"Non-Germans" Under the Third Reich (148 page)

22.
RGBl.
I 1146, with the first, second, and third implementing orders of November 14, 1935 (
RGBl.
I 384). For details, see Maßfeller, “Das Reichsbürgerrecht” (1935) (
RGBl.
I 3417 ff.) (Maßfeller was an official in the Reich Ministry of Justice); detailed information is also to be found in the “Confidential Information from the Party Chancellery,” no. 51/680, July 17, 1942, in
Verfügungen
, 2:169 ff., 176. See also Frick, “Das Reichsbürgergesetz” (1940); Frick, “Die Rassenfrage” (1939); Gütt, “Gesundheits- und Rassenpflege im Dritten Reich” (1940).

23.
See for example Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
(1937), 16 f.; Stuckart and Globke,
Reichsbürgergesetz
(1936), 14 ff. (16) (“Since only Jewry posed an acute threat to the German nation, the first aim of the law was to prevent mixing of blood with Jews”).

24.
See RuPrMdI circular of November 26, 1935 (
MinbliV
[1935], no. 49, 1436).

25.
The term
Jew
was defined in the First Decree to the Reich Citizenship Law of November 14, 1935, sec. 5, par. 2 (
RGBl.
I 1333). The prohibition also applied to marriages between Jews and “Jewish
Mischlinge
with Reich subject status” having only one Jewish grandparent (First Implementing Order of November 15, 1935, sec. 2 [
RGBl.
I 1334]); marriages between Jewish
Mischlinge
and people of “German blood” (
Deutschblütige
), that is to say marriages between “
Mischlinge
of the first degree” were also fundamentally forbidden; in exceptional cases a special authorization from the Reich minister of the interior or the deputy Führer could, however, be issued (First Implementing Order of November 14, 1935, sec. 3, [
RGBl.
I 1333]). Reich Ministry of the Interior decree of December 4, 1935 (
MinbliV
[1935]: 1455). There was no right of appeal against refusal of the authorization (Vienna Administrative Court, decision of January 30, 1940,
DVerw
. [1940]: 158). Marriages were also forbidden between Jewish
Mischlinge
with Reich subject status with one fully Jewish grandparent (“
Mischlinge
of the second degree”) (pars. 2a and 3a and b of the Reich and Prussian Ministry of the Interior circular concerning the Blood Protection Law of November 26, 1935 [
MinbliV
(1935): 1436]).

26.
According to Reich Ministry of the Interior circular, December 7, 1936 (
MinbliV
[1936], no. 53, 1631), in pursuance of the Blood Protection Law, sec. 6, with the agreement of the deputy Führer and the Reich minister of justice, it was forbidden for even a person “of German-blood” married to a Jew to “raise the Reich and national flag and display the Reich colors.” The prohibition applied analogously in all cases in which Jews lived in a household with people “of German blood.”

27.
See the Führer’s decree of October 8, 1939 (
RGBl.
I 2042), and the Decree on the Establishment of a German Ethnic Classification List of March 4, 1941 (
RGBl.
I 118).

28.
Decree on the Establishment of a German Ethnic Classification List of March 4, 1941, sec. 7, par. 2 (
RGBl.
I 118), in conjunction with the Twelfth Decree to the Reich Citizenship Law of April 25, 1943, sec. 3 (
RGBl.
I 268).

29.
Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
, 16.

30.
Pars. 3 A and B of the RuPrMdI circular concerning the Blood Protection Law of November 26, 1935, I B 3/324 II,
MinbliV
(1935): 1429 f.

31.
Sec. 6 of the First Implementing Decree to the Blood Protection Law dated November 14, 1935 (
RGBl.
I 1334); RuPrMdI circular of November 26, 1935, par. 4 (I B 3/324 II,
MinbliV
[1935]: 1429 f.).

32.
See par. 5c of the RuPrMdI circular of November 26, 1935 (I B 3/324 II,
MinbliV
[1935]: 1429 f.), according to which evidence that “no offspring endangering the preservation of the purity of German blood were to be expected” had to be submitted in the form of a “certificate of fitness for marriage.” Until such time, to be determined by the Reich minister of the interior, that the “certificate of fitness for marriage” would serve as evidence in a general way, the registry official had to require the certificate from partners of different races, for example, “in the case of marriage between people of German blood with Gypsies, Negroes, or their bastards.”

33.
Confidential information from the Party Chancellery dated July 17, 1942, no. 51/680,
Verfügungen
, 2:169 ff., 176.

34.
First Decree on Protective Citizenship of April 25, 1943 (
RGBl.
I 271).

35.
Memorandum of August 21, 1940, from the RFSS to the Reich Ministry of the Interior, in which he—unlike the Reich Ministry of the Interior—further wanted to prevent intermarriage between Poles and Jews (Nuremberg doc. NG-1916).

36.
RGBl.
I 1246, with First and Second Implementing Orders of November 29, 1935 (
RGBl.
I 1419), and October 22, 1941 (
RGBl.
I 650).

37.
RGBl.
I 529.

38.
See note 32.

39.
First Implementing Order to the Marital Hygiene Law of November 29, 1935, sec. 3 (
RGBl.
I 1419).

40.
According to sec. 8, par. 2, of the law, the Reich minister of the interior determined the moment at which sec. 2 would come into effect. Until then a certificate of fitness for marriage needed to be produced in doubtful cases only.

41.
Second Implementing Order to the Marital Hygiene Law of October 22, 1941, sec. 1 (
RGBl.
I 650).

42.
See Claudio Schwarzenberg,
Diritto e giustizia nell’Italia fascista
(Milan, 1977), 147 f.

43.
See memorandum of December 27, 1938, from the Reich minister and head of the Reich Chancellery (RMuChdRkzlei) to the Reich minister of justice and notes from the RMuChdRkzlei of January 7, 1939, and March 14, 1939 (BA R 22/465).

44.
The decision is quoted in Schwarzenberg,
Diritto e giustizia nell’Italia fascista
, 147 ff.; this programmatic declaration was in part codified, a law of January 5, 1939, forbidding so-called mixed marriages (
matrimoni misti
), a term that presumably included marriages between Italians and non-Aryans (see also 150 f.).

45.
Party Chancellery circular of January 13, 1941,
Verfügungen
, 2:58.

46.
Defense Law of May 21, 1935 (
RGBl.
I 609), sec. 15, par. 1; Jewish
Mischlinge
(half Jews) were liable to conscription but could serve only in the reserve force (Decree on the Admittance of Non-Aryans to Active Armed Service of July 25, 1935, sec. 2, par. 2, sec. 3,
RGBl.
I 1047); they were not permitted to become officers in the Wehrmacht (Defense Law of May 21, 1935, sec. 15).

47.
Subpar. 3 of the Decree on Marriage of Members of the Wehrmacht (Marriage Decree) of April 1, 1936;
HeeresVOBl.
121, quoted in Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
, 315 f.

48.
Subpar. 2, no. 3a, of the implementing regulations to the Marriage Decree,
HeeresVOBl.
123, quoted in Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
, 316. Even if the fiancé had only one grandparent who was non-Aryan, i.e., was only a so-called quarter Jew, it was sufficient grounds for refusal of permission to marry.

49.
Secret decree cited in
Verfügungen
, 2:58 ff.

50.
Secret decree by the OKW chief of January 26, 1942 (ibid.). The applicant had to submit a photograph, a political and racial-political assessment of the bride, a “certificate of fitness for marriage” for both parties, and proof of the Aryan descent of both. Later Hitler ordered that two full-length photographs of the bride (front and side views) in postcard format should be provided
in addition
(confidential information from the Party Chancellery 61/820, September 11, 1942, ibid., 60 f.)

51.
Party Chancellery instruction no. V/10/40 of November 23, 1940,
Verfügungen
, 2:56 f.

52.
Palandt,
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch
(1942), note 2 on sec. 13 of the Marriage Law.

53.
Confidential information 36/362 from the Party Chancellery of August 21, 1941,
Verfügungen
, 2:56 ff.

54.
See Olczewski, “Rassengebundene Rechtsprechung” (1941), with examples from inheritance and marriage law; Mössmer, “Rassenmischehe und geltendes Recht” (1934); Maßfeller, “Grundsätze der Erb- und Rassenpflege” (1935). For details of mixed German-Jewish marriages, cf. H. Graml, “Zur Stellung der Mischlinge 1. Grades,”
Gutachten des IfZ
, 2:31 f.

55.
Wöhrmann, “Die Auflösung der Ehe zwischen Juden und Ariern” (1933).

56.
More details in ibid.

57.
Reichsgericht of August 22, 1935, IV 128/35, quoted in Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
, 210.

58.
The attitude of the time is best illustrated by a passage from Rosenberg,
Der Mythos des 20. Jahrhunderts
(1933), bk. 3, IV 5, 558: “If a German woman voluntarily has relations with Negroes or Jews, she will in no event be protected by the law, nor will her illegitimate or legitimate children, who at no time are granted the rights of the German citizen.”

59.
RGBl.
I 807.

60.
For the preparatory work, see Mössmer,
Neugestaltung des deutschen Ehescheidungsgesetzes
(1936).

61.
Palandt,
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch
, introduction 2 to the Marriage Law.

62.
Gütt, Linden, and Maßfeller,
Blutschutz und Ehegesundheitsgesetz
, 16. The Blood Protection Law, sec. 1, had forbidden only marriages between Germans and Jews; the Marriage Law, sec. 4, now forbade marriages between Germans and all “alien” persons and thus offered unlimited possibilities of extension.

63.
Marriage Law, sec. 28, according to which the public prosecutor alone was authorized to prosecute in cases of annulment of marriage on the grounds of the Blood Protection Law and the Marital Hygiene Law, and in addition to the husband in all other cases of annulment (adultery, related partners, etc.).

64.
According to the official statistics (Nuremberg doc. NG-2982) quoted by Adler,
Der verwaltete Mensch
(1974), 281, the number of mixed German-Jewish marriages in “Greater Germany” at the end of 1942 was 27, 774 (16, 760 in the Altreich, 4, 803 in Austria, 6, 211 in the Protectorate); as of April 1, 1943, 16, 668 German-Jewish marriages were reported in the Altreich, 12,117 of which were “privileged” mixed marriages (e.g., mixed marriages whose offspring did not count as Jews). The then
Rassenreferent
(expert in charge of the Race Desk) in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, Lösener, estimated the number of “privileged mixed marriages” in the German territories (including Holland) at about 20,000 (Nuremberg doc. NG-2982; cited by Adler,
Der verwaltete Mensch
, 281).

65.
Minutes of the discussion of March 6, 1942, at the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA) on the Final Solution to the Jewish Question (Nuremberg doc. NG-2586; excerpts in Poliakov and Wulf,
Das Dritte Reich und seine Diener
[1956], 383 f.).

Part One. Section 1. IV. Citizenship Law

1.
Report by the Chief of Referat I/50 (Bureau for Nationality Questions) of the office of the Reich governor of Posen (Poznaω) to the Reich governor himself, July 30, 1941. An enormous bureaucracy had developed in the Reich. In 1933 “only” 90 offices dealt with nationality questions. Now there were already 146 (Institute for Western Studies, Pozna
, doc. I-145).

2.
RGBl.
I 582.

3.
Thus the right to nationality was already changed de facto by the Law on Revocation of Naturalization and the Deprivation of German Citizenship of July 14, 1933 (
RGBl.
I 480), and fundamentally transformed by the Decree on German Citizenship of February 5, 1934 (
RGBl.
I 85).
Technically
the Reich and State Citizenship Law was changed in only one place by the decree of February 5, 1934 (cf. RuStAG, sec. 13), but it was then largely annulled by the Law to Amend Reich and State Citizenship of May 15, 1935, sec. 2 (
RGBl.
I 595). Further amendments through the Decree on Withdrawal of Citizenship of September 1, 1939 (
RGBl.
I 1656), and the Decree on Regulation of Nationality Questions of January 20, 1942 (
RGBl.
I 40; naturalization of foreigners permitted even without residence in the country).