Polish Jews, Despite Republic’s Constitution Suffer from Numerous Legal Disabilities and Restriction

The action of the District Governor of Minsk-Mazowiecki, Poland, in refusing to confirm the election of Solomon Horowitz as sheriff of the village Siennica on the basis of an old Czaristic law, barring a Jew from elective office in such communities as are not entirely Jewish, focused public attention on the fact that in Poland today there is still in force a large number of restrictions and disabilities against the Jews, which had their origin in the Czaristic laws.

The Club of Jewish Deputies in the Polish Parliament has introduced a motion urging the central government to overrule the objection of the District Governor as the preservation of the old Czaristic laws against the Jews in Poland is contrary to the Constitution of the Polish Republic, which guarantees equality before the law to all citizens regardless of religion or race and is also contrary to the provisions of the Versailles peace treaty under which the Republic of Poland has undertaken to guarantee fair and equal treatment to the religious, racial and linguistic minorities within its borders.

The Jewish Daily Bulletin has received inquiries from various quarters as to the exact nature of these restrictions and as to how far these legal disabilities affect the cultural, religious and economic status of Polish Jewry.

To shed light on this vital question the Jewish Daily Bulletin presents herewith an authoritative statement of facts constituting an official document of the Polish legislature. It is a complete translation of a bill introduced by the Club of Jewish Deputies on May 15, 1928, in the form of an “urgent motion” before the Sejm. Up to this date no action was taken on this “urgent motion,” it still being in the committee as a pending bill.

This “urgent motion” for the abolition of the anti-Jewish Czaristic restrictions in the Republic of Poland is the last comprehensive proposal for legislative action in a series of futile attempts made by the Jewish deputies since the representatives of the Polish people have assembled for legislating laws for the new Republic. On a previous occasion, December 14, 1922, a similar bill was introduced by the Jewish deputies, but no action was taken, leaving a situation in which, as the document puts it, “the elementary rights of the Jewish population are limited, the right to choose freely places of resdence, the right to avail themselves of the freedom of trade, the right to hold various offices, full opportunity to fulfill their family duties,” a situation which is “an assault on the human dignity of the Jews.”

In the “urgent motion” of 1928, introduced by Deputies Hartglass, Gruenbaum and associates of the Club of Jewish Deputies for the purpose of removing the statutes limiting the equal rights of the Jewish population in the territory of former Russian Poland, it is declared:

FULL TEXT GIVEN

“In spite of the guarantee by the Constitution of March 17th, 1921, of Equal Rights to all citizens of the Republic of Poland, regardless of their nationality and religion, in spite of twice-repeated motions introduced by the Jewish Deputies in the Constitutional Assembly and in the previous Sejm, in spite of two similar drafts of bills introduced by the Government in both preceding Sejms, and in spite of the publicly assumed obligation by the post-May Government contained in the expose of Premier Bartel on the 19th of July, 1926; despite articles 96, 99 and 111, of the Constitution, there have been preserved up to this date in the territory of former Russian Poland numerous legal restrictions mostly of Russian origin in relation to the Jewish population.

ELEMENTARY RIGHTS AFFECTED

“These restrictions limit the elementary rights of the Jewish population, the right to choose freely places of residence on the territory of the state, the right to avail themselves of the freedom of trade, the right to hold various offices, to fulfil their family duties, etc., subjecting the Jewish population for different transgressions to more severe penalties than are established for Christians, and finally, assault the human dignity of the Jews. Those antiquated limitations remained in force, not only in the territory of the former Kingdom of Poland, where there was no other way for their removal except the legislative, but also in the Eastern provinces acquired on the basis of the Treaty of Armistice and Conciliation signed in Riga on October 12th, 1920, in which was binding the Article 5 of the Statute dated February 4th, 1921, authorizing the Council of Ministers to annul all excepting statutes and ordinances of whatever origin having for their purpose the curtailment of the rights of any nationality or religion.

COURT’S DECISIONS UNHEEDED

“It is true that the Supreme Court, in its verdict, rendered in full session on February 16th, 1924. in case No. ZS 69/23. declared that all regulations limiting the rights of the Jewish population and not requiring any new regulations in substitution ceased to be binding from the moment that the Constitution of 1921 became effective, but shortly afterwards namely on the 30th of October. 1924, the Supreme Administrative Tribunal in Case L. Rej. 1521/23 declared exactly the opposite-That all enactments limiting the rights of the Jewish population are binding up to the time of their removal-and this has been the consistent practice up to the present time. Thus, has arisen a paradoxical situation that makes the state ridiculous; while the courts shun the application of restricted measures against the Jews, the administrative organs steadily and systematically apply these restrictive measures-a situation all the more dangerous for the Jewish population because the order of the President of February 6th, 1928, (Official Gazette of the Polish Republic, No. 12, item 93) concerning the organization of the lower courts made questionable the independence of the Judges.

“The present motion has for its purpose to rectify what was neglected during the seven years past since the adoption of the March Constitution, as well as to co-ordinate the regulations pertaining to the Jewish population with the Constitution. Particularly, this motion has for its purpose the removal of the following regulations:

WHAT THE LIMITATIONS ARE

“1. Article 16 of the Civil Code of 1825 of Kingdom of Poland, which reads: “The Jews enjoy the civil rights from the use of which they are not exempted by the decree of the King or the Viceroy.

“2. Art. 414, par. 6 of the same Code, which reads: ‘Caunot be guardians, or members of family council; 6/ non-Christians over Christians.’

“3. Par. 7 of the Supreme Order, of July 5th, 1862, which invalidated documents written or signed in Yiddish or Hebrew language, or in Jewish script, not only when they are of a partly public character like accounting books, notes, but also documents of an entirely private nature as contracts, and the like. This regulation contradicts the Art. 109 of the Constitution.

“4. Art. 234 par. 1 of the Statute of the System of Provincial (gubernia) government of the Kingdom of Poland (Russian Code of Law Vol. II. part. V. published in 1892) depriving persons of non-Christian religions of the right to be elected to offices in the village and county government.

“5. Art. 282 of the same Statute which includes a rule permitting the election of a Jew as Sheriff (wojt) or Judge (soltys) only in the case when the entire membership of the village or county consists of Jews only.

“6. Art. 295, par. 1 of the same statute which deprives persons of non-Christian religious of the right to be elected to the office of Sheriff or Judge also in those villages and colonies in which the population consists exclusively of persons not falling under the regulations of the article 196-286 of the above statute, i. e. not falling under the general regulations of the Country Statute.

“7. Art. 5 of Regulations of the sale (Continued on Page 4) (Continued from Page 3)

“8. Art. 612 of the excise (Russian Code of Law, Vol. V, of 1912) which reads: “Jews have the right to deal in spirits only in the localities where they are permitted to reside, only in their own houses. They can be salesmen only in business places owned by their co-religionists.

“9. Art. 1072 of the Customs Statute (Russian Code of Law, Vol. VI. of 1910) imposing on Jews residing in the western provinces within the 50 viorst limit-(from the frontier) and apprehended smuggling, besides other penalties, deportation from the (50-viorst) limit for a period of one to five years, and in case of repeated offense, permanent deportation from the (50 viorst) frontier limit. Art. 1073 of the same statute imposes on Jews apprehended smuggling in the Province (general-Gubernatorstvo) of Warsaw, besides other penalties the penalty of deportation beyond the 10-viorst frontier limit for a period of 1 to 5 years and in case of repeated offense permanent deportation beyond this limit.

“10. Art. 464 par. 4 of the Mining Statute (Russian Code of Law, Vol. VII. published 1912) which forbids Jews to engage in mining.

SEGREGATED IN BORDER PROVINCES

“11. Art. 767-781, 785-816 and 819 of the law of Estates segregating the Jews of the border provinces (Kresy) from the rest of the local population, creating of them a separate Estate, determining the organization of this Estate, introducing for Jews a series of exemptory laws, pertaining to their registration in the Estate books, acquisition of real estate, the right to freely change their place of residence, the right to engage in different occupations, etc., it is necessary to mention that by the order of the President of October 14th, 1928 (Official Gazette of the Republic of Poland No. 92, item 824) removing the Estate distinctions, those articles that were limiting only Jews, were retained in force.

“12. Art. 148 of the Civil Code, which forbids adoption of Christians by non-Christians and vice versa.

“13. Art. 67-75 of the Passport Statute and the Adenda to Art. 61, which limit Jews in selecting places of residence.

“14. Art. 291 of the Penal Code of 1903 which reads: ‘A person guilty of non-complying with the rules established by law, or by regulations for education of Jewish youth, or for the supervision of such education, will be subject to a fine up to 100 rubles. In case of repeated offense by a “Melamed” (teacher of Hebrew) or other teachers in Jewish public or private schools the guilty will be subject to arrest.’ In case of removal of this regulation, the Art. 290 of the Penal Code referring to violations of general rules of supervision of the education of youth will become effective with reference to Jews.

“In the regulations given below we move to make certain changes:

“1. Art. 278 of the Penal Code of 1903 reads: ‘Who without proper permit will admit in a building belonging to him or rented by him a public Jewish religious service for the performance of which, beyond places designated for such religious services, permission is necssary according to statute, will be fined to the extent of 600 marks.’ The performance of religious services of other religions must be punished inasmuch as this performance is forbidden beyond places designated for this purpose. Therefore, the word ‘Jewish’ must be eliminated.

CANNOT BUY LAND

“2. Art. 6 of Regulations for the sale of peasant land of July 11-24, 1891 (Russian Code of Law and Government Regulations of 1891 No. 76, item 821) enumerates the documents which must be presented to the Notary Public in case of making a notarized lease of peasant land and homesteads and among them is mentioned in par. c; Certificate of the Sheriff (Wojt) or Court House that ‘the lessee is not of Jewish religion.’ The above quoted words hast be removed as contradicting the constitution.

“3. Art. 144 of the Civil Code permitting to legitimize children born out of wedlock for some reason deprives non-Christian children born out of wedlock of this benefaction. This unjust and immoral limitation should be removed by crossing out the opening words of this article.

“Finally, Art. 96, par. 1 and Art. 396, par. 1 of the Statute of Civil Procedure relieves priests and ministers of Christian denominations of taking the oath. According to the present draft the relief (of taking the oath) must include also ministers of non-Christian religions who are confirmed in their standing by government organs.

“The changes shown above remove the difference in the civil rights of the Jewish and non-Jewish population which are contradictory to the Constitution as well as to the spirit of the time, presenting an inadmissible anachronism, unique in Europe.

“Therefore, the undersigned move:

“The high Sejw will adopt the attached statute:

HOW WRONGS SHOULD BE RECTIFIED

“Removing the legal regulations limiting the equal rights of Jews in former Russian Poland.

Article I.

“The following changes are introduced in the Statues, effective in the (Continued on Page 8) (Continued from Page 4)

“I. Cancelled are:

A. Art. 16. par. 6 of Art. 414 of the Civil Code of Kingdom of Poland of 1825.

b. Par. 7 of Supreme Order of the 5th of July, 1862. (Dz. Pr. Krol. Polsk tom 60 str. 31.

c. Art. 234, par. 1,282,295, par. 1 of the Statute organizing Provincial (Gubernia) Government in the Kingdom of Poland. (Zb. Pr. tom II. cz. V wyd 1892 r.)

d. Art. 5 of the Regulation of the sale of peasant lands of July, 11-24, 1891 (Zb. Pr. i Rozp. Rzadu z 1891 r. Nr. 76 poz. 821).

e. Art. 612 of the Russian Excise Statute (Zb. Pr. tom V wyd. 1901 r. i ciag dalszy.)

f. Art 1072 and 1073 of the Customs Statute (Zb. Pr. tom VI. wyd. 1910 r.)

g. Par. 4 Art. 464 of the Mining Statute (Zb. Pr. tom . VIII. wyd 1912 r.)

h. Art. 767-781, 784-816 and 819 of the Law of Estates (Zb. Pr. IX together with an adenda to article 779 791, 794, 796 & 816.)

i. Art. 148 of the Civil Code (Zb. Pr. tom X. cz. 1.)

j. Art. 67-75 of the Passport Statute (Zb. Pr. tom XIV together with an adenda to Article 68.)

k. Art. 291 of the Penal Code of 1903.

“II. Crossed out are:

a. the word ‘Jewish’ of the Article 278 of the Penal Code of 1903.

b. The words ‘and does not profess the Jewish religion’ of the Article VI Par. c of the Regulations for the sale of peasant land of July 11-24, 1891 (Zb. Pr. i Rozp. Rzadu z 1891 r. Nr. 76 item 821.)

c. The opening words ‘For the Christian population’ of the Article 144 of the Civil Code. (The collection of laws Vol. X, par. 1.)

“III. Added are:

To the Article 96, par. 1 and to the Article 396, par. 1 of the Statute of Civil Procedure after the word ‘Christian’ the following words: ‘Also religious communities and priests of other non-Christian religions which are confirmed in their standing by Government orders.’

ARTICLE 2

“All government orders based on Statutes removed by this statute cease to be binding.

ARTICLE 3

“The present statute is binding within the jurisdiction of the Apellate Courts of Warsaw, Lublin and Vilna, from the date of publication.

ARTICLE IV

“The carrying out of this Statute is entrusted to the President of Ministers in accord with the respective ministries.”

TWO MORE DISABILITIES CITED

In the “urgent motion” introduced by the Jewish deputies in 1922, two more legal disabilities were enumerated and the demand for their abolition voiced.

Limitation No. 1-A decision of the administrative council of the Kingdom of Poland of the 25th of November, 1841 imposed upon the Jewish communities the duty to establish hospitals of its own and to tax the members of the Jewish community for this purpose. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of this decision oblige the Jewish communities, which had no hospitals of their own, to pay for the treatment and maintenance of its poor members who were received in other hospitals while for the treatment and maintenance of “Christian patients” the costs were born by the communities at large toward whose income the Jewish population contributed. Under this decision the Jewish population in Poland was taxed twice for hospital needs.

Limitation No. 2-Article 272, Part II of the Criminal Code of 1903 read: A fine of 600 Marks shall be imposed on any Jew who changes his first name or surname arbitrarily instead of the name under which he was registered at birth. The “urgent motion” argued that because of Article 272, Part I, imposing a fine for concealing first name and surname from the authorities, applicable to all citizens the specific reference to Jews was unnecessary.