August 2019 - bruckfamilyblog.com

POST 61: THE WOINOWITZ ZUCKERFABRIK (SUGAR FACTORY) OUTSIDE RATIBOR (PART IV-GRUNDBUCH (LAND REGISTER))

Note: In this post, I explore some of the information Mr. Paul Newerla, the Racibórz historian, was able to find related to the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik (Sugar Factory) in what is called the “Grundbuch,” or land register, discuss where this information currently resides, and how it rounds out my understanding of the history and ownership of the sugar plant over the years. I also explain to readers that even had I been able to access the land register and backup files on my own, I would have been hard-pressed to make much sense of the materials without the intercession of a lawyer familiar with German real estate law. Mr. Newerla happens to be a retired Polish lawyer who, by virtue of his profession and current study of Silesian history, is well versed in such matters.

Mr. Paul Newerla, my friend from Racibórz, Poland, is a retired lawyer who now specializes in studying and writing about the history of Silesia. Regular readers will recognize his name as I’ve mentioned him in numerous posts related to Ratibor, Germany, the town in Upper Silesia where my father was born in 1907. Perhaps, one of the biggest unintended benefits of having a family history Blog is that Paul stumbled upon it in the course of doing research and reached out to me through Webmail to offer supplementary historical information on the Bruck’s “Prinz von Preußen” Hotel which I’d written about. This family establishment was owned through what I’ve determined to be three generations, from roughly the mid-19th Century through the early 1920’s. Our initial exchanges involved the Bruck’s Hotel but have far transcended this subject.

Figure 1. Silesian historian, Paul Newerla, and me in 2018 standing by the historic statue of John of Nepomuk, located in the middle of a parking lot in Racibórz

I had the pleasure of personally meeting Paul in 2018 on a visit to Racibórz. (Figure 1) As an aside, I realize many fellow genealogists may never have the opportunity nor resources to visit the places one’s ancestors hail from, but I can’t emphasize enough the value of “having boots on the ground,” so to speak, to further one’s ancestral investigations, as this post will illustrate. It’s worth mentioning that Paul does not speak English, nor do I speak German, so we are compelled to use a few on-line translators to communicate, which presents its own challenges but is far better than nothing.

Figure 2. The Woinowitz sugar factory as it looked in the early 1900’s

As I began to research the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik (Figure 2), I naturally turned to Paul to ask him about the sugar plant’s history. He sent me numerous maps and visuals and provided valuable context for understanding the extent of the sugar industry in Silesia and its influence on the development of railroads; I’ve discussed these topics in earlier posts on the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik. I was specifically interested in what Paul might be able to tell me about the sale by or confiscation of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik from its Jewish owners, the timing, the names of the sellers, and the price for which the business was sold. While he knew little about these matters, coincidentally, during his lawyering days, Paul had handled the legal sale of the former Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik between Polish parties. For this reason, he knew that while the sale of the sugar plant may well have been compelled by the Nazis, the later Polish owners had valid legal rights. Likely, the Nazi overlords wanted to handle the forced sale with a veneer of “legality” by paying the Jewish owners something for their business, even if that payment was vastly below fair market value.

Figure 3. Entrance to the “Archiwum Państwowe w Katowicach Oddział w Raciborzu”

By virtue of Paul’s previous involvement with the sale of the former Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, he knew that the “Grundbuch,” that is the land register, is archived in the Archiwum Państwowe W Katowicach Oddzial W Raciborzu (“State Archives in Katowice Branch in Racibórz”). (Figure 3) The Grundbuch in Germany, including former parts of Germany that are now within Poland, shows the names of the current and previous owners, third party rights in rem (e.g., mortgages), and the description of the property. Land registers were kept for real estate or land, and included, as will be discussed below, the buildings and structures found on the land.

The land registry is a special division of the local German district court (i.e., Grundbuchamt beim Amtsgericht), and land registers are kept in Poland’s counterpart courts even today. Changes of rights to land do not go into effect until they have been recorded in the land register, although some exceptions apply (e.g. an heir becomes owner of a property even if he or she is not registered in the land register). Unless proven otherwise, the correctness of all titles recorded in the Grundbuch is assumed and a buyer can rely on its accuracy.

The old German land registers have been continued by the Polish court, naturally in Polish, and slightly modified in concept. The basic German land register was a thick book with sections for: I. Directory of Properties, II. Owner(s), III. Rights of other persons (e.g., rights of use, real burdens), and IV. Mortgages. The land registers were kept in court in case they were needed there. The documents justifying the individual entries in the land register were in the so-called “files to the land register,” and were held in the archives of the court; notes were made in the files but in the event of a discrepancy between the land register and the files, the former took precedence. In the 1960’s, Polish land registers were introduced that were organized differently; sections I-IV above were retained except they were kept in individual volumes, and in the back of each volume, the documents justifying the entries were maintained. As a result, files to the land registers in the court archives were no longer needed there so were turned over to the State Archives after several years.

There is one other distinction Paul brought to my attention I need to mention. There is also a “Handelregister,” or commercial register, that is maintained by what are called “Registergerichten,” Commercial Register Courts, that’s to say, regional courts above district courts. The Handelregister records “legal persons” of a company, including Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung (GmbH), a limited liability company, or LLC. The name of the GmbH emphasizes the fact that the owners (Gesellschafter, also known as members) of the entity are not personally liable or responsible for the company’s debts. GmbHs are considered legal persons. The Handelregister for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik is not available today for reasons that are unclear.

All the above is just background information that will understandably be of scant interest to most readers. Let me continue.

Prior to my queries, Paul had tried for some time to access the land register for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik. He was aware that German land registers, Grundbucher, are archived at the State Archives in Racibórz. The status of these registers is they have not yet been catalogued and therefore are not available to researchers. My interest in the sugar plant renewed Paul’s attempt to gain access to the plant’s Grundbuch, and, as Paul characterizes it, he finally “was allowed into the camp” to search for it; this was only possible because of his longstanding relationship with the State Archives in Racibórz. Paul found it under the number “Woinowitz Sheet 161.” (Figure 4) Fortunately, the land register includes the supporting files or documentation turned over by the Polish court.

Figure 4. Cover of the Woinowitz Grundbuch Paul Newerla found at the State Archives in Racibórz

Paul photographed and sent me copies of the documents he deemed of greatest value and spent a good deal of time explaining their content and significance. I want to believe that in describing some of what Paul found in the Grundbuch and the auxiliary files, I’ve mostly done justice conveying this to readers, although I welcome readers’ input if I’ve failed in this regard.

Figure 5 shows the size of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik under the column “Größe.” It was 5.44.10 hectares in size, or 13.44 acres.

Figure 5. The size of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik shown under the column “Größe, as 5.44.10 hectares, or 13.44 acres

As alluded to earlier, a Grundbuch is kept for land and shows the structural components located on the property. In the case of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, the extent of the property and the current value of the structural components is shown on Figure 6. The left-hand column of the table below is a German transcription of the structures listed and the right-hand column provides a rough translation and in a few instances some explanation in brackets:

Figure 6. Page from the Woinowitz Grundbuch listing the structural components of the sugar plant corresponding to the table below

GERMAN	ENGLISH
1. Acker, Weide, Graben, Weg, sowie Hofraum“ – was vom Grundbuch “Polnisch Woinowitz” [der früher Ortsnamen] Blatt 60 abgezweigt wurde. Dieses Blatt 60 umfasste Grundstücke des “Dominiums Woinowitz.”	1. Field, willow, ditch, path/way, courtyard space—which were diverted from the land register “Polish Woinowitz” [the former place name] Sheet 60. [Sheet 60 included plots of land of the “Dominium Woinowitz”]
a. Zuckerfabrik mit Maschinen und Kesselhaus	a. Sugar factory with machine and boiler house
b. Gasanstalt	b. Gasworks
c. Eisenbahnwaagehaus	c. Railway scale house
d. Comptoir (Büro) mit Waagehaus	d. Office with scale house [another scale house where incoming sugar beets and outgoing processed sugar were weighed]
e. Rohproduktionshaus mit Wohnung	e. Raw production house with apartment
f. Rohproduktionshaus	f. Raw production house
g. Stall mit Remise und Werkstätten	g. Stable with drawer and workshops

The table below corresponds to the text on Figure 7, and shows the various names for the sugar factory over time, the owners, and the reason for the acquisition or name change:

Figure 7. Page from the Woinowitz Grundbuch showing the name changes of the sugar plant over time corresponding to the table below

GERMAN	ENGLISH
1. Woinowitz’er Zuckerfabrik Adolph Schück & Comp. zu Woinowitz — Auf Grund der Auflassung vom 24-ten eingetragen am 30-ten Mai 1881 Der Name der Firma ist geändert und lautet jetzt „Woinowitz’er Zuckerfabrik Adolf Schück & Co. Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung zu Woinowitz bei Ratibor O/S.“ [O/S = Oberschlesien] — Eingetragen am 21. Oktober 1910 Nr. 2 statt Nr. 1 nach dem Rezess vom 29. Dezember 1923 eingetragen am 20. Februar 1925. Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik, Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung Weihendorf Kreis Ratibor — Auf Grund der Firmenänderung eingetragen am 13. August 1938.	1.Woinowitz’er Sugar Factory Adolph Schück & Comp. to Woinowitz — On the basis of the 24th injunction on 30th May 1881 The name of the company has been changed and is now “Woinowitz’er Zuckerfabrik Adolf Schück & Co. Gesellschaft with limited liability to Woinowitz near Ratibor O/S.” [O/S = Upper Silesia] — Registered on 21st October 1910 [FIGURE 8] No. 2 instead of No. 1 registered on 20th February 1925 after the recess of 29th December 1923. Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik, limited liability company Weihendorf district Ratibor — Due to the change in the company registered on 13th August 1938.
2. Die Ratiborer Zuckerfabrik, Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung in Ratibor — Aufgelassen am 26. Februar 1942 und eingetragen am 25. Februar 1943.	2.The Ratibor Sugar Factory, limited liability company in Ratibor — Abandoned on 26th February 1942 and registered on 25th February 1943.
3. Die Landwirtschaftliche Warenzentrale Oberschlesien /Raiffeisen) eGmbH in Oppeln — Aufgelassen am 11 Dezember 1942 und eingetragen am 25. Februar 1943.	3. The Agricultural Goods Centre Upper Silesia /Raiffeisen) eGmbH in Opole — Abandoned on 11th December 1942 and registered on 25th February 1943.

Figure 8. Letterhead from the time the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik was known as the “Woinowitz’er Zuckerfabrik Adolf Schück & Co. GmbH”

Paul provided some additional explanation about the land register and the auxiliary files. He’d hoped to find documents there about the possible expropriation of the sugar plant from the Schück family. However, Paul discovered the files relate only to the actual entries in the land register, and because no mention of the forced sale of the plant by the Nazis is found in the original land register, therefore, no documentation exists in the land register’s backup files.

The land register recorded changes of ownership; in the case of private sales, the purchase contract would be found in the files of the land register. However, because the Zuckerfabrik was a GmbH or an LLC, changes in ownership were recorded in the Handelregister, the commercial register, and the courts notified of such changes via a letter. The change in the name of the LLC could result from new ownership or possibly new shareholders that came into a company. Regardless, a change in the company’s name in the commercial register of the GmbH (LLC) also caused a change in the name of the company in the land register.

Let me provide an example as this may be confusing to readers. If Adolph Schück individually owned a plot of land, it was recorded in the land register under his name. If, on the other hand, Mr. Schück formed a GmbH, which he eventually did and could do even as a single person, he could transfer that property as a non-cash deposit into the GmbH which would then be recorded in the Handelregister. Adolph Schück’s name was also then deleted from the Grundbuch and the GmbH registered in place of his name as the owner of the property. The obvious advantage, as previously mentioned, was that Mr. Schück was no longer personally liable or responsible for the company’s debts.

From earlier posts on the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, readers may recall that Sigmund Hirsch was Adolph Schück’s partner in the sugar plant. I was even able to read his name on several pages Paul sent from the State Archives in Racibórz, so asked whether he was an equal partner. Paul reminded me this information and the size of Sigmund’s investment would be found in the commercial register, which we don’t have access to. However, Paul drew my attention to a four-page document he found at the State Archives, dated the 15th of January 1908, which indirectly answers my question. (Figures 9a-d) Initially, the capital shares owned by Schück and Hirsch were unequal. According to this document, Sigmund Hirsch was obliged to use his annual dividends, which exceeded 27,000 Reichmarks (RM), to increase his capital share of the business until they were equal partners. Additionally, because there was such a large difference in the number of shares owned by the two men, Sigmund Hirsch obtained a security mortgage in the amount of 400,000 RM payable to Adolph Schück.

Figure 9a. First page of four-page document last dated January 15, 1908 spelling out the terms of payments to bring Sigmund Hirsch’s shares in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik equal to those of Adolph Schück

Figure 9b. Second page of four-page document last dated January 15, 1908 spelling out the terms of payments to bring Sigmund Hirsch’s shares in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik equal to those of Adolph Schück

Figure 9c. Third page of four-page document last dated January 15, 1908 spelling out the terms of payments to bring Sigmund Hirsch’s shares in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik equal to those of Adolph Schück

Figure 9d. Last page of four-page document last dated January 15, 1908 spelling out the terms of payments to bring Sigmund Hirsch’s shares in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik equal to those of Adolph Schück

In addition to official partners, Paul explained there were also “silent” partners. They invested their money, presumably reaped a portion of the sugar plant’s profits, but were not recorded in the commercial register. Often, these silent partners were members of the Board of Directors or agents of the company.

Naturally, I was curious whether the land register and/or the backup files indicated in which year the Nazis forced the sale of the Zuckerfabrik and was reminded this information would also be found in the Handelregister. Yet again, however, one document from the State Archives gives an indirect clue; it shows that on the 26th of September 1938, the company name changed to “Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik GmbH” without “Adolf Schück & Co.” (Figure 10), likely corresponding to the end of the Schück family’s stake in the sugar plant. To remind readers, less than three months later December 18, 1938, Erich Schück, Adolph’s son and probable managing director of the sugar plant, killed himself in Berlin. I don’t think the timing is coincidental.

Figure 10. Letterhead from the time the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik was known as the “Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik GmbH” without the name “Adolf Schück & Co.”

As to the value of the sugar plant in 1938, I remarked to Paul that its value of 189,800 RM seemed low. (Figure 11) He pointed out that while a 1943 letter from the tax office used roughly this same value for that plot of land, it also showed “assets and working capital” of 2,269,351 RM minus unspecified “deductions” of 1,247,223 RM. (Figures 12a-b) To remind readers, in January 2017, a 1937 Reichsmark would have been worth approximately $4.30. Clearly, the income generated by the Zuckerfabrik was significant, and it’s very likely the Jewish owners sold at a significant loss and the heirs never adequately compensated.

Figure 11. Letter dated 30th of August 1938 indicating the “unit value” of the then-named “Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik” as 189,800 Reichmarks

Figure 12a. First page of letter from the “Finanzamt Ratibor,” Ratibor Tax Office, dated the 22nd of January 1943

Figure 12b. Second page of letter from the “Finanzamt Ratibor,” Ratibor Tax Office, dated the 22nd of January 1943, showing the value of the sugar factory, as well as its “assets and working capital” (i.e., 2,269,351 RM) minus unspecified “deductions” (i.e., 1,247,223 RM)

Suffice it to say, at the risk of presenting information that would be of no interest to most readers, there are many more documents in the files to the land register that seemingly relate to contracts and financial matters.

I’ve previously alluded to the fact that knowing someone who is familiar with the “landscape” of archival and documentary resources available for an area one’s ancestors originated from can significantly expand one’s understanding of things. I erroneously assumed the land register for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik from the State Archives in Racibórz was the extent of documentary information available; what I initially failed to comprehend is that the original land register for the sugar plant still exists and is retained by the local district court in Poland.

Paul accessed the original Grundbuch and was able to glean additional information not available from the copy of the land register and files in the State Archives. He confirmed that Adolph Schück originally purchased in 1881 only arable land and meadows where the sugar plant, gas station, etc. would eventually be built. (Figure 13) The ownership titled was recorded in the land register on the 27th of March 1881 as “Woinowitzer Zuckerfabrik Adolph Schück & Comp. in Woinowitz.” (Figure 14) At the time, the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik was not yet a GmbH or LLC. On the 21st of October 1910, the name of the company changed to “Woinowitzer Zuckerfabrik Adolph Schück & Co. Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung [Gmbh] zu Woinowitz” (Figure 14), at which time the company became an LLC. Then, on the 13th of August 1938, the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik underwent an ownership change becoming the “Weihendorfer Zuckerfabrik, Gesellschaft mit beschränkter Haftung Weihendorf Kreis Ratibor.” (Figure 14) Presumably, this corresponded to the time the Schück and Hirsch heirs were forced to sell the sugar plant.

Figure 13. Page from the original land register at the District court confirming that Adolph Schück originally purchased arable land and meadows where the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik would eventually be built

Figure 14. Page from the original land register at the District court showing the ownership title was recorded on the 27th of May 1881 as the “Woinowitzer Zuckerfabrik Adolph Schück & Comp. in Woinowitz”; subsequent name changes are also shown

Subsequent changes are also noted in the Grundbuch. On the 26th of February 1942, the factory was taken over by the “Ratiborer Zuckerfabrik GmbH in Ratibor,” and later that year, on the 11th of December 1942, the factory named changed to “Raiffeisen.” (Figure 14)

Thus, the original land register for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik clarifies a few things: we learn the year Adolph Schück purchased the land (1881); the fact that he purchased land and meadows with no structures on them; the year the firm became a GmbH or LLC (1910); and the date the Schück family ceased to be owners (1938).

Paul was unable to find the Grundbuch for the Woinowitz estate (i.e., “Polnisch Woinowitz“) from which Adolph Schück purchased the land in 1881, so no conclusions can be drawn about the previous property owners. Just to be crystal clear about this, Figure 6 above, the page from the files of the Woinowitz Grundbuch, indicates that Adolph Schück purchased a “field, willow, ditch, path/way, courtyard space” which was “detached” from what was referred to as the Polnisch Woinowitz and this sale was noted in the land register for that estate. Paul was unable to find the Grundbuch for this estate at the District court, although possibly it may eventually turn up at the State Archives in Racibórz.

Let me apologize to readers for the ponderous nature of this post. I’ve gone to such lengths to understand and explain the source of the data related to the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik and the timeline for the benefit of a select audience. As explained, because the Grundbuch’s auxiliary files are not catalogued, they are basically inaccessible to the average individual. However, even if they were generally available, it would still require comprehension of German and an understanding of German land law to make sense of their contents and its significance. This said, for the few readers whose Jewish ancestors may have held property in Germany they were compelled to sell during the Nazi era, there may be a few tendrils of useful information in this post.

POST 60: 200 YEARS OF THE ROYAL EVANGELICAL HIGH SCHOOL IN RATIBOR & A CLUE TO THE BRUCK FAMILY

Note: In this post, I talk about the Royal Evangelical Gymnasium (High School) in Ratibor, celebrating its 200th anniversary in 2019, and briefly discuss a contemporary publication from 1820 confirming my family’s connection to the city at that time.

Figure 1. Cover of the 1820 publication entitled “Denkschrift über die feierliche Eröffnung des Königl. Evangel. Gymnasium zu Ratibor am 2. Juni 1819” written by Dr. Carl Linge, first director of Ratibor’s Gymnasium

This year Racibórz, Poland celebrates “200 Jahre der Königlichen Evangelischen Gymnasium zu Ratibor,” 200 Years of the Royal Evangelical Gymnasium (High School) in Ratibor. Around Easter, my friend Mr. Paul Newerla, retired lawyer and current Silesian historian, presented a lecture at the Muzeum w Raciborzu on this subject. In researching the school’s history, Paul discovered an old book published in Ratibor in 1820 upon the school’s opening, archived at the British Museum, entitled “Denkschrift über die feierliche Eröffnung des Königl. Evangel. Gymnasium zu Ratibor am 2. Juni 1819. . .,” “Memorandum on the solemn opening of the Royal Evangelical High School in Ratibor on June 2, 1819. . .” (Figure 1) Prior to Paul’s discovery, this publication was unknown to local historians.

This 1820 book contains an alphabetical listing of the students enrolled at the time the Gymnasium was opened, that, interestingly, includes two of my earliest ancestors (Figure 2):

“J. Bruck, aus Ratibor”
“S. Bruck, aus Ratibor”

(J. Bruck and S. Bruck from Ratibor)

Figure 2. Page from Dr. Linge’s 1820 publication with the names of my ancestors “J. Bruck” and S. Bruck” shown as enrolled in Ratibor’s Gymnasium when the school first opened in 1819

Figure 3. A photo believed to be of my great-great-granduncle, Jonas Bruck (1813-1883)

Figure 4. My great-great-grandfather Samuel Bruck (1808-1863), original owner of the Bruck’s “Prinz von Preußen” Hotel

These ancestors were brothers Jonas Bruck (1813-1883) (Figure 3) and Samuel Bruck (1808-1863) (Figure 4), sons of Jacob Nathan Bruck (1770-1832). In Post 11, I told readers the original owner of the family hotel in Ratibor, the Bruck’s “Prinz von Preußen” Hotel, had been my great-great-grandfather, the Samuel Bruck who attended the Ratibor Gymnasium. Previously, I’d known my family’s connection to Ratibor extended back to at least 1850, which corresponded to the approximate time when Samuel Bruck purchased the family hotel. However, Mr. Newerla brought to my attention information proving the Bruck family’s association with Ratibor in fact extended back at least one more generation to Samuel’s father. In Post 11, I reported that according to land registers from the city of Ratibor from the time of Jacob Bruck, he had been an arrendator, a leaseholder, on two properties within Ratibor. These were located, respectively, on Jungfrauenstraße and Stockhaus-Gasse, shown on an 1812 city map sent to me by Mr. Newerla. (Figure 5) How much earlier my Bruck family may have arrived in Ratibor, and from which Silesian town, remains unknown. Regardless, the list of the students enrolled at the Royal Evangelical Gymnasium in 1819 confirms an early 19th century connection to Ratibor by my ancestors.

Figure 5. 1812 map of Ratibor showing location of parcels owned by Jacob Bruck along Jungfrauenstraße & Stockhaus-Gasse, and location of “Odertor,” the city gate atop which the Bruck’s Hotel was built after the city walls were demolished

Let me provide some brief historical background on the Royal Evangelical Gymnasium in Ratibor to help readers better understand the origins of the school, its locations, the age of the students, and their religious makeup.

Following a decision by the Royal Prussian Government on the 1st of October 1817, Ratibor became the seat of the Higher Regional Court of the Province of Upper Silesia. This coincided with the arrival of about twenty lawyers who discovered that Ratibor, then the largest city in Upper Silesia, had no grammar school for their children. Notably, those high schools that existed elsewhere at the time in Upper Silesia were all run by Catholic institutions or were in monasteries and were Catholic. The judges of the Higher Regional Court, as well as many other representatives of the intelligentsia, however, were Protestant. Thus, the President of the Regional Court of the Province of Upper Silesia appealed for the establishment of an Evangelical grammar school in Ratibor, which the King of Prussia granted on the 5th of June 1818. He appropriated 2,500 Reichtalers from the treasury for the maintenance of the new school and gave it the very spacious monastery of the Holy Ghost Dominican Church (Figure 6), which had been secularized in 1811. The monastery was located adjacent old city walls at the end of Jungfrauenstraße, coincidentally along the very street where Jacob Bruck leased property. Because the monastery buildings had to be renovated for school purposes, the Gymnasium was housed for a time in the former Franciscan monastery along Brunken (Figure 7), then located outside the city walls. Ratibor’s city walls, towers and gates, surrounding the town, were only demolished in 1828, after which the Prinz von Preußen was constructed at the corner of Oderstraße and Bollwerkstraße, eventually becoming the Bruck’s Hotel in the mid-19th Century.

Figure 6. A line drawing of Ratibor’s Gymnasium as it looked in 1820 with the adjacent tower of the former Holy Ghost Dominican Church; at the time, the entrance to the school was located on its south side

Figure 7. 1933 plan map of Ratibor showing Brunken, the Gymnasium’s location between 1819-1827; the Gymnasium’s current location; and the location of the Protestant church after 1909

When the Ratibor Gymnasium first opened its doors in the former Franciscan monastery, 114 students had passed an entrance examination and been admitted. Even though the high school was Protestant, paying students from all religious denominations could attend. The first class consisted of 40% Protestants, 50% Catholics, and 10% Jews. After only a few years the percent of Jewish students was at 20%, and never dropped much below this level, even though Ratibor’s Jewish population never exceeded 10%. This attests to the importance Jews attached to education.

The renovation of the grammar school on Jungfrauenstraße was not completed until 1827; the renovation included demolition of the east and north wings of the monastery, along with the removal of the city wall near the west wing, as it darkened the school rooms in this wing. Between 1819, when the grammar school opened, and 1827, when renovations were completed, the King of Prussia had issued an edict on January 16, 1821, giving the monastery church adjacent the Gymnasium to the Protestant parish (Figure 8) because their church located elsewhere in Ratibor was in danger of collapse on account of an unstable foundation.

Figure 8. On the right the tower of the Protestant Church located adjacent Ratibor’s Gymnasium between 1821 and 1909

By 1904, the Protestant parish had purchased a plot of land elsewhere in Ratibor on which to erect a new church. The plan had been to sell the former monastery church next to the Gymnasium to the Prussian State, dismantle the church, and use the parcel for the expansion of the grammar school. Even though essential components of the monastery dated to the 14th Century, the Conservator of the Provincial Burgermeister, essentially the Province of Silesia’s executive council, deemed the monastery to be of “insignificant monumental value.” This decision highlighted the power of Ratibor’s Protestants even over the General Conservator of the Province. It was only the refusal by the Prussian State to purchase the monastery that prevented its destruction and allows the facility to exist today as part of the Muzeum w Raciborzu. As a historic preservationist, I find it fascinating how serendipitous the survival of this noteworthy structure is.

Figure 9. View of the north side of Ratibor’s Gymnasium after a western extension was added

By the 1870’s Ratibor’s Gymnasium numbered in excess of 700 students, so an approval and allocation of funds for an extension was obtained that was completed by 1881. (Figure 9) A third floor was eventually added to the high school. (Figure 10)

Figure 10. 1925 view of Ratibor’s Gymnasium after a third level was added and the entrance moved to the western side of the school

Attendance in kindergarten was optional. At the age of six one was admitted to elementary school. Schools were denominational until 1873, after which such religious schools were abolished. Compulsory education existed in Prussia since 1765, although unconditional compulsory education for boys and girls was not introduced until 1907. The school year started on the 1st of April, effectively after Easter. Following the fourth grade of elementary school, one could be admitted to high school with passage of an entrance exam, thus around the age of ten.

In the case of Samuel and Jonas Bruck who show up in 1819 as enrolled students in Ratibor’s Gymnasium, their attendance was no doubt due to passage of the entrance exam. Still, Jonas’ attendance at the precocious age of only six, he was born in 1813, seems early. There is no doubt, however, as to the year Jonas was born because he is buried along with one of his renowned sons and their respective wives in the Old Jewish Cemetery in Breslau [today: Wrocław, Poland], and his headstone provides his date of birth. (Figures 11a-b) Paul Newerla sent me one page of the register of students admitted to Ratibor’s Gymnasium along with their ages, and most were between 9 and 13 years of age. (Figure 12) This log still exists today, and, as we speak, Paul is working on having it donated to the Archiwum Państwowe W Katowicach Oddzial W Raciborzu (“State Archives in Katowice Branch in Racibórz”). Regardless of whether Paul is successful in this endeavor, he is working to access the log to check for other Bruck relatives who may have attended Ratibor’s Gymnasium over the years.

Figure 11a. The large, stately Bruck Family tomb at the Old Jewish Cemetery in Wrocław, Poland where Jonas Bruck, his renowned son Julius Bruck, and their respective wives are all interred

Figure 11b. A closeup of Jonas Bruck’s headstone showing his birth and death dates

Figure 12. One page from the log of students admitted to Ratibor’s Gymnasium

The names of the classes in the 9-year high school were taken from Latin. The lowest class was labeled “Sexta” (sixth), the next “Quinta” (fifth), then “Quarta.” The next three classes, “Tertia” (third), “Sekunda” (second), and “Prima” (first), each consisted of lower and upper grades, for example, “Untertertia” or “Obersekunda” (“unter” means lower, “ober” means upper). After completing the “Oberprima,” you could take the matriculation exam, the “Abitur,” that if passed allowed you to attend a university.

One other thing of passing interest regarding the Ratibor Gymnasium were its collections. In 1938, these consisted of a teacher’s library with 17,000 books, a student library with more than 2,000 volumes, as well as more than 200 books printed before 1600, and 28 incunabula, that is, books printed before 1501. The Ratibor Gymnasium also preserved collections considered useful such as minerals, plant specimens, seeds, mollusks and birds, as well as valuable numismatic collections. (Figures 13-14) When the Museum Raciborzu was founded in 1927, these collections were handed over to the museum. Unfortunately, the museum’s natural science collection, which was in the former Protestant rectory, burnt down in 1945 and has been completely lost.

Figure 13. Collections of the Gymnasium in their museum (1936)

Figure 14. More collections of the Gymnasium in their museum (1936)

Figure 15. Baron Anselm von Rothschild (1803-1874) who donated the Egyptian mummy to the Ratibor Gymnasium in 1864

One unusual exhibit, given to the Royal Evangelical Church in 1864 by the wealthy Jewish banker baron Anselm von Rothschild (Figure 15), lord of Chałupki and Szilerzowice, survives today in the Muzeum Raciborzu. As an archaeologist, I find this story fascinating. Around 1860, Anselm von Rothschild went on a journey to Egypt and brought back numerous souvenirs, among them a complete burial of an Egyptian woman which he intended as a wedding gift for his fiancée. The peculiar gift was rejected. Oddly, in Rothschild’s palace in Szilerzowice, in the presence of invited dinner guests, the two sarcophagi were opened, the cartonnage undone, and the embalmed corpse unwrapped from its bandages.

In 1864, the baron decided to rid himself of the mummy and donated it to the Antiquity Department of the Royal Evangelical Gymnasium. Along with the other collections preserved by the Gymnasium, the mummy was formally taken over by the Muzuem w Raciborzu when it was founded in 1927. The half-bandaged mummy, sarcophagi, and richly ornamented cartonnage as well as three canopic jars to keep the viscera of corpses, purchased from the Museum of Antiquity in Berlin before the war, today are the greatest attraction of the Muzeum w Raciborzu. (Figure 16) Scientific analysis on the mummy revealed it was an Egyptian woman who lived during the 12th Dynasty (946-722 B.C.) named Dzed-Amonet-ius-anch, meaning “goddess Amonet said she would live.” She was a wealthy married woman, probably the daughter of a priest and barber from Thebes, who apparently died of complications from pregnancy.

Figure 16. The mummy of Dzed-Amonet-ius-anch from Egypt’s 12th Dynasty (946-722 B.C.) on display at the Muzeum w Raciborzu

The Ratibor Gymnasium is still standing today and is currently used as an economic middle school. (Figure 17) According to Paul Newerla, this middle school is where the volume with the names of students enrolled in the former Gymnasium was once kept, along with portfolios of graduation certificates. As we speak, Paul is trying to track down the current provenience of these materials to access their contents and see what more they can tell us about my Bruck relatives.

Figure 17. The Ratibor Gymnasium as it currently looks, now an economic middle school

REFERENCE

Linge, Dr. Carl

1820 Denkschrift ueber die feierliche Eroeffnung des Koenigl. Evangel. Gymnasium zu Ratibor am 2. Juni 1819 nebst den dabei gehaltenen Reden des Consistorialrath Dr. Wachler und des Dr. Linge und anderen Beilagen, Ratibor.

POST 59: THE WOINOWITZ ZUCKERFABRIK (SUGAR FACTORY) OUTSIDE RATIBOR (PART III—HEIRS)

Figure 1. The Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik as it looked in the early 1900’s

Figure 2. The Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik in 2014, seen from roughly the same angle as Figure 1

Remark: I’ve relabeled the titles of the two previous posts dealing with the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik (Sugar Factory) (Figures 1-2), Posts 36 and 55, to make clear to readers this post is merely another part of a story that continues to evolve and grow. Woinowitz [today: Wojnowice, Poland], is located outside Ratibor [today: Racibórz, Poland], the town in Upper Silesia where my father, Dr. Otto Bruck, was born in 1907. Lately, I’ve acquired multiple new documents and photographs from family, friends, and archives about the factory and its heirs, and anticipate receiving more in coming weeks, possibly enough materials to expand the story to five or six separate posts.

In Post 36, including the Postscript, I provided some historical background and maps, including information on the original family owners of the sugar plant. I fully anticipated the original post, now Part I, would be a “one-and-done” publication. This unexpectedly changed when I was contacted earlier this year through my Blog by a Danish gentleman, Allan Grutt Hansen, with documentation on the compensation paid by the then-West German government in 1966 to his ancestors for the forced sale of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik by the Nazis around 1937. I detailed this surprising development in Post 55, now Part II of the tale. Suspecting the German government has indemnified what amounts to only one-sixth of the heirs propelled further forensic investigations and resulted in findings that provide the basis for this Blog post.

One additional point I want to emphasize to readers. I have “no skin in this game,” that’s to say, I am not entitled to any compensation that may eventually be meted out for the forced sale of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik. While I hope the rightful heirs eventually receive reparations for harm done to their ancestors and will strive to facilitate this outcome, this post is primarily a story describing the scientific technique I applied to uncover relevant ancestral evidence that may buttress the family’s claims.

Note: In this post, I identify the first-generation heirs of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, and briefly return to the topic of compensation for the forced sale of the sugar plant. I also discuss the historic documents obtained since publication of Post 55, alluded to in that post, that lead to some unexpected discoveries.

Following publication of Post 55, now Part II of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik saga, I pursued other avenues of investigation to identify the first-generation heirs of the sugar factory and learn who, if any, among them was indemnified for the forced sale of the plant. With the help of living next-of-kin, I’ve compiled the following table of the two original owners and their immediate descendants, along with their vital statistics:

Figure 3. Adolph Schück (1840-1916), co-owner of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik

Figure 4. Sigmund Hirsch (1848-1920), Adolph Schück’s brother-in-law and partner in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik

Figure 5. Dr. Erich Schück (1878-1938), an heir of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, who supposedly committed suicide after the forced sale of the sugar plant

ORIGINAL OWNER	FIRST-GENERATION HEIR	RELATIONSHIP TO OWNER	EVENT	DATE & PLACE
ADOLPH SCHÜCK (Figure 3)			Birth	5 Jul 1840 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	3 Nov 1916 Ratibor, Germany
	Auguste Leyser née Schück	Daughter	Birth	26 Jan 1872 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	28 May 1943 Theresienstadt
	Elly Kayser née Schück	Daughter	Birth	7 Sep 1874 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	28 Apr 1911 Berlin, Germany
	Erich Schück (Figure 5)	Son	Birth	13 Apr 1878 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	18 Dec 1938 Berlin, Germany

SIGMUND HIRSCH (Figure 4)			Birth	18 Nov 1848
			Death	14 Oct 1920 Ratibor, Germany
	Helene Goldenring née Hirsch	Daughter	Birth	25 Mar 1880 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	12 Jan 1968 Newark, NJ
	Robert Hirsch	Son	Birth	31 Oct 1881 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	7 Oct 1943 Valparaiso, Chile
	Frieda Mamlok née Hirsch	Daughter	Birth	8 Feb 1883 Ratibor, Germany
			Death	29 Jul 1955 Montevideo, Uruguay

Figure 6. Allan Grutt Hansen (b. 1962) from Denmark, grandnephew of Erich and Hedwig Schück

Figure 7a. Front page of the 1966 restitution agreement for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik showing the estimated value; the number of “shares”; the date of Hedwig Schück’s death; and the “Landkreis” where the case was administered

Figure 7b. Page from 1966 West German compensation agreement for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik indicating how individual shares of 75,000 RM were “adjusted” to 142,500 RM and showing only 2,500 RM was disbursed to Hedwig Schück’s heirs

Several things are worth noting. First, I presume from the Woinowitz compensation package provided to me by Allan Grutt Hansen (Figure 6) that when the West German government indemnified Allan’s ancestors in 1966 they were aware of six possible heirs. This presumption is based on the total compensation calculated at the time, 450,000 Reichmark (RM), which was divided by six, with each “share” worth 75,000 RM. (Figure 7a) For reasons possibly having to do with how much was paid out in the 1930’s by the Nazi overlords to the factory’s owners, this 75,000 RM was multiplied by a factor of 1.9 theoretically entitling each heir to 142,500 RM (Figure 7b) (i.e., in January 2017, a 1937 Reichsmark would have been worth approximately $4.30). Second, the six first-generation heirs likely correspond to those identified in the table above. The original owners of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, along with their wives, died well before the Nazis came to power and the sugar plant’s sale was forced. Third, we can see that apart from first-generation heir Helene Goldenring née Hirsch, all other first-generation heirs were deceased by 1966 when some compensation was paid out. Fourth, we know that Hedwig Schück née Jendricke’s descendants, as a result of her marriage to Dr. Erich Schück, received some minimal compensation, 2,500 RM split unequally four ways (Figure 7c); Hedwig’s relatives would have been second- and third-generation heirs. And, finally, based on conversations I’ve had with third- and fourth-generation heirs of the factory’s original owners, Adolph Schück and Sigmund Hirsch, it appears that five-sixth of the compensation was never meted out, despite concerted efforts by several of the descendants.

Figure 7c. Page from 1966 West German compensation agreement for the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik listing Erich and Hedwig Schück’s four heirs, and the fraction they each received of the 2,500 RM compensation doled out

Figure 7d. Page from 1966 West German compensation agreement showing that the case was adjudicated by the “Kreis Oldenburg (Holstein) Der Landrat,” the District Administrator for Oldenburg in the German State of Holstein

The package provided to me by Allan Grutt Hansen identifies the German office that handled the compensation case, namely, the “Kreis Oldenburg (Holstein) Der Landrat,” the District Administrator for Oldenburg in the German State of Holstein. (Figure 7d) After a few failed attempts to establish contact with the administrative office in Holstein that may have handled the proceedings, I was directed to the Bundesarchiv in Beyreuth, Germany, the Federal State Archives in the city of Beyreuth, in northern Bavaria. I’ve provided them with the list of all the possible heirs to the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, requested they tell me about indemnification they may have received, and now await a reply; oddly, the archive can only research by individual names, not by the name of the Woinowitz factory, so it’s unclear what, if any, documentation I may eventually obtain.

Towards the end of Post 55, I told readers about having found the death register listings for Dr. Erich Schück and his wife Hedwig Schück née Jendricke in the online Landesarchiv Berlin database, the latter of which was the subject of Post 49. To remind readers, I found Hedwig’s date and place of death in the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik compensation package given to me by Allan Hurst Hansen; it showed she died on the 9th of June 1960 (Figure 7a) in the Wilmersdorf Borough of Berlin, making locating her in the Landesarchiv Berlin database relatively straight-forward. Finding her husband Dr. Erich Schück in the database was slightly more involved. I’d been told growing up he’d committed suicide sometime after the forced sale of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik. Operating under the assumption he’d moved to Berlin after selling the sugar plant, further assuming he’d lived in Berlin-Wilmersdorf, where his wife died in 1960, and finally theorizing he’d died in the late 1930’s or early 1940’s, I scoured the death register for Wilmersdorf and eventually discovered his name listed under the year 1938.

As explained in Post 49, finding names in the death register listing does not give you immediate access to the underlying death certificates; these must be ordered from the Landesarchiv Berlin, and since publication of the Post 55, I’ve received these documents.

Figure 8. Dr. Erich Schück’s death certificate highlighting his dates and places of birth and death, his cause of death, the attending physician, his birth certificate number, and his marriage date

Figure 9. Hedwig Schück née Jendricke’s death certificate highlighting her dates and places of birth and death, her birth certificate number, and her marriage date

The death certificates for Erich and Hedwig, as readers can observe for themselves, are typed, thus easily decipherable even though written in German. (Figures 8-9) I learned several interesting things from these certificates. In the case of Dr. Erich Schück, his death certificate identified his cause of death, “todesursache,” as “Kranzaderverkalkung, Zuckerkrankheit, Herzschlag,” that’s to say, as arteriosclerosis, diabetes and heart disease. As mentioned above, Dr. Schück’s relatives had always maintained he committed suicide. Notwithstanding the stated causes of death, I still believe his death was self-inflicted. Let me explain why. The attending doctor who signed his name to the death certificate was a Dr. Alfred Mamlok, who it so happens was Dr. Schück’s first cousin. Perhaps mindful of the need for decorum or financial necessity, Dr. Mamlok opted to state natural causes as the reason for his cousin’s death. We may never know.

Figure 10. Co-owner of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik Sigmund Hirsch with his wife Selma Hirsch née Braun with their three children, Frieda, Robert and Helene

I’d been aware for some time that Sigmund Hirsch, co-owner of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik, had three children with his wife Selma Hirsch née Braun, two daughters, Helene and Frieda, and one son, Robert. (Figure 10) I knew both daughters had been born in Ratibor but had never found any concrete evidence of when and where the son had been born, though I’d known for some time he’d died in Valparaiso, Chile in 1943. Then, recently, I again searched Robert Hirsch in ancestry.com, and came upon a promising lead for a person by that name who once lived in an unexpected place at some remove from Ratibor called Mittweida, Germany, promising only because it showed this person was born in Ratibor on the 31st of October 1881. (Figures 11a-b) The year comported with the timeframe his two siblings had been born, respectively, in 1880 and 1883. Still, uncertain what to make of this, I asked Mr. Paul Newerla, my historian friend from Ratibor, whether he could check in the civil register in Racibórz for the Robert Hirsch born in 1881, which he graciously agreed to do. Paul located this person’s birth certificate and confirmed that he was indeed Sigmund and Selma’s son, born, like his sisters, in Ratibor. (Figure 12) Another mystery solved. A side benefit of this request to my friend Paul is that he also found and sent me the birth certificate for Erich Schück, who it turns out was born in 1878 in Ratibor only three years before Robert Hirsch. (Figure 13)

Figure 11a. Mittweida, Germany (State of Saxony) 1904 Residence Register listing a Robert Hirsch born on the 31st of October 1881 in Ratibor (cover)

Figure 11b. Mittweida, Germany (State of Saxony) 1904 Residence Register highlighting the Robert Hirsch born on the 31st of October 1881 in Ratibor (register)

Figure 12. Robert Hirsch’s Ratibor 1881 birth certificate highlighting his parents’ names, Sigmund and Selma Hirsch née Braun (partners Sigmund and Adolph’s wives were sisters)

Figure 13. Erich Schück’s Ratibor 1878 birth certificate highlighting his parents’ names, Adolph and Alma Schück née Braun (partners Adolph and Sigmund’s wives were sisters)

Erich and Hedwig’s respective death certificates indicated their date and place of birth, but more importantly provided the certificate numbers of their birth certificates. (Figures 8-9) Erich was born on the 13th of April 1878 in Ratibor, Germany, while his future wife Hedwig Jendricke was born on the 6th of December 1890 in a place called Gollantsch, Germany [today: Gołańcz, Poland]; On the off chance that familysearch.org might have the birth records automated for Gollantsch, I checked their online catalog, and, amazingly, found Hedwig’s birth certificate matching the number shown on her death certificate. (Figures 14a-b)

Figure 14a. Hedwig Schück née Jendricke’s 1890 birth certificate from Gollantsch, Germany, matching Certificate Number 129 found on her 1935 Berlin marriage certificate

Figure 14b. Translation of Hedwig Schück née Jendricke’s 1890 birth certificate

Both Erich and Hedwig Schück’s death certificates indicate they were married on the 25th of June 1935 in Berlin-Charlottenburg. (Figures 8-9) This was a source of potential new information, so naturally I ordered their marriage certificate from the Landesarchiv Berlin; it arrived several weeks later, but unlike Erich and Hedwig’s death certificates, it was handwritten. (Figures 15a-c) I asked one of my German cousins for a translation, which he happily provided. The marriage certificate included one new piece of information whose significance I had no reason to fully appreciate at the time, namely, Hedwig’s “middle” name, “Lange.” Often, in the Landesarchiv Berlin marriage registers, a widowed or divorced spouse who remarries has her first husband’s surname recorded. Such was the case with Erich and Hedwig’s 1935 marriage certificate, which showed Hedwig’s first husband had been someone with the surname Lange (i.e, Hedwig Lange née Jendricke).

Figure 15a. Erich Schück and Hedwig Lange née Jendricke’s 1935 Marriage Certificate 622 (page 1)

Figure 15b. Erich Schück and Hedwig Lange née Jendricke’s 1935 Marriage Certificate 622 (page 2)

Figure 15c. Translation of Erich Schück and Hedwig Lange née Jendricke’s 1935 Marriage Certificate 622

Figure 16. My third cousin once-removed, Larry Leyser

It took my third cousin once-removed, Larry Leyser (Figure 16), to fully unravel the significance of this new piece of information. Briefly, some background. In recent years, Larry has had the opportunity to scan a large collection of family photos and documents from his deceased great-aunt now in the possession of his second cousin. As occasionally also happens with me, even with labeled photos, neither of us is immediately able to recognize all the names nor ascertain a possible family connection; the photos go into what I term my “back-burner” file for future contemplation. Once I shared the translation of Erich and Hedwig Schück’s marriage certificate with Larry, it triggered an “aha!” moment to the previously unknown “Lange” name. In Larry’s own back-burner file, he discovered four labeled photos of Hedwig Lange from 1930, including one of Larry’s father, Kurt Leyser, with two of Kurt’s first cousins. (Figures 17-18) Beyond now knowing what Hedwig Schück looked like, it confirms that Hedwig was known to her future second husband Erich while she was either still married to, divorced or widowed from her first husband. Also, it was known that Hedwig was an aspiring actress or singer, and two of the photos do indeed appear to have been professionally staged. (Figures 19-20) It is beyond amazing that Larry was able to relate photos of a previously unfamiliar Hedwig Lange to the broader story of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik.

Figure 17. Hedwig Lange née Jendricke on the 20th of September 1930

Figure 18. Hedwig Lange née Jendricke with three children, Larry Leyser’s father, Kurt Leyser, and two of Kurt’s cousins

Figure 19. May 1930 stage photograph of Hedwig Lange née Jendricke, an aspiring actress

Figure 20. May 1930 stage photograph of Hedwig Lange née Jendricke

Figure 21. Franz Kayser, one witness at Erich and Hedwig Schück’s 1935 marriage, in 1945 atop Rockefeller Center in New York City

Figure 22. Franz Kayser’s son, John Kayser, in 2014, in front of the apartment building in Berlin near where his parents lived at the time they fled to America in 1938, shown in Erich and Hedwig Schück’s marriage certificate as Kaiserdammstrasse 82 (not 22)

One final thing I found on Erich and Hedwig Schück’s marriage certificate of great personal interest were the names and addresses of two witnesses, specifically, “Franz Kayser” and “Fritz Leyser.” (Figure 15b) Readers should refer to the table at the outset of this post to see that Adolph Schück’s two daughters’ married names were, respectively, Leyser and Kayser. Franz Kayser (Figure 21), whom I met once as an adolescent in New York, was the father of my third cousin John Kayser (Figure 22), while Fritz Leyser (Figure 23) was Larry Leyser’s grandfather. It was astounding to find the surnames on one historic document from Berlin of three families, Schück, Leyser and Kayser (Figure 24), all connected to the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik outside Ratibor.

Figure 23. Larry Leyser’s grandfather, Friedrich “Fritz” Leyser, the second witness at Erich and Hedwig Schück’s 1935 marriage

Figure 24. Franz Kayser and Fritz Leyser, the two witnesses at Erich and Hedwig Schück’s 1935 marriage, as adolescents on horseback in the Tiergarten in Berlin

The point of telling readers about these discoveries is not to bore you senseless, but rather to emphasize that reconstructing one’s own family tree and finding relevant certificates and clues can be a painstaking process that sometimes requires taking baby steps to make progress. Occasionally, a single name or document can open a plethora of opportunities.

Figure 25. Dr. Alfred Mamlok with his wife Frieda “Henrietta” Mamlok née Hirsch

Figure 26. Dr. Alfred Mamlok’s grandson, Dr. Robert Mamlok

Figure 27. Dr. Alfred Mamlok’s son, Dr. Erich Mamlok (1913-1991), who attempted to obtain compensation on behalf of his family during the 1950’s for the forced sale of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik around 1937

Regular readers know how much I like uncovering “connections” in my forensic investigations, so beyond finding photos of Hedwig Lange-Schück, I discovered one other serendipitous association. I previously mentioned the physician who signed Dr. Erich Schück’s death certificate was his first cousin, Dr. Alfred Mamlok. (Figure 8) It so happens that Alfred Mamlok (Figure 25) was the son-in-law of Sigmund Hirsch, co-owner of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik. After publishing Post 55, Part II, of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik story, Larry Leyser put me in touch with Alfred Mamlok’s grandson, Dr. Robert Mamlok (Figure 26), living in Texas. I alluded to this at the outset. It turns out that Dr. Erich Mamlok (Figure 27), Dr. Alfred Mamlok’s son, coordinated with two other second- generation heirs of the sugar plant and corresponded extensively with the German government on the issue of the Woinowitz Zuckerfabrik compensation in the 1950’s but, apparently, they were never successful in being indemnified. The correspondence is in German, Polish, and Spanish, and eventually I hope to obtain a copy of the complete file from Robert Mamlok and translate it to learn why compensation was never meted out to his family. It’s odd that some of the sugar plant owners’ heirs failed in their efforts to be compensated during the 1950’s but that some heirs were eventually indemnified in 1966. I hope to eventually learn why.