"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (173 page)

36.
Cf. Hitler’s working supper of June 24, 1942, in Picker,
Hitlers Tischgespräche
, 190 (see note 2 above).

37.
Letter from the chief of the SIPO and SD of September 18, 1941, to the RMuChdRkzlei regarding the status of the head of the civil administration in the East. Heydrich declared therein that the heads of the civil administration in the “German sphere of influence” were freed by Führer’s decree from their obligation to take orders from the Reich central authorities and were subject only to the authority of the Führer (exceptions were the postal administration and the head of the Four Year Plan). For this reason the “position of the
Reichsführer
-SS in this regard toward the head of the civil administration must be ‘cleared up’ on account of the ‘unity of police measures’ ”; answer of the RMuChdRkzlei of October 7, 1941: the planned presentation to the Führer was postponed in agreement with the
Reichsführer
-SS (BA R 43 II/96).

38.
Teppe, “NSDAP und Ministerialbürokratie,” 367.

39.
Examples: the development of the
Gauräte
referred to above and the conflicts over the introduction of the Prussian Law of Police Administration in the Annexed Eastern Territories described below.

40.
Cf., for example, the note in the files by the head of Referat I/50, office of the Reich governor of Posen, dated July 14, 1943 (State Archive Pozna
, Reichsstatthalter 1174, Bl. 39).

41.
File note of July 14, 1943: “I do not consider it appropriate to draft a notice on the treatment of Polish workers: these are things that can be discussed only by word of mouth. It cannot be put down in writing, for example, when a Pole may or may not be beaten” (ibid.); and of July 17, 1943: “I spoke today with Fräulein Thröh (head of the NS women’s association and
Gau
women’s association) about work rules for domestic staff. Frl. Thröh agrees that … no detailed regulations whatsoever for Poles are desirable but that very general guidelines should be set up so as to avoid at all costs the possibility that the Poles could make reference to them” (ibid., Bl. 41).

42.
Overview of the entire administrative structure in the
Reichsgau
Wartheland, undated, Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
; H. Faust, “Neuordnung und Aufbau der Verwaltung in Oberschlesien,”
DVerw
(1940): 433 ff.; (1941): 433 ff. See also Hubrich, “Gliederung und Verwaltung der Ostgebiete.”

Part One. Section 2. Introduction. III. Results

1.
Roesner, “Der neue Ostraum Großdeutschlands,”
DJ
2 (1940): 857 f.

2.
With regard to the administrative practices, see the descriptions of the conditions in two districts of the Wartheland, Sieradz and Łód
, by M. Cyga
ski, “Powiat Sieradzki w latach okupacji hitlerowskiej 1939–1945,”
Rocznik Lódzki
14 (17) (1970): 79 ff.; Cyga
ski, “Powiat Lódzki w latach okupacji hitlerowskiej 1939–1945 r.” (1970–72).

3.
Thus the report of July 30, 1941, by the nationhood-political officer in the office of the Reich governor of Posen (Pozna
) (Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
, doc. I-145). For the policy in Danzig (Gda
sk)–West Prussia, see also the report of May 21, 1941, by the district president of Hohensalza (Inowrocław) (Posen University Library).

4.
See full details in “Die Aufgaben des Gauamtes für Volkstumsfragen im Reichsgau Wartheland,” undated, no author, 36 (Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
, doc. I-4); further references in part 1, section 2, Introduction, II (“The New Type of Administration in the Annexed Eastern Territories”), note 35.

5.
Report of August 18, 1940, by the district president of Hohensalza (Posen University Library).

6.
Report of September 18, 1940, by the district president of Hohensalza, ibid.

7.
Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
, doc. I-145 (also circular of February 23, 1943, from the Reich governor of Posen, Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
); examples of “Pole-friendly” or “unpatriotic” behavior were to prepare a recommendation for a Pole, to drink together with Poles or visit their homes, etc.