text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
[330 U.S. 127, 129] Messrs. Mac. Q. Williamson and James W. Bounds, both of Oklahoma City., Okl., for petitioner.
Mr. Ralph F. Fuchs, of Washington, D.C., for respondent.
Mr. Justice REED delivered the opinion of the Court.
This proceeding brings to this Court* another phase of the Hatch Act, 18 U.S.C.A. 61 et seq. The petitioner, the State of Oklahoma, objects to the enforcement by the United States Civil Service Commission of 12(a) of the act. 1 [330 U.S. 127, 130] France Paris has been a member of the State Highway Commission of Oklahoma since January 14, 1943. He was elected chairman of the Democratic State Central [330 U.S. 127, 131] Committee for Oklahoma for his third term in February 1942 and he occupied such position continuously until October 18, 1943, when he resigned. On October 12, 1943, the Civil Service Commission issued its letter of charges in the matter of France Paris and the State of Oklahoma, in which it notified Mr. Paris and Oklahoma that information which the Civil Service Commission had received war- [330 U.S. 127, 132] ranted an investigation into an alleged improper political activity on the part of France Paris under the provisions of 12 of the Hatch Act. The charge was that since January 14, 1943, Mr. Paris had been an officer of Oklahoma whose principal employment was and is in connection with an activity financed in whole or in part by loans and grants from a Federal agency of the United States and that during such time Mr. Paris also held a political party office, to it, the chairmanship of the State Central Committee above referred to. It later developed that no general election occurred in Oklahoma in 1943. The State Democratic Headquarters had been closed on January 4, 1943, by Mr. Paris and were later reopened during the year under the direct charge of the vicechairman of that committee, we assume prior to Mr. Paris' resignation on October 18, 1943. On June 14 the committee sponsored a 'Victory Dinner' in Oklahoma City. The trial court found as follows:
Pursuant to 12(c) of the State of Oklahoma, after having received notice of the Civil Service Commission's determination, instituted these proceedings for the review of the order in the proper district court of the United States. That court, D.C., 61 F.Supp. 355, upheld the action of the Civil Service Commission and this action was affirmed by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. State of Oklahoma v. United States Civil Service Commission, 153 F.2d 280. Certiorari was sought and allowed because of the importance of the issues involved in the administration of justice, 328 U.S. 831 , 66 S.Ct. 1342, under 12(c), 53 Stat. 1147, as amended, 54 Stat. 767, and 240(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C.A. 347(a).
The state contends that the judgments below are invalid for the following reasons:
First. The Government's first contention is that the petitioner, the State of Oklahoma, has no standing to attack the constitutionality of 12. It is argued that the state has no legal capacity to question the manner in which the United States limits the appropriation of funds through 12( a); that 12(b) is merely procedural to assure that the statutory requirem nts are observed and that 12(c) is a safeguard against the exercise of arbitrary power by the Commission, not a permission to wage an attack on the entire arrangement. 2
If this contention is treated as an objection to the state's capacity to bring this suit, as no objection was made until the memorandum for the respondent on the petition for certiorari, it would be out of time. A failure to object in the trial court to a party's capacity is a waiver of that defect. Parker v. Motor Boat Sales, 314 U.S. 244, 251 , 62 S.Ct. 221, 225. On the other hand, if the contention is treated as meaning that no justiciable controversy as to the constitutionality of 12(a) exists because petitioner suffers no injury which it may protect legally from the withdrawal by the United States of a portion of a grant- in-aid, the objection, as it questions judicial power to act on that point, is timely although first made in this Court. 3 We think that the [330 U.S. 127, 135] latter position more correctly reflects respondent's contention. The Commission urges the cases listed in note 2 above as showing that the relation between the state and federal government arising out of grants-in- aid are political and that the order of the Commission that Paris be removed was not mandatory. We therefore treat the issue as properly before us.
The issue is whether Oklahoma can challenge the constitutionality of 12 on statutory review of a Commission order. Subsection (c) gives to any party aggrieved a judicial review of the Commission order. The review is on the entire record and extends to questions of fact and questions of law. The order is to be affirmed if the court determines that it is 'in accordance with law.' If the court determines the order is not in accordance with law, the proceeding is to be remanded to the Commission 'with directions either to make such determination or order as the court shall determine to be in accordance with law or to take such further proceedings as in the opinion of the court, the law requires.' 4 We think the challenge can be made in these review proceedings to the constitutionality of the law upon which the order under review is predicated.
The activities of the Highway Commission of Oklahoma were financed in part by loans and grants from a Federal agency during all the pertinent times. This was the organization of which Paris was a member. During the period in question, January 15, 1943, to October 18, 1943, while Paris was also Chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee, the United States through allotment by federal statute contributed over $2,000,000 for the highway work of the Oklahoma Commission. 5 Nothing indicates that these sums were to be received by Oklahoma otherwise than in accordance with regular statutory appor- [330 U.S. 127, 136] tionment among the states of federal highway funds and we assume the sums were to be so received by Oklahoma. Congress may create legally enforceable rights where none before existed. Payments were not made at the unfettered inclination of a federal disbursing officer or highway agency but according to statutory standards, compliance with which entitled Oklahoma to receive her proper share of the federal appropriations for highway construction through state agencies. If it were not for 12, Oklahoma would have been legally entitled to receive payment from the federal disbursing office of the sums, including the amount that 12(b) authorizes the Civil Service Commission to require the disbursing or allocating federal agency to withhold from its loans or grants. 6 Oklahoma had a legal right to receive federal highway funds by virtue of certain congressional enactments and under the terms therein prescribed. Violation of such a statutory right normally creates a justiciable cause of action even without a specific statutory authorization for review. 7 It may be that before the payment of those funds to Oklahoma Congress could have withdrawn the grant without legal responsibility for such action either in its officers or the National Government. Perhaps, before disbursement, it could add of its own free will any additional requirements but when it erected administrative bars, that is, a condition that a part of the allotment might be withheld by action of the Commission, with judicial review of the Commission's determination, we think those bars left to Oklahoma the right to receive all federal highway funds allotted to that state, subject only to the condition that the limitation on the right to receive the funds complied with the Constitution. Issues presented by this suit, even though [330 U.S. 127, 137] raised by a state, are closely akin to private wrongs. 8 Either the state employee or the state may be the party aggrieved and may maintain the action for judicial review. The power to examine into the constitutionality of the conditions was given the federal courts by the grant of the authority to review the legality of the Civil Service order. Therefore when by 12 a right of review of the Civil Service Commission's order is given to Oklahoma, we are of the opinion that the constitutionality of the statutory basis, 12(a), of the order is open for adjudication.
Congress has power to fix the conditions for review of administrative orders. 9 By providing for judicial review of the orders of the Civil Service Commission, Congress made Oklahoma's right to receive funds a matter of judicial cognizance. Oklahoma's right became legally enforceable. Interference with the payment of the full allotment of federal highway funds to Oklahoma made the statutory proceeding to set aside the order a case or controversy between Oklahoma and the Commission whose order Oklahoma was authorized to challenge. 10 A reading of 12 will show the special interest Oklahoma had in preventing the exercise of the Civil Service Commission's power to direct that Oklahoma's funds be withheld. 11 It was named as the employer affected by 12(a). Notices were sent to it. Funds allotted to Oklahoma were to be withheld under certain conditions. It was a 'party aggrieved.' 12 When it brought this suit, under this statu- [330 U.S. 127, 138] tory authority, Oklahoma was entitled to a judicial determination as to whether the order of the Civil Service Commission was 'in accordance with law.' Was the order within the competency of the Commission? That question of competency included the issue of the constitutionality of the basis for the order, 12(a).13 Only if the statutory basis for an order is within constitutional limits, can it be said that the resulting order is legal. To determine that question, the statutory review must include the power to determine the constitutionality of 12(a).
The cases cited by the Government as pointing toward lack of power to adjudicate the constitutionality of 12 [330 U.S. 127, 139] are inapposite. None deny to a court with jurisdiction by statute to review the legality of administrative orders the power to examine the constitutionality of the statute by virtue of which the order was entered. The authorities in note 2 above relied upon by the Government do not hold or imply a position contrary to our conclusion. In Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447 , 43 S.Ct. 597, the Commonwealth and others sought decrees to enjoin the enforcement of the Federal Maternity Act, 42 U.S.C.A. 161 et seq. This Court denied federal jurisdiction, 262 U.S. at page 480, 43 S.Ct. at page 599, because no burden was placed upon a state and no right infringed, 262 U.S. at page 482, 43 S.Ct., at page 598. Perkins v. Lukens Steel Co., 310 U.S. 113 , 60 S.Ct. 869, denied a manufacturer who desired to sell to the Government the right to question a government official's definition of 'locality,' which the official was required by statute to make to determine the minimum wages of the 'locality' under the Public Contracts Act, 41 U.S.C.A. 35 et seq. The denial of federal jurisdiction to decide the question was because no 'litigable rights' to deal with the United States had been bestowed by the statute on the would- be seller, pages 125 and 127 of 310 U.S., pages 875, 877 of 60 S.Ct.. The prospective seller by statute or otherwise had nothing to do with the conditions of purchase fixed by the United States. Alabama Power Co. v. Ickes, 302 U.S. 64 , at page 479, 58 S.Ct. 300, at page 303, denied that the power company had any enforceable legal right to be free of competition, financed by illegal loans. This present Oklahoma case is differentiated from each of the foregoing by the authority for statutory review and by the existence of the legally enforceable right to receive allocated grants without unlawful deductions.
We do not think the rule that one may not in the same proceeding both rely upon and assail a statute14 is applicable to the present situation. In the cases the Govern- [330 U.S. 127, 140] ment cites, the litigants had received or sought advantages from the statute that they wished to attack, advantages other than the mere right to sue. What we are concerned with in this case is not an estoppel to sue but the allowable scope of the statutory jurisdiction.
From this point of view, the respondent urges that the Congress did not intend to create a justiciable right broad enough to include in attack upon the constitutionality of 12(a). We think the final sentence of 12( c), note 1 supra, comes near to demonstrating the unsoundness of such a contention. It reads:
We do not see that this sentence can mean anything other than that the invalidity (unconstitutionality) of any provision of subsection 12(b) should not affect the determination of the Civil Service Commission. In view of our conclusion hereinafter expressed that 12(a) is constitutional, whether the Commission's determination would be enforceable without a particular statutory provision is not involved in this case.
The Government urges that the absence of legislative consideration of attacks on the constitutionality of 12 through the provision for judicial review negatives 'the conclusion that Congress intended Section 12(c) as an avenue of attack on Section 12(a).'15 But we do not agree that this lack of extended discussion of the scope of the judicial review by implication denies to a litigant the right to attack constitutionality. The final form of [330 U.S. 127, 141] judicial review is different from that first proposed. 86 Cong.Rec. 2468. No change of purpose, however, appears. The proposer of judicial review feared arbitrary action. Id., 2469. Others a violation of political liberty. It was thought the latter objection might be reached without right of judicial review. No one intimated constitutionality could not be reached with judicial review. 16 [330 U.S. 127, 142] None of the subsequent changes in the bill are effective to modify this construction of the scope of this judicial review. 17
Second. Petitioner's chief reliance for its contention that 12(a) of the Hatch Act is unconstitutional as applied to Oklahoma in this proceeding is that the so-called penalty provisions invade the sovereignty of a state in such a way as to violate the Tenth Amendment18 by providing for 'possible forfeitures of state office or alternative penalties against the state.' Oklahoma says 12(c) 'provides that the commencement of an appeal from an order of the Commission: '... shall not operate as a stay of such determination or order unless (1) it is specifically so ordered by the court, and (2) such officer or employee is suspended from his office or employment during the pendency of such proceedings. ..." The coercive effect of the authorization to withhold sums allocated to a state is relied upon as an interference with the reserved powers of the state.
In United Public Workers of America v. Mitchell, decided this day, we have considered the constitutionality of this provision from the viewpoint of interference with a federal employee's freedom of expression in political matters and as to whether acting as an official of a political party violates the provision in 12(a) against taking part in political management or in political campaigns. We do not think that the facts in this case require any further discussion of that angle. We think that acting as chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee and acting, ex officio, as a member of the 'Victory Dinner' committee for the purpose of raising funds for the Democratic Party and for selling war bonds constitute taking an active [330 U.S. 127, 143] part in political management. While the United States is not concerned with and has no power to regulate local political activities as such of state officials, it does have power to fix the terms upon which its money allotments to states shall be disbursed.
The Tenth Amendment does not forbid the exercise of this power in the way that Congress has proceeded in this case. As pointed out in United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 124 , 657 S., 61 S.Ct. 451, 462, 132 A.L.R. 1430, the Tenth Amendment has been consistently construed 'as not depriving the national government of authority to resort to all means for the exercise of a granted power which are appropriate and plainly adapted to the permitted end.' The end sought by Congress through the Hatch Act is better public service by requiring those who administer funds for national needs to abstain from active political partisanship. So even though the action taken by Congress does have effect upon certa n activities within the state, it has never been thought that such effect made the federal act invalid. 19 As nothing in this record shows any attempt to suspend Mr. Paris from his duties as a member of the State Highway Commission, we are not called upon to deal with the assertion of Oklahoma that a state officer may be suspended by a federal court if 12 is valid. There is an adequate separability clause. No penalty was imposed upon the state. A hearing was had, conformable to 12 and the conclusion was reached that Mr. Paris' active participation in politics justified his removal from membership on the Highway Commission. Oklahoma chose not to remove him. We do not see any violation of the State's sovereignty in the hearing or order. Oklahoma adopted the 'simple expedient' of not yielding to what she urges is [330 U.S. 127, 144] federal coercion. Compare Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447, 482 , 43 S.Ct. 597, 599. The offer of benefits to a state by the United States dependent upon cooperation by the state with federal plans, assumedly for the general welfare, is not unusual. 20
In order to give the Civil Service Commission adequate standards to measure active participation in political activities, Congress adopted 15 of the Hatch Act quoted above in note 1. By this section Congress made the test of political activity for state employees the same as the test then in effect for employees in the classified civil service. The Commission had at that time determined that 'Service on or for any political committee or similar organization is prohibited.' This could only mean that service on such a committee was active participation in politics. Such determination was made a matter of record by Senator Hatch in charge of the bill during debate on the scope of political prohibition. 21 Obviously the activities of Mr. Paris were covered by the purpose and language of 12. The words of 12(a) requiring Mr. Paris' abstention from 'any active part in political management or political campaigns' are derived from Rule I of the Civil Service Commission and have persisted there since 1907.22
Oklahoma also argues that the Civil Service Commission determination that the acts of Mr. Paris constitute such a violation of 12(a) as to warrant his removal from his state office is not in accordance with law but arbitrary, unreasonable and an abuse of discretion. The facts of Mr. [330 U.S. 127, 145] Paris' activities and his connection with the Democratic State Central Committee during his tenure of office as a member of the Highway Commission of Oklahoma have been stated. The Circuit Court of Appeals said, 10 Cir., 153 F.2d at page 284, 'Manifestly, the Commission had solid footing in the Act for the conclusion that removal of Paris from office was warranted.' We agree. 23
Finally, petitioner says that 12(c), note 1, supra, authorizes a review of 'every minute detail of the case' to 'determine whether sufficient facts exist to support the order of the Commission, decide whether the statute has been reasonably and just y applied, and independently resolve the entire question as though the federal court had been the forum in the first instance.' The basis for this argument in so far as it differs from that referred to in the preceding paragraph, is drawn from the language of 12(c) that 'The review by the court shall be on the record entire, including all of the evidence taken on the hearing, and shall extend to questions of fact and questions of law. ... The court shall affirm the Commission's determination or order, or its modified determination or order, if the court determines that the same is in accordance with law.' As the facts were stipulated and no objection has been taken to the findings of fact, D.C., 61 F.Supp. 355, 357(5); 10 Cir., 153 F.2d 280, 283, the attack, on this issue, is limited to an examination into whether or not the Commission abused its discretion in the order of removal. As heretofore stated, the provisions for review underwent changes during the passage of the act. 24 As finally [330 U.S. 127, 146] adopted, however, the reviewing court is directed to remand when it determines that the action of the Commission 'is not in accordance with law.' 12(c)25 The question of 'the removal of the officer or employee,' 12(b), note 1, supra, we think is a matter of administrative discretion. Since under Rule I of the Civil Service Commission the taking of 'any active part in political management or political campaigns' had been determined by the Commission to include service on a political committee, see notes 37 and 38 of United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 , 67 S.Ct. 556 it is clear Mr. Paris' position violated 15 of the Hatch Act. Note 1, supra. It could hardly be said that determination of the Commission in ordering his removal was an abuse of its discretion. See 61 F.Supp. at page 357(6) and (7); 153 F.2d at pages 283, 284.
Judgment affirmed.
Mr. Justice MURPHY and Mr. Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Mr. Justice BLACK and Mr. Justice RUTLEDGE dissent.
Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER, concurring.
It is of course settled that this Court must consider whenever the question is raised or even though not raised by counsel, the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts as well as the jurisdiction of this Court. Mansfield, C. & L.M.R. Co. v. Swan, 111 U.S. 379, 382 , 4 S.Ct. 510, 511. But whether a State has standing to urge a claim of constitutionality under a [330 U.S. 127, 147] Congressional grant-in-aid statute does not involve 'jurisdiction' in the sense of a court's power but only the capacity of the State to be a litigant to invoke that power. In this litigation the Government did not challenge the standing of Oklahoma to question the constitutionality of the Act until the case came here. I think it is too late to raise that question at this stage. Assuming that it is here, it is my view that under the Hatch Act, in the legislative and judicial context in which it must be read, the State can question only the correctness of the procedure and the determination of the Civil Service Commission, not the validity of the Act. Section 12(b), (c), 54 Stat. 767 amending 53 Stat. 1147, 18 U.S.C. 61l(b) and (c), 18 U.S.C.A. 61l(b, c).
The Administrative Procedure Act does not apply to the present case. Pub.L.No. 404, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. June 11, 1946 12, 5 U.S.C.A. 1011. That Act will, in due course, pre ent problems for adjudication. We ought not to anticipate them when, being irrelevant, they are not before us. The Act ought not to be used even for illustrative purpose because illustrations depend on construction of the Act.
Apart from the foregoing, I agree with Mr. Justice REED'S opinion.
[ Footnote * ] See United Public Workers of America (C.I.O.) v. Mitchell et al., 330 U.s. 75, 67 S.Ct. 556.
[ Footnote 1 ] 53 Stat. 1147, as amended, 54 Stat. 767, 18 U.S.C.A. 61l:
[ Footnote 2 ] Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 447, 482 , 43 S.Ct. 597, 599; Perkins v. Lukens Steel Co., 310 U.S. 113 , 60 S. Ct. 869; Alabama Power Co. v. Ickes, 302 U.S. 464, 479 , 58 S.Ct. 300, 303, are cited as authority, together with other cases.
[ Footnote 3 ] A respondent can support his judgment on any ground that appears in the record. LeTulle v. Scofield, 308 U.S. 415, 421 , 60 S.Ct. 313, 316; City of Gainesville v. Brown-Crummer Co., 277 U.S. 54, 59 , 48 S. Ct. 454, 456.
[ Footnote 4 ] See note 1, supra, 12(c).
[ Footnote 5 ] See Federal Highway Act, 42 Stat. 212, as amended, 23 U.S.C. 1- 117, 23 U.S.C.A. 1-117.
[ Footnote 6 ] Cf. Columbia Broadcasting System v. United States, 316 U.S. 407, 422 , 62 S.Ct. 1194, 1202.
[ Footnote 7 ] See Deitrick v. Greaney, 309 U.S. 190, 198 , 200 S., 201, 60 S.Ct. 480, 484, 485; Steele v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co., 323 U.S. 192, 202 , 65 S.Ct. 226, 232.
[ Footnote 8 ] See the discussion in Colegrove v. Greene, 328 U.S. 549 , 66 S.Ct. 1198.
[ Footnote 9 ] American Power Co. v. Securities & Exchange Comm., 325 U.S. 385, 389 , 65 S.Ct. 1254, 1256.
[ Footnote 10 ] Federal Power Commission v. Pacific Power & Light Co., 307 U.S. 156, 159 , 59 S.Ct. 766, 767, 768.
[ Footnote 11 ] Chicago Junction Case, 264 U.S. 258, 266 , 44 S.Ct. 317, 320 (Second); Z. & F. Assets ealization Corporation v. Hull, 311 U.S. 470, 485 , 61 S.Ct. 351, 354.
[ Footnote 12 ] Federal Power Commission v. Pacific Power & Light Co., 307 U.S. 156, 159 , 59 S.Ct. 766, 767, 768; Federal Communications Commission v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470, 476 , 642 S., 60 S. Ct. 693, 698; American Power & Light Co. v. Securities & Exchange Commission, 325 U.S. 385, 390 , 65 S.Ct. 1254, 1256, 1257; Parker v. Fleming, 329 U.S. 531 , 67 S.Ct. 463.
[ Footnote 13 ] Cf. National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin, 301 U.S. 1, 25 , 43 S., 49, 57 S.Ct. 615, 619, 627, 629, 630, 108 A.L.R. 1352; Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States, 288 U.S. 294, 321 , 324 S., 53 S.Ct. 350, 360, 362; United States v. Ruzicka, 329 U.S. 287 , 67 S.Ct. 207.
Judicial review normally includes issues of the constitutionality of enactments and action thereunder. Pub.Law 404, 79th Cong., 2d Sess., Sec. 10(e), 5 U.S.C.A. 1009(e):
See the full discussion of the 'Scope of Review,' Legislative History, Administrative Procedure Act, S.Doc.No. 248, 79th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 213, ( e), and p. 278, 10(e).
[ Footnote 14 ] See Hurley v. Commission of Fisheries, 257 U.S. 223 , 42 S.Ct. 83; United Fuel Gas Co. v. Railroad Commission of Kentucky, 278 U.S. 300 , 49 S.Ct. 150; Great Falls Mfg. Co. v. Attorney General, 124 U.S. 581 , 8 S.Ct. 631.
[ Footnote 15 ] It cites 86 Cong.Rec. 2354, 2429, 2440, 2468-2474, 9448, 9452; H. Rep. 2376, 76th Cong., 3d Sess., p. 9.
[ Footnote 16 ] 86 Cong.Rec. 2470:
[ Footnote 17 ] See 86 Cong.Rec. 9446, 9495.
[ Footnote 18 ] 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'
[ Footnote 19 ] Veazie Bank v. Fenno, 8 Wall. 533, 547; Stearns v. State of Minnesota, 179 U.S. 223, 244 , 21 S.Ct. 73, 81; State of Florida v. Mellon, 273 U.S. 12 , 47 S.Ct. 265; Helvering v. Therrell, 303 U.S. 218 , 58 S.Ct. 539; Wright v. Union Central Life Ins. Co., 304 U.S. 502, 516 , 58 S.Ct. 1025, 1033; Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 338 , 56 S. Ct. 466, 479.
[ Footnote 20 ] Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548 , 593-598, 57 S.Ct. 883, 893-894, 109 A.L.R. 1293; United States v. Bekins, 304 U.S. 27 , 51- 54, 58 S.Ct. 811, 815-817. A review of grants-in- aid will be found in 8 American Law School Review, Corwin: National-State Cooperation, 687, 698.
[ Footnote 21 ] 86 Cong.Rec. 2938, 15 of exhibit.
[ Footnote 22 ] See United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75 , 67 S.Ct. 556.
[ Footnote 23 ] See Jacob Siegel Co. v. Federal Trade Commission, 327 U.S. 608 , 66 S.Ct. 758.
[ Footnote 24 ] See 86 Cong.Rec. 2468-2474; S. 3046 in the House of Representatives, Union Calendar No. 924, June 4, 1940, pp. 4 and 17; H.Rep. No. 2376, 76th Cong., 3d Sess., p. 9. The amendment which resulted in the present form of the section appears at 86 Cong.Rec. 9448.
[ Footnote 25 ] The following also appears in the section:
Was this helpful?
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)


text:
American Physical Society Sites|APS|Journals|Physics Magazine
- American Physical Society Sites
- Publications
- Meetings & Events
- Programs
- Membership
- Policy & Advocacy
- Careers In Physics
- Newsroom
- About APS
- Become a Member
Committee Members: John F. Ahearne, W. R. Frazer, Steve Koonin, Frederick K. Lamb (Chair), Kumar C. Patel, Roberta P. Saxon, Jeremiah D. Sullivan
Officio Members: James S. Langer, George H. Trilling, Judy Franz
The APS Advisory Committee on National Missile Defense was appointed by the President of the APS to consider whether the APS should initiate a study of aspects of national missile defense (NMD) and, if so, to assist in identifying possible leaders and members of a study group.
The Advisory Committee addressed the following questions:
In addressing these questions, the Advisory Committee consulted widely and deliberated carefully before formulating its recommendations.
The Advisory Committee unanimously makes the following recommendations:
1. The APS should initiate as soon as possible a study of several key technical issues related to proposed NMD systems.
After reviewing the status of current and proposed missile defense programs and technologies, the Advisory Committee concluded that (a) there are important technical issues that can be meaningfully and appropriately addressed by an APS study of NMD and (b) the results of such a study could have a significant impact, by making an important contribution to the nation's understanding of these issues and affecting upcoming decisions concerning NMD. The Committee therefore recommends strongly that the APS initiate such a study as soon as possible.
The Committee also recommends that the APS conduct a series of follow-on studies (see below).
2. The APS studies of national missile defense should address technical issues that have a substantial physics content and should be rigorous and objective.
The APS has a reputation for careful and objective technical studies. Its studies therefore have very high credibility and have had a large impact. The APS studies of NMD should continue this approach. The Advisory Committee believes there are important technical issues related to NMD technologies and systems that have a large physics component and are therefore appropriate for study by the APS.
3. The initial APS study of NMD issues should focus on several important technical questions related to boost-phase intercept technologies and systems for national missile defense.
The Advisory Committee considered the full range of technical issues related to NMD technologies and systems that would be appropriate for an APS study and concluded that the best course would be for the APS to begin with a study focused on technical issues related to boost-phase intercept. There were several reasons for this decision:
(a) There are significant questions related to boost-phase intercept where careful and rigorous application of basic physical principles seems likely to lead to important conclusions. An APS study of these questions is therefore opportune and appropriate.
(b) Proposals for boost-phase-intercept NMD systems are under active consideration and are currently receiving widespread attention.
(c) The Committee believes it is important for the APS to complete an initial study of NMD in a very timely fashion, for the reasons discussed in point 4 below. In order to achieve this goal, the scope of the initial study must be fairly limited.
(d) Technical issues relating to boost-phase-intercept technologies and systems have received much less attention and scrutiny than technical issues relating to the current NMD program, which relies on mid-course intercept. An APS study of boost-phase intercept is therefore likely to have a more immediate and substantial impact than would a study of the current NMD program, which has already received considerable public scrutiny and is now being further critiqued.
The specific boost-phase technical issues that the Committee recommends studying are discussed below in Section C.
The Committee does believe that there are important technical questions concerning the current NMD architecture and program and mid-course intercept technologies and systems in general that are both very important and appropriate for study by the APS. Some of these questions have been the subject of recent studies by other groups and committees. The Committee expects the current mid-course intercept NMD program to be continued for at least several more years and therefore expects that these technical questions will remain relevant. The Committee believes that a study of the current NMD architecture and program would be likely to have more impact in a year or two than it would at present. The Committee recommends that the APS consider a follow-on study to the initial study proposed here that would address some of the important technical questions concerning mid-course intercept technologies and systems.
4. Every effort should be made to complete the initial study within nine months.
Important decisions concerning NMD are likely to be made early in the next administration and will commit the U.S. for years to come. Therefore every effort should be made to complete the initial study within nine months, so that its results are available when these early decisions are made.
5. The proposed study of boost-phase intercept should be unclassified.
Initially a large majority of the Advisory Committee believed that any APS study should be classified. However, after carefully considering the current situation and the pros and cons, the Committee unanimously concluded that an unclassified study could address the technical issues listed in Section C in a highly credible and meaningful way and is the only viable approach. The principal reasons for this conclusion are:
(a) There is a wealth of information in the open literature about the technologies and systems relevant to boost-phase intercept. Important technical issues can be addressed using basic physical principles. An unclassified study of these issues would therefore be meaningful and credible.
(b) Waiting for decisions concerning access and cooperation would delay the start of the study by many months, especially because the U.S. is in the midst of a difficult and possibly contentious transition between administrations. Such a delay would significantly diminish the value and impact of the study.
(c) Conducting a classified study does not guarantee access to all or even most of the relevant classified information. Some relevant agencies and individuals may not cooperate and may later charge that important classified information was not considered. After careful investigation and consultation with various officials and individuals, the Committee concluded that an APS study of NMD might not receive cooperation from the relevant individuals and agencies.
(d) Considering classified information would mean that the results of the study could not be released until it has been reviewed by all the relevant agencies. This would certainly delay release of the report by several months and could delay it much longer, greatly diminishing its value and impact.
(e) Conducting a classified study would significantly constrain the pool of individuals available to serve as members of the study group.
(f) Although the conclusions of an unclassified study can be criticized as being based on incomplete information, the Committee believes that an unclassified APS study of boost-phase intercept would have a very high degree of credibility because many of the most important issues can be addressed using basic physical principles and because of the very strong reputation the APS has for conducting careful, objective, and rigorous studies of technical issues.
The Advisory Committee therefore concluded that the proposed study of boost-phase intercept technologies should be unclassified. The study group should include a number of scientists who have knowledge and experience in the relevant military programs.
6. The study group should be given some flexibility in deciding which specific technical issues to pursue.
Although the Advisory Committee believes that the technical issues identified in Section C are important and appropriate for the proposed study, the technical and policy context of the study could change and the study group may find that some issues are more or less suitable for detailed study. The Advisory Committee therefore recommends that the study group be given some latitude in deciding which specific issues to consider in depth.
7. A liaison committee should be created to facilitate communications between the Society and the NMD study group. A committee of knowledgeable APS members should review the report of the study group.
The Advisory Committee recommends that APS appoint a few members of the Executive Board and a member of the Panel on Public Affairs to serve as a liaison committee to facilitate communications between the Society and the study group and to serve as a sounding board for the study group as it makes decisions concerning the direction and timing of the study.
As with past APS studies, the report of the boost-phase-intercept study group should be reviewed by a committee appointed by the APS, before it is released.
8. APS should conduct a series of NMD studies over the next few years.
In addition to technical issues related to boost-phase intercept technologies and systems, the Advisory Committee identified several other important technical issues that could be meaningfully studied by an APS study group. Issues relating to the currently proposed mid-course NMD system have already been mentioned. Other issues identified by the Committee include certain testing and evaluation questions. Some of these issues are listed in the Appendix.
The Advisory Committee did not recommend that the initial study consider these important issues only because of the need to keep the scope of the initial study limited in order to make it manageable and timely. The Committee believes it is very important for the Society to address these issues over time, in order to provide the public and policy makers with a more balanced and comprehensive understanding of the overall situation.
Many institutions and organizations that have sought to provide useful technical input to policy decisions have found that comprehensive, long-term studies of major and complex technical question frequently have a disappointingly limited impact, because the decisions to which they are relevant have already been made by the time the study is complete. The Advisory Committee believes that this problem can be mitigated by conducting a series of shorter, more focused studies of related technical issues.
The Advisory Committee therefore recommends that the APS build on the proposed short-term study of boost-phase intercept to develop a new model for how APS addresses large and complex technical issues with important political and policy implications by initiating a series of studies of NMD technical issues over the next several years. These studies need not and probably could not be carried out by a single study group, but it may be helpful to draw on the experience of prior study groups and maintain continuity by having some members of earlier studies participate in the later ones. Some of these studies could be classified studies, if this approach seems important and workable at the time they are initiated.
1. The Advisory Committee recommends that the initial study focus on the following questions related to boost-phase intercept by hit-to-kill weapons:
1.1 Could one use existing radars or IR sensors to provide useful missile-track information to a boost-phase interceptor and kill vehicle (KV)? Are there other radar or IR sensor technologies that could provide useful missile-track information to a boost-phase interceptor and KV?
1.2 What are the constraints imposed on the sizes and weights of boost-phase interceptors and kill vehicles by the velocities and accelerations and geographic coverage needed to achieve intercept? What are the implications for basing modes and the ability to counter possible threats?
1.3 What is the phenomenology of missile plumes and what KV sensor capabilities would be needed to see the rocket exhaust and the hardbody through the expanded plume? Can existing sensor technologies provide these capabilities? Can other sensor technologies provide these capabilities? What kind of homing capabilities would be required?
1.4 Is it technically feasible to adapt the THAAD or Navy Theater-Wide TMD systems for a boost-phase intercept system?
1.5 What warning times are physically possible, what response times would be required, and what are the command and control implications?
2. The Advisory Committee recommends that the study group also summarize (perhaps in a separate chapter of their report) the current status of the Airborne Laser (ABL) program and the technical challenges involved in using airborne lasers for boost-phase intercept of ICBMs.
The technology of airborne lasers is significantly different from the technology of hit-to-kill weapons. Also, the ABL program is a very substantial program. Thorough study of the ABL program would therefore broaden the technological scope of the study significantly beyond the technology of hit-to-kill weapons, adding significantly to the task of the study group and requiring that it include many members with expertise in lasers and laser propagation. This would likely add substantially to the time required to complete the study. On the other hand, it is important that the APS not leave the proposed ABL system unaddressed.
It is the Committee's view that these difficulties can be largely avoided by including a summary of the current status of the ABL program and the technical challenges facing the use of airborne lasers for intercepting ICBMs in their boost-phase. Preparing such a summary would require only that several study group members have expertise in this area and would not increase substantially the task of the study group.
3. The Advisory Committee recommends that the report of the boost-phase intercept study group include a chapter that places its analysis of boost-phase intercept systems in context by summarizing the most important and challenging unresolved technical issues relevant to the current mid-course intercept NMD program, including testing and evaluation issues.
As discussed above, the Advisory Committee recommends that the current, mid-course intercept NMD system not be the main focus of the proposed initial APS study of NMD, in order to keep the study manageable and have a finished report in time to affect important decisions. However, it is important that the APS not leave the impression that these issues are resolved or unimportant, which could happen if there is no mention of them in the report of the boost-phase study group. There is precedent for mentioning technical issues relevant to related programs. The DEW Study Group report identified but did not discuss in detail important related issues, such as the role of kinetic energy weapons; command, control, communication, and intelligence; computing hardware; software creation and reliability for battle management; and overall system complexity. An appendix of the DEW report discussed systems integration issues.
The Advisory Committee recommends that the APS address more fully the important and challenging unresolved technical issues relating to the currently proposed mid-course intercept NMD technologies and systems, including testing and evaluation issues, in follow-on studies.
The Advisory Committee has compiled a list of qualified people who would be appropriate as leaders or members of the proposed study and has discussed this list with the APS President and President-elect.
In addition to the technical issues related to boost-phase intercept technologies and systems cited above, the Advisory Committee identified numerous technical issues that are important and would be appropriate for study by the APS. The following list is intended to be illustrative rather than definitive.
1. The current mid-course intercept NMD program
Are there countermeasures to mid-course intercept that are likely to be effective against current and near-term intercept technologies?
Is it likely to be technologically feasible for a state that has developed ICBMs to deploy possibly successful countermeasures to mid-course intercept?
2. Testing and evaluation
Testing is generally restricted to two test ranges (White Sands and the Pacific Test Range), which means that the test conditions differ from operational conditions in many ways, including (but not limited to) the missile and interceptor trajectories, intercept geometries, relative velocities, altitudes, and day or night conditions. How important are these differences and how much uncertainty do they introduce in whether the system will work as planned?
How much extrapolation is required in going from tests to operational conditions? What impact does this have on the realism and adequacy of the tests?
How robust is the currently planned NMD system likely to be, given that (according to the Rumsfeld Commission Report) it will very probably encounter unexpected radar and IR signatures and countermeasures?
Given a certain effectiveness requirement, how many and what types of tests would be needed to determine with high confidence whether the system has achieved the required level of effectiveness? What uncertainties are introduced by possible countermeasures?
3. Airborne lasers for boost-phase intercept
The Advisory Committee believes there are many important physics questions related to the use of airborne lasers for boost-phase intercept that could be addressed by a more detailed study of this technology. Such a study could build on the analysis of boost-phase intercept using lasers contained in the 1987 report of the APS Study Group on Directed Energy Weapons, noting the technical problems with laser ABM weapons identified in the DEW study and describing the extent to which these problems have or have not been solved in the intervening period, in the context of airborne lasers.
A study of airborne lasers should probably focus on technical issues-- such as horizontal propagation of laser beams--that do not depend on the details of the laser itself.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
50°03' / 21°25'
Translation of Debica chapter from
Pinkas Hakehillot Polin
Translation of Debica chapter from
Published by Yad Vashem
Published in Jerusalem
Published in Jerusalem
Project Coordinator
Marc Seidenfeld
Our sincere appreciation to Yad Vashem for permission
to put this material on the JewishGen web site.
This is a translation from: Pinkas Hakehillot: Encyclopedia of Jewish Communities, Poland,
Volume III, pages 119-124, published by Yad Vashem, Jerusalem
JewishGen, Inc. makes no representations regarding the accuracy of
the translation. The reader may wish to refer to the original material
for verification.
JewishGen is not responsible for inaccuracies or omissions in the original work and cannot rewrite or edit the text to correct inaccuracies and/or omissions.
Our mission is to produce a translation of the original work and we cannot verify the accuracy of statements or alter facts cited.
(pages 119-124)
The village of Dembitz was already the seat of the Church deacon in 1326. In 1358, the king granted the owners of Dembitz the right to set up a city according to the Magdeburg charter. In the subsequent years of that century, the city was granted further rights, such as the right to hold yearly fairs and weekly market days and other such rights. Dembitz is located on the main route from Krakow to Lwow, and its geographic location was a significant factor in its development. Despite the destruction caused to the city by the Swedish invasion of 1655 and the great fire of 1660 which destroyed nearly all of the houses, Dembitz continued to develop, and a marketplace was built in the New City, which was next to the Old City. In the 17th century, Dembitz was known for the widespread business which was transacted there, and also for the multitude of industrial endeavors (shoemaking, weaving, blacksmithing, tinsmithing, etc.), whose owners were organized into guilds.
The decline of Dembitz began in the first half of the 18th century, when bands of soldiers would pass through, and battles were fought in its midst among the Swedish, Russian, and Polish Confederate armies. At that time there remained only 60 wooden houses, and a marked decline of commerce and manufacturing took place. After the annexation of the region to Austria in 1772, Dembitz lost its status of a city. In the first half of the 19th century was a time of great crisis due to fires, floods and epidemics which struck every few years, in particular in the years 1830, 1847 and 1854.
In 1846, the urban residents of Dembitz, along with the neighboring villagers, joined together in a revolt against the landlords. The burnt their castles, killed several noblemen, and divided the spoil (grain and livestock) amongst themselves. The rebellion was put down ruthlessly by the Austrian army, and the residents of the city were harmed.
In the latter half of the 19th century, the development of Dembitz began, primarily due to the construction in 1856 of the Krakow - Zheshev [1] rail line that passed through Dembitz, and had a stop there, and also the construction in 1896 of the Dembitz - Tarnobrzeg [2] highway. The industry and manufacturing began to revive, and the population began to increase. By 1895, there were already 280 houses in Dembitz. In 1914, Dembitz regained its status of a city, and in 1907 a gymnasium was established there. In 1918, the Russian army captured the city twice, and inflicted great damage.
At the conclusion of the first world war, an economic slowdown occurred, however, between 1936-1939, the economy was stimulated again, since centers of economic activity were joined to the district. A large cotton factory and several other smaller factories were set up in the cities, whose purpose was to service the larger industrial establishments that were set up in the entire region.
The first documentation of Jews in Dembitz is from 1471. In an agreement between the owners of the city and the local priest, it is noted that the residents of the city are required to pay tithes to the church "with the exception of the Jews and non-Catholics". Apparently there were only a few Jewish families, who abandoned the city in the wake of the Tatar invasion of 1502 or during the great fire of 1504.
The Jewish settlement apparently took root after the invasion of the Swedes in 1656, as well as after the fire of 1660. At that time, the "New City" was established. However, the first concrete evidence as to the establishment of a Jewish community is from 1690. According to the regulations of the butcher's guild from that year, limits were established for the Jews of Dembitz with respect to Kosher slaughter.
At that time, there were two Jewish communities in the city: one in the Old City, and a larger one in the New City. Levi the son of Yitzchak was Parnas of the Old City, and Hershel was Parnas in the New City. The population growth of the Jewish community in the New City met the disfavor of the general population and the church authorities. In 1701 a committee appointed by the Cardinal of Krakow decided that the growth of the Jewish population in Dembitz should be curbed. The Jews were forbidden to do business during the times of Church services, to drink liquor on Sundays, and to employ Christian maids in their homes. The residents of the New City were commanded to destroy their synagogue, that had apparently been built illegally. The Jews were able to prove that the building was the private property of the Parnasim of the community, who paid appropriate head taxes to enable them to set up a place of public prayer in their homes. The decree to destroy the synagogue was rescinded.
In the 18th century, the Jewish populations of the two communities in Dembitz continued to grow. In 1765 the community oversaw also the 338 Jewish residents of the neighboring villages. According to the census of 1864-1864, the professions of the 33 wage earners that were recorded are as follows: 1 retail merchant, 1 cantor, 4 teachers of children, 1 musician, 1 cord maker, 7 tailors, 3 hat makers, 1 silver smith, 7 butchers, 5 bakers, 1 tinsmith and 1 medic. Many wage earners from the city and the outlying areas were not included in this census, in particular merchants, store owners, inn keepers and middlemen. Apparently, these people avoided the census due to fear of "the evil eye" with respect to the governing authorities and the tax collectors.
At the beginning of the period of Austrian rule in Dembitz (from 1772)
{p 120}
a wave of fiscal decrees and enactments came upon the Jews of Dembitz. The declared purpose was to make the Jews "more useful and cultured". In accordance with the decree that required Jews to settle in villages and to take up agricultural work, the community of Dembitz was required to provide 8 families, and to provide them with implements and animals to the value of 250 Guilder per family. The community managed to avoid fulfilling this decree until 1804, and even in the subsequent years, not a single Jewish family from Dembitz was given over. When the school system that were founded by H. Homburg was established [3] , Dembitz was also required to set up this type of school. Meir Kook was appointed as the teacher, and his salary was 200 Florin (ten times the annual salary of the Rabbi at the time). However, this decree did not come to fruition, since this entire school system was closed down by a decree of the Kaiser in 1806. In 1805, a command forbade Jews to purchase buildings or fields from gentiles, but the Jews of Dembitz were able to circumvent this stricture: the bought houses and fields and hid their ownership of them, and only in 1824, after the disclosed their ownership to the government, did their ownership of these properties become official.
The early years of Austrian dominion were particularly difficult for the Jews of Dembitz; however by the 1820s and 1830s their economic situation began to improve due to the opening up of business ties with other provinces of the Austrian empire. In the middle of the 19th century small scale factories and workshops were set up in Dembitz, primarily by the Jews. These included flour mills, liquor distilleries, beer breweries, match and soap factories, and even a small furnace for glass production. To the good fortune of the Jews of Dembitz, the bloody events which took place in the wake of the revolt of the farmers against the noblemen and their estates in 1846 passed over Dembitz itself, and the fear of the community turned out to be for naught.
The establishment of a railway station in Dembitz on the Krakow-Lwow railway line marked the beginning of the economic flourishing of Dembitz. With the annulment of the economic restrictions against the Jews, and with the freedom of residence and movement (the granting of these freedoms took place over a period of time from the revolution of 1848 until the granting of equal rights to the Jews of Dembitz in 1867-1868), the Jews of Dembitz began to conduct their business with greater vigor. The centers of the Old City and the New City became filled with Jewish stores and stalls. The fairs in Dembitz and in the neighboring towns and villages served as an important source of livelihood for the Jewish merchants and peddlers. At the end of the 19th century an army cavalry regiment camped in Dembitz, and many Jewish merchants and workmen made their livelihood by servicing this regiment, in particularly the captains of the regiment. At the beginning of the 20th century, several clothing factories were established which employed dozens of Jewish tailors. The Jewish community of Dembitz was not noted in particular for its wealth. The profit from the small scale trade and industry was quite modest, and the living conditions were quite cramped. In the wave of emigration in the final decades of the 19th century, and in particular in the years of economic depression at the beginning of the 20th century, many Jewish families left Dembitz in an attempt to find better sustenance in larger cities, or in foreign countries, in particular to the United States of America. This exodus diminished the Jewish population of Dembitz, and the eve of the First World War was marked by a decline in the communal and cultural activities of the community.
As has previously been noted, the Jews of Dembitz were organized into their own community already at the beginning of the 17th century. The community of Dembitz belonged to the district of Zheshev until 1730, and through that district, it paid its required head tax of 500 gold coins. From that year until 1756, the community of Dembitz succeeded in becoming independent of Zheshev for several years, and its head tax quotas were set and paid independently. In 1756 the community of Dembitz again came under control of Zheshev. In 1785 the Austrian government established the communal council of Dembitz which consisted of 3 Parnasim. This council was required to run the community in accordance with the governing authorities of the district, to concern itself with paying the large number of taxes at the correct times, and to maintain the population registries. Synagogue trustees, charity trustees, appraisers and bookkeepers were also appointed in addition to the Parnasim. This composition of the communal council remained in place with minor changes until the standardization of the communal leadership in 1890. It is important to point out that after the initial years when the council was controlled by the tax lessees (in particular by the lessees of the "candle tax", which included corrupt individuals and betrayers), the community of Dembitz, according to the traditions of all Jewish communities, made it its business to concern itself not only with the activities required by the government, but also with general communal matters, such as the support the poor (a trust fund was established), the burial society (Chevra Kadisha), and the visiting of the sick (Bikur Cholim).
From 1891 and onward the communal council had a set budget, which in 1907 reached the sum of 13,000 Crowns.
We do not have much information on the Rabbis who served in Dembitz until the middle of the 18th century. In the latter half of that century, Rabbi Shmuel and Rabbi Eliezer Horowitz, of the renowned Horowitz family, are noted in the annals of the Rabbis of Dembitz. After the passing of Reb Eliezer in 1790, another Rabbi was not appointed. Rabbi Natan Landau served as the Moreh Horaa [4] until 1809. From that year until 1820 Rabbi Shmuel Chanoch Gewirtz served as Rabbi, and his son Rabbi Eliahu took over after him.
Already by the first half of the 19th century, the Jewish community of Dembitz had come under the Chassidic influence of Rabbi Naftali Tzvi of Ropczyce. With the increase of Chassidic influence, the community appointed to the Rabbinical chair Rabbi Reuven Horowitz, the grandson of Reb Naftali Tzvi. He also served the role of Admor [5] . His son Rabbi Shmuel inherited these two titles after him. In the 1880s and 1890s, Reb Alter Yeshaya Horowitz served as Rabbi of the city and Admor to the throngs of Chassidim. He died in 1895.
{p 121}
Zionist activity began in 1894. At around 1904 the Zionists set up a library and assembly hall. The most organized group was "Poale Zion", which began in 1905. In 1907 this organization arranged a tailor's strike, which was successful. After the strike, the workday of the tailor's apprentices was shortened to 11 hours. In 1911, a youth branch of Poale Zion, called "Yugend" was established. A woman's Zionist organization "Devora" was set up around 1904, which attracted mainly the upper class women. The commonfolk set up their own organization "Chavatzelet" [6] which was associated with "Poale Zion".
In 1907, two additional Zionist organizations were established in Dembitz: "Geula" [7] which attracted the gymnasia students and the academia, and "Hashachar" [8] which attracted the youth of the Beis Medrash. In 1911 the members of "Poale Zion" broke off from the general Zionist library, with the complaint that it did not devote sufficient attention to Yiddish literature. They set up their own "Sifria Amamit" [9] with 200 members. In 1911 the "Tzeire Zion" [10] was established, and upon its foundations "Hashomer Hatzair" [11] was set up in 1918.
Approximately a month after the outbreak of the First World War [12] , Russian army units captured Dembitz. As they entered the city, the Cossacks began to steal Jewish property, to torture Jewish men and rape Jewish women. According to one report, some local Jews attempted to find refuge in the Beis Medrash. The Russians first forced the men out and then raped the women (several of them were shot as they attempted to flee by jumping out of the high windows), and afterward commanded the men to reenter the Beis Medrash, which was then ignited from all sides. The Russians remained in Dembitz for about one week, and to the joy of the Jews the city was liberated by Austrian army units. After two or three days the Austrians retreated again, however this time all the Jews of Dembitz left their cities and exiled themselves to the interior of the Austrian Empire, primarily to Sudetenland [13] . From there some -- not all -- returned in 1915. At the conclusion of the war, in November and December of 1918, ruffians of the city and neighboring villages attempted to start a pogrom against the Jews of Dembitz. The "National Council" that was set up through the efforts of and headed by the Zionists prevented the pogrom in two ways: the bribed the head of the local police and the commander of the gendarme who warded off the pogrom; while at the same time they organized a Jewish defense unit from amongst those who had been released from the army, they provided them with approximately 100 bayonets that were produced by the local Jewish factories. These people were able to stand up against any attempt to injure the Jews or steal their property.
There were 66 workshops and industrial ventures that were under Jewish ownership in 1921, but this number included three which did not renew their activities after the war. The 63 ventures employed 131 people, including 59 owners and members of their families, and 72 employees, of whom 47 were Jews. 22 of these 63 ventures were involved in the clothing industry (tailors, ready made clothing, and hats), and 19 in food related industries. This number does not included the small scale merchants, owners of stalls, peddlers, members of the professional intelligentsia and clergy.
The Jewish merchants' union which was established in Dembitz already prior to the war assisted their members who were in difficulty, primarily by supplying merchandise on credit. However, in subsequent years this union was not active, and its activities were restricted to the arranging of permits for its members. In its stead, two other financial institutions that also had existed prior to the war expanded their activities: the Gemach [15] fund and the "Jewish Bank". After having interrupted its activities during the war, the Gemach fund only renewed its activities in 1925. From 1927, the Gemach was partially supported by the Joint, and by 1935 its principal had reached 20,000 Zloty. In order to increase its intake, the fund set up a linen workshop which had about 30 sewing machines. This workshop hired girls. The profits of this enterprise were transferred to the Gemach, and thereby it was able to increase the number of loans it was able to give to the needy. In general the loans would be up to 500 Zloty per loan, interest free, with repayments every two weeks. The "Jewish Bank", which renewed its activities at the end of the war, assisted the more well off merchants, who were able to receive loans at modest interest rates.
In the 1930s, the economic situation of the Jews of Dembitz declined progressively. The development of industry in the city and the area between 1936-1939 did not bring an improvement in the situation, for the Jews of Dembitz were not employed at all in those enterprises. The Jews were restricted from obtaining merchandise or from selling their wares, in light of the anti-Jewish propaganda and the boycott of Jewish industry and business, which increased in Dembitz during these years. This caused a decrease in the number of purchases that gentiles would make in Jewish stores and factories. There were many bankruptcies at that time among the Jewish merchants. The well to do only barely found sustenance, and the poor required assistance.
In addition to the charitable fund, two other public assistance institutions helped the beggars and dispossessed, who came to the city from near and far. One organization would gather donations from the heads of households, and from the Gemach, which set up a branch from the beggars. This branch was called "Demei Vitur" [16] , which gave out money in an honorable fashion on the condition that the beggar
{p 122}
would stop bothering the heads of households. The "Chevrat HaMezonot" [17] made sure that the needy would receive hot meals, especially for Sabbaths and festivals. The "Linat Tzedek" [18] organization took care of the chronically ill, in particular by guarding over them at night. Only men belonged to this organization. A similar organization called "Chevrat Lina" [19] had a membership of women, who took care of the ill also during the day. "Chevrat Lina gave out medication to those who required it, and also ran a small pharmacy of its own.
The "Agudat Yetomim" [20] looked after the war orphans and other orphans in Dembitz. This organization established an orphanage in 1927, at first in a rented house, and from 1935 in its own 8 room house. This orphanage took care of about 50 charges that year, and also dispensed food and tuition assistance for dozens of poor children, who were not orphans, but who required assistance. This organization arranged annual summer camps for 30 children.
The Zionist organizations resumed their activities already by the first few years after the world war. In subsequent years, branches of almost all the existing Zionist organizations of the time were set up in Dembitz. The most conspicuous organizations were the "General Zionists", "Mizrachi", and "Hitachdt". The most prominent Zionist youth organizations were "Hashomer Hatzair", "Gordinia", "Hanoar Hatzioni", "Akiva" and "Betar". Many members of these organizations participated in Hachshara [21] camps in the region. In Dembitz itself in 1934 there were two Hachshara Kibbutzim, one of "Hanoar Hatzioni" consisting of 17 members, and one of "Gordonia" consisting of 23 members.
The number of purchasers of Zionist Shekels [22] grew annually. 271 delegates participated in the 1931 Zionist congress: their affiliations were as follows: "General Zionists" 116, "Mizrachi" 65, "Gush Eretz Yisrael Haovedet" [23] 63, and the Union of Revisionist Zionists 27. In the elections for the 1935 Zionist congress, the "General Zionists" received 772 ballots, the "Mizrachi" 192, and the "List of Gush Eretz Yisrael Haovedet" 276. This number of ballots evidently included the electors from the surrounding villages. However, it is also possible that the election results were not completely pure, and various electors may have used more than one shekel to register their right to vote. A branch of "Agudat Yisrael" [24] also existed in Dembitz.
In the communal council elections that took place in 1922 and 1928, the Zionists took the lead, and their delegates were elected to head the council. However, due to the influence of the Chassidim, the governing authorities deposed the Zionist head of the council, and in 1928 they invalidated the results of the elections. Due to the pressure exerted by the government, additional elections to the communal council were held, and Avraham Goldman was elected as head. He received the approbation from the Rabbi of the city and also from the governing authorities, and he served in his position until the outbreak of World War II. After the death of Rabbi Shmuel Horowitz in 1923, his son Rabbi Tzvi Elimelech took his place. He perished in the Holocaust.
In the period between the two world wars, much activity in the realm of education and culture took place in the Jewish community of Dembitz.
In the realm of Torah education, the traditional Orthodox played the leading role. In 1919, a "Talmud Torah" was set up through the efforts of "Agudat Yisrael". In 1923, there were 306 students divided into 8 grades, and 10 teachers in that school. The "Eitz Chayim" Yeshiva renewed its activities in 1923. It had 83 students in 3 classes, lead by 3 teachers. In 1932 a "Beis Yaakov" girl's school was established.
The Hebrew school, which had been established in 1910, renewed and expanded its activities. In 1919 it became affiliated with the "Tarbut" network of schools. In 1926 it had 146 students, which included about 70 girls. It had 6 teachers and 5 grades. The school building served as a center for cultural and Zionist activities, a home base for the youth groups, and a public library. Courses in Hebrew for adults took place in the evenings. For a time, a Hebrew kindergarten functioned next to the "Tarbut" school. The communal council was responsible for taking care of and running the school. The WIZO women's organization provided assistance to the students.
In 1935, a clubhouse was established in the school building, and a reading room next to it. The clubhouse organized lectures, and provided a meeting place for the drama group, and the theatrical groups that would visit Dembitz. The "Bar Kochva" sport organization was founded in 1920, and played a prominent role in sporting activities. An additional sports club "Hachashmonai" was founded in 1931.
Dembitz was captured by the Germans on September 8, 1939. The Jews immediately suffered from the full severity of the Wehrmacht soldiers. They broke into homes, stole property, and conscripted the Jewish men for hard labor.
In November 1939, the Judenrat was set up, headed by Tovia Zucker. The Judenrat was responsible for providing a daily quota of men for hard labor, turning over household effects and valuables to the Germans, and collecting contributions. In 1940, the Germans required Jewish men to work on the roads and to maintain the railway lines. Jews were also employed in factories which repaired locomotives and railway cars. The work conditions were replete scheming and maltreatment.
With the worsening of the situation in the city, in 1940 young Jews began
{p 123}
to escape to Soviet territory in the hope of finding refuge. However the difficult living conditions of the refugees and the constraints in obtaining Soviet citizenship forced several of them to secretly return to their families in Dembitz.
In the spring of 1940, the Germans conducted a census of the population of the city, including Jews. This census served as the basis for the issuance of papers for the Jews who were conscripted for hard labor. The surveillance of the Jews increased. In June 1940, Jewish men were conscripted to Postokov. They were involved in constructing the labor camp that opened in November of that year, and served until 1944 as a place of torture and murder for Jews of the area. The Dembitz Judenrat attempted to free some of the conscripts from the Postokov camp, or in any case to lighten the working conditions. In return for a large bribe, the heads of the Judenrat of Dembitz reached an arrangement with the heads of the camp that the kitchen would be run by appropriate people, and the food would be supplied by representatives of the J.S.S. In the first months of the existence of the camp this arrangement made life much easier for the prisoners.
In the winter of 1940-1941, the economic situation of the community deteriorated. The Jews of Dembitz suffered from restrictions of movement, theft of property and monetary obligations. At the end of 1940, a communal kitchen run by the J.S.S. was opened in the city. It served hot meals to hundreds of needy people. That year, changes took place in the leadership of the Judenrat; due to internal disputes Tovia Zucker was pushed aside, and Yosef Taub was appointed in his stead.
At the beginning of 1941, the Jews were concentrated into a specific area of the city that surrounded the "Potter's Circle", one of the worst areas of town. The Polish families that lived in this area left, and Jews were moved in to replace them. The houses in this quarter were not able to house all the Jews, so wooden huts were erected that would each house 20 people. The Judenrat was responsible for the allocation of housing in the quarter. The sanitary conditions were quite poor due to the overcrowding. In order to prevent the outbreak of epidemics, medical services and a sickroom were set up.
After a short time, this area became a closed ghetto. Only people with special permits were permitted to leave its boundaries. The disruption of communication with other areas of the cities made it very difficult for the residents of the ghetto to obtain food. The Germans viciously put down any attempt at smuggling of food into the ghetto. Anyone who was caught outside of the ghetto without permission, or who was caught smuggling food into the ghetto, was brought to the Jewish cemetery for execution.
In the latter half of June 1942, Jews that were expelled from Sedziszow, Ropczyce, Wielopole Skrzynskie, Pilzno, Radomysl Wielki, and other neighboring towns were brought to the Dembitz ghetto. The population of the ghetto at that time was about 4,000. This large increase in population in the small area of the closed off ghetto made the economic distress more grave. In addition, the perplexity in the ghetto increased due to the knowledge of the massive expulsions in the neighboring settlements. The suspicion that an expulsion aktion was imminent in Dembitz caused people to search for hiding places both outside and inside the ghetto. Families who had maintained good relations with their Christian neighbors attempted to seek refuge with them. The workers in the enterprises outside the ghetto prepared hiding places in their workplaces and also within the ghetto itself.
The first large scale aktion in Dembitz began on June 29, 1942. The ghetto was surrounded by S.S. units and the Polish police. The Germans ordered the Judenrat to gather all work permits that were in the hands of the Jews for recertification. The Jews were informed that signed work permits would only be returned to the most essential workers for the German economy, and the remainder would be sent to "work in the East". A selection took place in the public square, and the Gestapo agents gathered together those who possessed appropriately signed work permits. The remainder were transferred to a second gathering point that was known as "Kashinza Lunka". While the enumeration at the gathering points was taking place, the Germans thoroughly searched the houses of the ghetto to find those who had hidden. Whomever was found hiding was brought to the Jewish cemetery and murdered there.
The holders of permits and there families were returned to the ghetto. A group of about 200 of those who were selected for expulsion were taken to Lisa Gora, near the village of Wielice, to be murdered. A group of men were separated from those gathered at "Kashinza Lunka" and sent to work in the aircraft factories of Zheshev and Mielic. Another group was sent to the Postokov labor camp. After these selections, approximately 2,000 people were sent off the Belzec death camp.
After this aktion, those who had succeeded in hiding outside of the ghetto began to return secretly. The Polish populace was warned by the German authorities to refrain from providing shelter to Jews: those who went against that order would be punished by death.
After the June aktion, the survivors of the community that remained in the ghetto attempted with all their effort to find employment in industries that were vital to the Germans. They believed that only that type of employment would save them from further expulsions. The railway industry was considered one such vital workplace, and great sums of money would be expended in order to secure work in such an enterprise.
In the autumn of 1942 the ghetto of Dembitz was classified as a labor camp: at the time it was populated by about 600 people. On the 8th of Tevet 5703 [26] there was a further aktion. The Germans, with the aid of the Ukrainian gendarmes, gathered all members of the camp into the area of "Kashinza Lunka". There was a selection, and the workers in the railway factories were separated from the rest of those gathered. However, this time, the workers were not permitted to remain with their families, who were sent together with all the remainder to the Belzec death camp.
Even after this aktion, people who had succeeded in hiding and saving themselves from the expulsion returned to the camp. There were also instances in this final transport to Belzec where several of the Jews of Dembitz jumped off the train. Whomever did not meet their deaths under the wheels of the train or from the bullets of the guards
{p 124}
returned to the camp in secrecy. However the Jewish directors of the labor camp did not agree to allow them remain in the camp, lest the matter become known to the Germans and the camp be liquidated completely. The head Jewish superintendent of the camp at that time was Imarglik, and the Jewish survivors of Dembitz subjected him and the other Jewish guards of that time to a severe inquiry [27].
At the beginning of 1943, groups of Jews who survived in the neighboring Jewish communities were brought to the camp, and the number of number of prisoners increased to about 1,600. At that time, in one day 52 Jews who were in the camp "illegally" were captured and taken out to be killed. Others who lived in the camp without permits fled to the ghetto of Bochnia, where they met the same fate as the other Jews of that ghetto; most were sent to Auschwitz in September 1943 to be murdered.
The prisoners of the Dembitz camp continued to work in the railroad plants and in construction until the liquidation of the camp in April 1943. The last prisoners were transferred to other labor camps near Krakow. After a time, when these camps were liquidated due to the approaching front, the prisoners, including Jews from Dembitz, were transferred to other camps on the conquered lands of Europe.
Several Jewish families managed to hide in the city and in nearby towns with the aid of their gentile acquaintances, others managed to find hiding places in the surrounding forests. Many were uncovered due to the spreading of rumors, and were taken out to be killed in the Jewish cemetery. The Polish police assisted in these searches. From among the righteous gentiles who expended effort to save Jews of Dembitz, it is important to mention the doctor Dr. Alexander Mikolikow and his wife Liukadia, who hid 13 Jews in their home.
Sefer Dembitz , Tel Aviv, 1960.
"Yudisher Arbeiter" 28.2.1908, 30.12.1910, 14.2.1911, 3.4.1914, 15.6.1918, 15.7.1918, 27.12.1918; "Yudishe Arbeiter Yugend" March 1912, July 1912, September-October 1917. "Hamagid" 9.11.1848, 31.7.1867, 14.2.1895, 23.10.1903; "Mamitzpeh" 2.9.1904, 9.1.1914; "Hatzfira" 12.8.1904, 31.5.1905, 15.6.1916, 4.1.1921; "Hashomer" Elul 5679.
"Chwila Wieczorna" 2.4.1937. "Diwrej Akiva" 3.4.1936; "Hanoar" (Lwow) styczen 1932, "Hanoar Hacijoni" 25.2.1935, 15.5.1936, 15.6.1936, 15.3.1938; "Nowy Dziennik" 1920, 1922, 1925-1937; "Przeglad Zydowski" 27.7.1929; "Slowo Mlodych" listopad 1938; "Trygodnik Zydowski" 24.7.1928, 30.2.1930, 14.3.1930, 24.4.1931, 26.8.1932, 18.11.1932, 11.2.1938;
2. A city about 50 km north of Dembitz. Back
3. See the article in the Dembitz Yizkor book. These were schools that were meant to acculturate the Jews to the Austrian culture. Back
4. Moreh Horaa is a title for a adjudicator of Jewish Law. The implication is that here is that he would have served as Rabbi, perhaps even the head of the Rabbinical court (Beis Din), but not the official Rabbi of the city. Back
5. Chassidic master. Back
6. Lily. Back
7. Redemption. Back
8. The dawn. Back
9. Public library. Back
10. Youth of Zion.Back
11. The Young Guard. A socialist Zionist organization still in existence today. Back
12. This would be around the beginning of September 1914. Back
13. Sudetenland is the Germanic areas of what used to be known as Czechoslovakia. It is of course quite famous as the lands given away to Hitler by Neville Chamberlain in the 1938 Munich pact. The entire area of what is now the Czech Republic and Slovakia used to be part of the Austro Hungarian Empire. Dembitz is perhaps 50 miles north of the Polish Slovak border. Back
14. The Joint Distribution Committee: an international committee for helping Jewish poor and dispossessed. Back
15. Gemach is an acronym for Gemilut Chasadim, which means an organization for the doing of good deeds. This generally refers to a charitable organization or free loan organization, or other such organizations of public welfare. Back
16. Money for concession. Money given in return for relinquishing a right. Back
17. The food organization. Back
18. Lodging in righteousness. Back
19. The organization of lodging. Back
20. Orphan's band or organization. Back
21. Hachshara is a term used by Zionist organizations for preparations for aliya. Back
22. Seemingly a term for membership in Zionist organizations. The purchasing of a shekel would register one as an affiliate of a Zionist movement. Back
23. The Labor Bloc of the Land of Israel. Back
24. The Orthodox, non-Zionist organization. Back
25. A river in near the south-eastern tip of the present day borders of Poland. Back
26. Wednesday December 16, 1942. Back
27. It is not entirely clear what this means. It probably means that after the war, the survivors of Dembitz took these people to task for not coming to the aid of those who jumped off the train. Back
Yizkor Book Project JewishGen Home Page
Copyright © 1999-2023 by JewishGen, Inc.
Updated 5 May 2006 by LA