Security Service Reichsfuehrer SS . Kochem, 7 May 1938. Unterabschnitt Koblenz Branch Kochem IF 225-0/1 M
Note forwarded 7 May 1938 [initialled] M. [?]
1. To the Security Service (SD)—Unterabschnitt Koblenz, Koblenz
Subject: Plebiscite of 10 April 1938. 913/38
Ref.: Your letter II, dated 22 April 1938
Our letter II 225-0/1, dated 22 April 1938.
Copy of a schedule is attached herewith enumerating the persons who cast "No" votes or invalid votes at Kappel, district of
Simmern. The invalid votes are listed first, ending with-------,
thereafter come the No-votes.
The control was effected in the following way: some members of the election committee marked all the ballot papers with numbers. During the ballot itself, a voters' list was made up. The ballot-papers were handed out in numerical order, therefore it was possible afterwards with the aid of this list to find out the persons who cast No-votes or invalid votes. One sample of these marked ballot papers is enclosed. The marking was done on the back of the ballot papers with skimmed milk.
The ballot cast by the Protestant parson Alfred Wolferts is also enclosed.
The identification of two persons was impossible because there
R-142
are several persons of the same name in the village and it was impossible to ascertain the actual voter.
Security Service Branch Kochem initialled: Staffelscharfuehrer
2. for filing II 225-0/1
Security Service Reichsfuehrer SS
Unterabschnitt Koblenz Kochem, 22 April 1938.
Branch Kochem
Note forwarded 22 April 1938
II 225-0/1 M
To the Security Service Unterabschnitt Koblenz, Koblenz
Subject: Plebiscite of 10 April 1938 Ref.: Your letter of 22 April 1938 Enclosures: 4—in duplicate.
Supplementing the telephone conversation with SS-Oberschar-fuehrer Heinrich of 21 April 1938, schedules showing'the polling results of the villages in the area of this branch are forwarded herewith in accordance with No. 1 of your letter.
The high percentage of No-votes and invalid votes has its reason in nearly all cases in the religious attitude of the population, irrespective of whether they are Catholics or Protestants. The district manager of the District Kochem gave the assurance that it was mostly women who voted "no" or "invalidly". As became known here a supervisory control was ordered at several localities of the district which has confirmed the assertion of the district manager. In one village, Fronhofen, district Simmern, see enclosure 3, several inhabitants were fined in the fall of last year because they had shown forbidden church banners at the occasion of a festival at the first ordination of a priest. The bad result in the village Riesweiler in the same district is obviously the result, as the district manager there states of squabbles between the leader of the local party group and several inhabitanta In spite of many endeavors, even on the part of the Gau-leadership, these squabbles could not so far be settled. A report on the village of Kiesselbach has already been made over the phone: in this connection, it must be taken into consideration that the result given has to be corrected because the percentage reported
244
included the "no" votes, but did not include the invalid votes. Aside from religious questions, the following reasons were at the root of the matter. For some time already the consolidation of private property had been under way. The Reich Food Estate had promised the peasants in the beginning that the individual plans would not exceed 4 "Morgen" to 1 Hektar (about 2.47 acres). Afterwards it appeared, however, that plans had been made for up to 2k Morgen. Some peasants received property situated near the village while other peasants who formerly had their landed property near the village, now received property at the border of the area. Apart from some individual cases where "no" votes or invalid votes may be attributed to an anti-social attitude, no further reasons beyond those enumerated above, can be found. -Only two cases of direct incorrectness in carrying out the ballot have so far come to our knowledge as may be gathered from enclosures 1 and 2. They affected the localities of Pommern, district of Kochem, and Boppard, district of St. Goar. At the village of Kappel, district of Simmern, an inconspicuous supervisory control of the votes cast was effected without, however, altering the actual results. A special report about this case will follow soon.
Security Service Branch Kochem initialled: N Staifel-Scharfuehrer.
Enclosure 1
Kochem district
Votes cast No-votes Invalid votes Percentage Locality
286 14 2 5.6 Lieg
277 ' 24 - 9.5 Beuren
198 14' - 7.1 Urschmitt
145 5 14 13.1 Pommern
495 4 (40) 1 GO) 1.01 (10.1) Poltersdorf
The figures inserted in () in Pommern give the actual voting results, the published figures give the official result.
Enclosure 2
St. Goar district
Invalid
Votes cast No-votes votes Percentage Locality.
4,178 11 (130) 2 0.31 (3.1) Boppard
The figures in () show the actual result of the ballot.