Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:05, 13 February 2008

It has been suggested that Westprussia plebiscite be merged into this article. (Discuss) Proposed since February 2008.

This article includes a list of references, related reading, or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (February 2008) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

The Allenstein and Marienwerder plebiscite (Template:Lang-pl) was a plebiscite for self-determination of those regions, then part of East Prussia, in accordance with Article 97 of the Treaty of Versailles.

Conduct

The plebiscite, as well as the Westprussia plebiscite, asked the voters whether they want their homeland to remain in East Prussia, which was part of Weimar Germany, or instead become part of Poland. All inhabitants of the plebiscite district older than 20 years of age or those who were born in this area before 1 January 1905, were entitled to vote.

The plebiscite areas were placed under the authority of two International Commissions of five members appointed by the Principal Allied and Associated Powers representing the League of Nations. French, British and Italian troops under the command of these Commissions had arrived on February 12, 1920. The regular German Reichswehr had previously left the area. Civil and municipal administration was continued under the existing German authorities who were responsible to the Commissions for their duration.

Allenstein

The President of and British Commissioner on the Inter-Allied Administrative and Plebiscite Commission for Allenstein was Mr. Ernest Rennie; French Commissioner was M. Couget; the Marquis Fracassi, a Senator, for Italy; Mr. Marumo for Japan. The German Government were permitted under the Protocol terms to attach a delegate and they sent Baron von Gayl, former Interior Minister. The local police forces were placed under the constrol of two british officers, Lieutenant-Colonel Bennet and Major David Deevis. Col. Bennet reported that he regarded them as "well-disciplined and reliable". There was also present a battalion from the British Army.

This Commission had general powers of administration and, in particular, was “charged with the duty of arranging for the vote and of taking such measures as it may deem necessary to ensure its freedom, fairness, and secrecy. The Commission will have all necessary authority to decide any questions to which the execution of these provisions may give rise. The Commission will make such arrangements as may be necessary for assistance in the exercise of its functions by officials chosen by itself from the local population. Its decisions will be taken by a majority.“

Mr. Rennie reported to Earl Curzon at the British Foreign Office, on February 18, 1920, that the Poles, who now occupied the corridor to the Baltic, had "entirely disrupted the railway, telegraphic and telephone system, and the greatest difficulty is being experienced. Colonal Lomas, the head of the Communications Department, has left for Warsaw in order to negotiate with the Polish Authorities and to endeavour to remedy matters."

Marienwerder

Mr. H. D. Beaumont was the British representative on the Marienwerder Plebiscite Commission and he and the other members of the Commission reached Marienwerder on February 17, 1920. Upon their arrival they found an Italian battalion of Bersaglieri on guard who afterwards marched past at the double. This commmission had about 1,400 uniformed German police under its authority.

The difficulties

The districts concerned had changed hands at various times over the centuries between Old Prussians, Teutonic Knights, Germany, and Poland. Many of the inhabitants had their roots in Poland and were classified as Poles or Masurians at the last official German population census in 1910.

Mr. Beaumont reported to Earl Curzon on February 25, 1920, that the total population of his Plebiscite Area was approximately 158,300, of whom 134,500 are claimed to be of German race and 23,800 Poles, or 15%. He said that with the exception of the circle of Stuhm where Poles admittedly number 15,500 out of a population of 36,500 (42%), the German sympathies of the inhabitants are clearly evident. He added that "immense sums have been spent in the past on railways, roads, bridges and public buildings." Beaumont continued: "the frontier is strictly guarded by the Poles with people having business on the other side prevented from passing without having to go through vexatious formalities. Trains are deliberately held up for hours on entering and leaving Polish territory or the service suspended altogether. Postal, telegraphic and telephonic communication is constantly interrupted. To pass into the territory of Danzig it is necessary to cross through a narrow strip of Polish territory by the great bridge over the Vistula at Dirschau. Here the way is barred by sentries (in French uniforms) who refuse to understand any language but Polish, and a similar barrier has been established at the little village of Muhlhaus before again entering Danzig territory. The result is that this area is cut off from its shopping centre and chief port almost completely. Although it is scarcely likely to change the result of the Plebiscite it would in my opinion be desirable to convey a hint to the Warsaw Government that their present policy is scarcely calculated to gain them votes."

Sir Horace Rumbold, the British Minister in Warsaw, also wrote to Earl Curzon on March 5, 1920, saying that the Plebiscite Commissions at Allenstein and Marienwerder "felt that theyw ere isolated both from Poland and from Germany" and that the Polish authorities were holding up supplies of coal and petrol to those districts. Sir Horace had a meeting with the Polish Minister for Foreign Affairs, M. Patek, who he was disappointed with the Pole's behaviour and "spoke strongly about the tactlessness and rigidity of the Polish Military authorities."

Beaumont again wrote (March 10, 1920) of numerous continuing difficulties being made by Polish officials and added "as a result, the ill-will between Polish and German nationalities and the irritation due to Polish intolerance towards the German inhabitants in the Corridor (now under their rule), far worse than any former German intolerance of the Poles, are growing to such an extent that it is impossible to believe the present settlement (borders) can have any chance of being permanent.... It can confidently be asserted that not even the most attractive economic advantages would induce any German to vote Polish. If the frontier is unsatisfactory now it will be far more so when it has to be drawn on this side (of the river) with no natural line to follow, cutting off Germany from the river bank and within a mile or so of Marienwerder, which is certain to vote German. I know of no similar frontier created by any treaty."

Propaganda

Both sides started a propaganda campaign. The Germans founded several regional associations under the title of the "Ostdeutsche Heimatdienst", which is claimed to have had above 220,000 members. They put their emphasis on Prussian history and loyalty to the Prussian state and also used prejudices against Polish culture and Poland's economical backwardness.

The Poles established an unofficial Masurian Plebiscite Committee (Mazurski Komitet Plebiscytowy) on June 6, 1919 under the chairmanchip of Juliusz Bursche, later Bishop of the Evangelical-Augsburg Church in Poland. They argued that the people of the regions they called Warmia and Masuria were victims of a long period of Germanization, but ethnic Poles, now had the opportunity to liberate themselves from Prussian rule.. The Poles were also aggravated by the Versaille Treaty stipulation which enabled those who were born in the plebiscite area but not living there any more to vote. They claimed that German sources said this was also a Polish condition at Versailles, because it was expected that many Ruhrpolen would vote for Poland.

Undercover and illicit activities were also commenced and as early as March 11, 1920 the Earl of Derby reported a decision of the Allied Council of Ambassadors in Paris to make representations to the Polish government regarding violations of the frontiers of the Marienwerder district by Polish soldiers.

The Plebiscites

The plebiscites took place on 11 July 1920. The plebiscite ended as expected with a majority of the voters, both German and Polish, voting for their districts to remain in East Prussia; only a small part of the territory affected by the plebiscite was awarded to Poland.

Results

• Olecko/ Oletzko

99.993 % Prussia

0.007 % Poland

• Gizycko/ Lötzen

99.97 % Prussia

0.03 % Poland

• Mragowo/ Sensburg

99.93 % Prussia

0.07 % Poland

• Ełk/ Lyck

99.88 % Prussia

0.12 % Poland

• Pisz/ Johannisburg

99.96 % Prussia

0.04 % Poland

• Szczytno/ Ortelsburg

98.51 % Prussia

1.49 % Poland

• Nidzica/ Neidenburg

98.54 % Prussia

1.46 % Poland

• Ostróda/ Osterode

97.81 % Prussia

2.19 % Poland

• Olsztyn/ Allenstein

86.53 % Prussia

13.47 % Poland

• Reszel/ Rößel

97.90 % Prussia

2.10 % Poland

registered voters: 425.305

valid: 371.189

turnout: 87,31 %

total votes for East Prussia: 363.209

total votes for Poland: 7.980

In total, 97.89 % of the inhabitants voted to remain in Prussia, while 2.11 % wanted to join the new Polish state.

Inside the villages of Lubstynek (Klein Lobenstein), Czerlin (Czerlin) and Groszki (Groschken)in the district of Osterode (Ostróda), a majority voted for Poland. These villages became a part of Poland after the plebiscite.

As another clause of the Versailles treaty, the former Prussian area of Soldau (Działdowo), part of the district of Neidenburg, was given to Poland without plebiscite.

See also

• Upper Silesia plebiscite

References

1. Butler, Rohan, MA., Bury, J.P.T.,MA., & Lambert M.E., MA., editors, Documents on British Foreign Policy 1919-1939, 1st Series, HMSO, London, 1960, vol.x, Chapter VIII, "The Pelbiscites in Allenstein and Marienwerder January 21 - September 29, 1920", pps:720 - 828.
2. Williamson, David G., The British in Germany 1918-1930, Oxford, 1991, pps:93-101, ISBN 0-85496-584-X ,
3. Wambaugh, S., Plebiscites since the World War, Washington DC, 1933.
4. Butler et al, 1960, vol.x, p.722
5. Butler et al, 1960, p.721-2
6. Butler et al, 1960, p.723.
7. Butler et al, 1960, vol. ix, 90 and vol.x, p.728.
8. Butler et al, 1960, vol.x, p.723-4.
9. Butler, et al, 1960, vol.x, p.725.
10. Butler, et al, 1960, vol.x, p.726-7.
11. A. Kossert, Masuren, p.249
12. A. Kossert, Masuren, p. 247
13. A. Kossert, Masuren p. 249
14. Butler et al, 1960, vol.x, p.729.

• Plebiscyt 1920

Further reading

• Robert Kempa, Plebiscyt 1920 r. w północno-wschodniej części Mazur (na przykładzie powiatu giżyckiego). In Masovia. Pismo poświęcone dziejom Mazur, 4/2001, Giżycko 2001, p. 149-157 Template:Pl icon
• Andreas Kossert, Masuren Ostpreussens vergessener Süden, ISBN 10-3-57055006-0
• Andreas Kossert, Ostpreussen Geschichte und Mythos (East Prussian History and Myths), ISBN 10-3-88680-808-4
• Andreas Kossert, Religion versus Ethnicity: A Case Study of Nationalism or How Masuria Became a "Borderland", in: Madeleine Hurd (ed.): Borderland Identities: Territory and Belonging in Central, North and East Europe. Eslöv 2006, S.313-330
• Wojciech Wrzesiñsk, Das Recht zur Selbstbestimmung oder der Kampf um staatliche Souveränität - Plebiszit in Ostpreußen 1920 in AHF Informationen Nr. 54 vom 20.09.2000
• Sarah Wambaugh, Plebiscites since the World War, Washington 1933, I p 99 – 141; II p 48 - 107

• Articles to be merged from February 2008
• 1920 referendums
• Referendums in Poland
• Aftermath of World War I
• History of Poland (1918–1939)
• History of Germany
• Polish-German relations
• East Prussia