Holocaust city by Tim Cole

Author:Tim Cole
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Routledge

THE IMPACT OF PETITIONING UPON THE DOCTORS OF SPACE

It would seem that there was a thoroughgoing reinvestigation of the designated yellow-star houses and a significant number of the properties suggested for designation in petitions on 20–21 June. Certainly reference to this reinvestigation is made in some of the petitions themselves. The “Jewish” owner of VI Lendváy u. 15 noted in his petition requesting the property continue to be designated for “Jewish” use that a representative of the VI district council had come round to the building on the evening of 20 June to collect data on the occupants in the building.46 These data were added to the cover sheet of the other petition, submitted earlier by the son of the painter Gyula Benczúr.47 It was in essence a retallying of the data collected in the citywide survey of properties undertaken at the beginning of June. Thus, the total number of “Jewish” and “non-Jewish” flats, the total number of “Jewish” and “non-Jewish” inhabitants, and the status of the owner were all jotted down.

This practice of essentially reinvestigating the data collected in the 1–2 June survey was undertaken not only for properties like Lendváy u. 15 that were contested in the aftermath of the designations. In the VI district of the city—where Lendváy u. 15 was sited—there was a thorough investigation, with the VI district council recommending properties to be added to and deleted from the list of “Jewish” houses. Thirty-nine apartment buildings were recommended for designation and nine recommended for cancellation, generally on the grounds of majority occupation. Another twenty-four apartment buildings were listed as proposed by the Jewish Council for designation, but not endorsed after investigation of the data.48

The contested site Király u. 82 was amongst the nine properties in the district investigated and recommended for cancellation. On the cover sheet of the petition from the house air-raid warden calling for cancellation, the council official jotted down the numbers of “Jewish” and “non-Jewish” tenants and inhabitants.49 As the separate petitions from both “Jewish” and “non-Jewish” inhabitants made clear, the building had a majority of “Jewish” tenants (thirty-one compared with twenty) but a majority of “non-Jewish” inhabitants (161 compared with 95), including a unit of Hungarian soldiers. Thus, in terms of majority occupation, both could—and did—make a case for designation/cancellation of yellow-star status. In the end, it was the majority of “non-Jewish” inhabitants that was seen as more significant by the VI district council official, who recommended cancellation of the property from the ghetto list. On the list of “Jewish” houses published on 22 June, Király u. 82 was absent. The thirty-one “Jewish” tenants had lost the battle to stay put, and the twenty “non-Jewish” tenants had won the battle to stay put.

It was not only in the VI district that such a thoroughgoing reinvestigation of designated properties took place. Evidence from the XI district of the city suggests that this practice was far more widespread.50 There all of the properties designated for “Jewish” use on 16 June were subject to reinvestigation on 20–21 June.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.