and the Public History Commons Repository Citation Johnson, K. D. (2017). British Appeasement 1936-1939: The Debate between Parliament and the Public. Available at: https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/award/31 This Research Paper is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by Digital Scholarship@UNLV with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Research Paper in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Research Paper has been accepted for inclusion in Calvert Undergraduate Research Awards by an authorized administrator of Digital Scholarship@UNLV. For more information, please contact [email protected]. British Appeasement 1936-1939: The Debate between Parliament and the Public Kylie Johnson Dr. Michelle Tusan Johnson 2 Following the Great War, the countries in Europe were wary of another devastating war plaguing the world. The years of fighting and the immense loss of life permeated the minds of the people of the world for decades. -
Thesis Shuang Wu
British Press Coverage of Nazi Antisemitism, 1933 - 1938 Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Shuang Wu, M.A. Graduate Program in History The Ohio State University 2018 Thesis Committee: Robin Judd, Adviser Jennifer Siegel Copyright by Shuang Wu 2018 !2 Abstract From Adolf Hitler’s seizure of power in March 1933 until the Kristallnacht in November 1938, the British press provided a comprehensive narrative concerning the anti-Jewish persecutions in Germany. The staff of the Times, the Daily Mail, the Manchester Guardian, the Financial Times, the Economist and the Spectator condemned the Jewish persecutions and expressed concern for the Jews in different degrees. When they discussed the Jewish refugees, they were aware of Britain’s national interests, and revealed their hesitation to accept the Jews through the press. A close examination of the reportage also shows that the editors and correspondents of these publications held different perspectives towards Nazi Germany, which influenced their narratives and attitudes towards the antisemitic events. !3ii Vita June 2011…………………………….High School Affiliated with Shanghai Jiao Tong University May 2016…………………………….B.A. History, University of Wisconsin-Madison Fields of Study Major Field: History iii!4 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………......ii Vita…………………………………………………………………………………………....iii Essay…………………………………………………………………………………………...1 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………..42 -
List of Documents
List of Documents 1 On 1 January 1938 Amalie Malsch writes to her son in the USA about waiting to emigrate 2 On 5 January 1938 Reichsführer SS Heinrich Himmler orders the expulsion of Soviet Jews from Germany 3 On 14 January 1938 the Munich Gestapo notes that Jewish Mischlinge with illegiti- mate children are not forbidden to meet with one other 4 On 19 January 1938 the director of the Reich Archives calls on the Reich Minister of theInteriortoforbidJewstousethearchives 5 On 27 January 1938 Luise Solmitz describes her daughter’s social exclusion 6 Neue Zürcher Zeitung, 27 January 1938: article on the economic restrictions placed on Jews and the consequences for their emigration prospects 7 Jüdisches Gemeindeblatt, 30 January 1938: article in which the Relief Association of German Jews promotes the emigration of women 8 On 30 January 1938 Rabbi Löwenstamm asks his colleague Max Dienemann for ad- vice on whether a child from a mixed marriage may be accepted into the Jewish faith 9 In January 1938 a fifth-year school pupil writes an essay on the subject of Jews 10 Israelitisches Familienblatt, 3 February 1938: article on the prospects for Jewish youth 11 Berliner Tageblatt, 3 February 1938: article about the Jews in Poland 12 On 13 February 1938 the Oberpräsident of East Prussia writes to the German Coun- cil of Municipalities to ask how to deal with Jewish female patients in the Regional Women’s Hospital 13 Neues Volk, February 1938: article about international antisemitism 14 On 2 March 1938 Luise Solmitz writes about discriminatory regulations -
& )-+ .16+41*6.21*/ 4+53215+ 62 (+40*1 *,,4+55.21 "'$$ "'%!
2.7 The international response to German aggression, 19331940 Conceptual understanding Key concepts Continuity Consequence Signifcance Key question Examine the international communitys response to German aggression. The international reaction to the actions o Germany, 1 93539, has been the subject o much criticism and debate amongst historians. A cartoon by David Low, Whats Czechoslovakia to me, anyway? As you read this next section, consider the 18 July 1938 options available to Britain and France at each stage o German expansion, and the extent to which the decisions that Britain and France took encouraged German aggression. What was the international reaction to German rearmament? As we have seen, there was sympathy in Britain towards Germanys desire to reverse certain aspects o the Treaty o Versailles. Following Germanys withdrawal rom the Disarmament Conerence and the League o Nations in 1 933 (see page 1 57) , Britain worked hard to get Germany back into the conerence. It proposed that Germany should be allowed to have an army o 200,000 (rather than the 1 00,000 stipulated in the Treaty o Versailles), that France should also reduce its army to 200,000, and that Germany should be allowed an air orce hal the size o the French air orce. However, the realization in 1 935 that Germany was introducing conscription and already had an air orce ended attempts by the British and French to bring Germany back into the League o Nations and to establish new conditions or rearmament. Germanys actions blatantly contravened the terms o the Treaty o Versailles. This was obviously a concern to the other powers, who could see that Germany was now catching up militarily. -
Panama Canal Record
texMMMiaxwMmn n n*gMM THE PANAMA CANAL VOLUME 3 ' ^ mi l iii rmTT~r i Gift ofthe Panama Canal Museum /-f3s (ff- L(^'J Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from Lyrasis IVIembers and Sloan Foundation http://www.archive.org/details/panamacanalr33193940isth THE PANAMA CANAL RECORD PUBLISHED MONTHLY UNDER THE AUTHORITY AND SUPER- VISION OF THE PANAMA CANAL AUGUST 15, 1939 TO JULY 15, 1940 VOLUME XXXIII WITH INDEX THE PANAMA CANAL BALBOA HEIGHTS, CANAL ZONE 1940 THE PANAMA CANAL PRESS MOUNT HOPE, CANAL ZONE 1940 For additional copies of this publication address The Panama Canal. Washington, D.C., or Balboa Heights, Canal Zone. Price of bound volumes, SLOO; for foreign postal delivery, $1.50. Price of current subscription, $0.50 a year, foreign, $1.00. THE PANAMA CANAL RECORD OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE PANAMA CANAL PUBLISHED MONTHLY Subscription rates, domestic, $0.50 per year; foreign, Jl.OO; address The Panama Canal Record, Balboa Heights, Canal Zone, or, for United States and foreign distribution. The Panama Canal, Washington, D. C. Entered as second-class matter February 6, 1918, at the Post Office at Cristobal, C. Z., under the Act of iVIarch 3, 1879. Certificate.—By direction of the Governor of The Panama Canal the matter contained herein is published as statistical information and is required for the proper transaction of the public business. Volume XXXIII Balboa Heights, C. Z., August 15, 1939 No. i Traffic Through the Panama Canal in July 1939 The total vessels of all kinds transiting the Panama Canal during the -
THE LONDON GAZETTE/1 JULY, 1938 4245 Lt
THE LONDON GAZETTE/1 JULY, 1938 4245 Lt. F. H. Anderson, K.O.S.B., is granted TERRITORIAL ARMY. the local rank of Capt. whilst empld. with Col. C. F. Liardet, C.BM D.S.O., T.D., the Aden Protectorate Levies; 2ist May to be Maj.-Gen. 23rd June 1938. (Sub- 1938. x 2nd Lt. H. H. Jones, late'Tank Corps, stituted, for the notifn. in the Gazette of 24th relinquishes the rank of and Lt. on enlist- June 1938.) ment into the T.A. 26th May 1938. COMMANDS AND STAFF. Maj.-Gen. C. F. Liardet, C.B., D.S.O., T.D., Terr. Armyi to be Comdr., The Lond. Div. (temp.). 23rd June 1938. (Substi- REGULAR ARMY RESERVE OF tuted for the notifn. in the Gazette of 24th OFFICERS. June 1938.) The undermentioned having attained the Maj. J. H. Boyd, R.E., Instr. in Search- age limit of liability to recall, cease to belong lights, ist Anti-Aircraft Div., from (Cl. DD) to the Res. of Off.:—. to be (Cl. Z). 6th June 1938. Capt. G. E. Thubron, N. Stafford R., to GENERAL LIST. be Bde. Maj., i66th (S. 'Lanes. & Cheshire) Col. (Hon. Maj.-Gen.) L. A. E. Price- Inf. Bde. i8th June 1938. Davies, V.C., C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O. (late ROYAL ARTILLERY. Inf.) {Gentleman-at-Arms). soth June 1938. Col..R. Luker, C.M.G., D.S.O. (late Inf.). 68th (S. Midland) Fd. Bde.—2nd Lt. R. A. ist July 1938. Crossley to be Lt. 7th May 1938. Col. R. T. -
Appendix a Senior Officials of the Foreign Office, 1936-381
Appendix A Senior Officials of the Foreign Office, 1936-381 Appointed * Rt. Hon. Anthony Eden, MC, MP (Sec retary of State for Foreign Affairs) 22 Dec. I935 Sir Robert Gilbert Vansittart, GCMG, KCB, MVO (Permanent Under-Secretary of State) I Jan. I930 * Viscount Cranborne, -MP (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State) 5 Aug. I935 Rt. Hon. the Earl of Plymouth (Parliamen tary Under-Secretary of State) I Sept. I936 Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan Wallace, MC, MP (Additional Parliamentary Under-Sec retary of State) 28 Nov. I935 * Halifax's appointment as Foreign Secretary announced 25 February 1938. * R. A. Butler's appointment as Parliamentary Under-Secretary announced 25 February 1938. Deputy Under-Secretaries of State Hon. Sir Alexander M.G. Cadogan, KCMG, CB I Oct. I936 Sir Lancelot Oliphant, KCMG, CB (Superin tending Under-Secretary, Eastern De partment) I Mar. 216 Appendix A 2I7 Appointed Assistant Under-Secretaries of State Sir George Augustus Mounsey, KCMG, CB, OBE I5 July I929 Sir Orme Garton Sargent, KCMG, CB (Superintending Under-Secretary, Central Department) I4 Aug. I933 Sir Robert Leslie Craigie, KCMG, CB I5 Jan. I935 Charles Howard Smith, CMG (Principal Establishment Officer) 22 Aug. I933 Sir Frederick G. A. Butler, KCMG, CB (Finance Officer) 22 Aug. Sir Herbert William Malkin, GCMG, CB, KC (Legal Adviser) I Oct. I929 William Eric Beckett, CMG (Second Legal Adviser) I Oct. Gerald Gray Fitzmaurice (Third Legal Adviser) 6 Nov. Montague Shearman, OBE (Claims Adviser) I Oct. Counsellors (in order rif appointment to Counsellors' posts) Charles William Orde, CMG I5 July I929 George Nevile Maltby Bland, CMG 14 Nov. -
Between Coercion and Cooperation: the Flick Concern in Nazi Germany Before the War
BETWEEN COERCION AND COOPERATION: THE FLICK CONCERN IN NAZI GERMANY BEFORE THE WAR L M. Stailbaumer Bkornsburg University ABSTRACT This study examines two pivotal events in the Flick Concern’s relations with the Nazi state: the manner in which it was coerced into supporting the estab lishment of the state-dominated Reichswerke Hermann Goring and the manner in which it cooperated with the state to fuffill its racial goal of “aryanizing” Jewish property; These two events, usually examined in isola tion, share in common the Nazi principle of usufructary (Nutzniesser) which gave the state the right to use private property as it saw fit and defined rela tions between industry and state. Scholars have often operated on the assumption that Nazi economic policy lacked any sort of ideological coherency and was a series of half-measures formulated to meet the exigencies of the moment and the demands of rearmament.1 They suggest that in the absence of ideological norms, the corporate elite of Germany took advantage, even manipulated, Nazi economic policies because ofthe state’s single-minded goal ofrearma ment and recovery from the Depression. Nazi economic ideology was founded on the principle that the economy must serve the political and social goals as defined by the state. The Nazis sought to create a fully integrated national community (¾lksgemein.ccbaft) in which only members of the don, defined in racial terms, belonged. As members ofthe national community; the state expected everyone to place the needs of the community before the needs of the indi vidual.2 This view is embodied in the concept of usufructary (Nutzniesser) which is defined “as the right to use (usufructum) property belonging to the people as a whole, while the state is under obligation to supervise this use.”3 Consequently, the Nazi economy was not anti-capitalist as such, but it was anti-liberal because the state progressively inter fered with free competition and imposed greater systems ofcontrol on private enterprise.