The Aryanization program in the last quarter of 1938.
From a report of 5 January 1939 by the office of the City President of Berlin to the Reich Minister of Economics.
Source: J. Noakes and G. Pridham, eds. Nazism 1919-45 - A History in Documents and Eyewitness Accounts Vol. I The Nazi Party, State and Society 1919-1939 . (New York. 1983,1984) pp. 562-63.
' Egoism in economic life
The confused weeks after the new decrees of November 1938 concerning the Jews reflected a coarsening of business methods, perhaps also as a result of the September crisis. Not only in the retail trade, in the competition of applicants for the Jewish retail shops, but in general the impression prevails of an increasingly ruthless exploitation of positions of power. This begins with the fight for the allocation of raw materials, continues with the fight for labour and leads to the ruthless exploitation by people of their own, sometimes merely apparent, financial power, in order to attract workers with wage increases. It sometimes leads to agreements to ignore the wage freeze announced by the Trustee and not even to make an application. The number of interventions on the ground of an alleged acquaintanceship with me of the most superficial kind has increased in influential quarters, despite the fact that such interventions were already criticised by the Party authorities in September 1938 at the beginning of Aryanization. Every group has its favourite for whom it would to procure, let us say, the plant just ripe for Aryanization... Such drastic actions as those initiated by the decree on the Exclusion of Jews from German Economic Life of 12.11.38, easily tend to "get out of hand" at the lower levels of the executive authorities. With the first newspaper announcement or the first announcement by an influential figure on the radio, forces are set in motion, which claim the right to carry out such measures themselves, whereas in reality their function is at best advisory. Thus the illegal use of private "commissioners" has developed, with Jewish owners of plants giving them extensive plenary powers in order to get rid of the factory as quickly as possible (since they hope for the biggest advantage thereby); also there are attempts at notarial transfers of properties on the basis of such plenary powers, etc. This can be prevented by the issuing, when possible, of executive regulations simultaneously with the basic decree. The main task of my office in the context of Aryanization in retail trade has been to mitigate the uncontrollable actions of such forces.
Arbitrary interpretation of the law
In the same way I have noticed in connection with the Aryanization programme that legal regulations and decrees are supplemented by a somewhat arbitrary interpretation not only on the part of organisations affiliated to the Party but also on the part of State authorities. Thus, in the process of drawing up the registry of Jewish businesses, a factory was declared Jewish simply because the Aryan proprietress was married to a Jew, although, according to the instruction for the drawing up of this register, there is no such regulation. In fact, according to the edict of the Minister of the Interior of 14.7.38, the decision is to be made in the light of individual circumstances and according to whether or not the Jewish partner had a dominant influence over the business. The other regulation may even have been avoided on purpose. The further development of legal regulations on the basis of a progressive refinement of the sense of legality within the community, is certainly a supplement to legislation, which must not be underestimated. It becomes dangerous only if in this sphere, away from the legislators and without knowledge of his motives, the varying strength and power of penetration of the organisation taking part, and of the State and non-State authorities begin to get out hand. This happened when the Jews were prohibited from being landlords. Pressure was exerted that Jews should be forced to interpose German administrators over their own house property; basically this was certainly an aim worth striving for, but it was something which had not yet been expressed in legislation (Law for the Alteration of the Industrial Code of 6.7.38). Thus, letters were written to Jews stating that an administrator had been appointed for their house property and that the owner had to appear at the office so that the "take over of administration" might be effected; he was also to bring along any managers who had been appointed by other agencies. He was threatened with "further measures" if he did not appear. Subsequently, for such measures the explanation was given that it was found necessary to keep various Jewish management under observation during the critical days of November'. Moreover, this procedure was justified since another authority had also given orders for the same property to be supervised. In this way, through the simultaneous actions of two different organisations, several representatives appeared without authority and sometimes even tried to collect the rent...'
