[Page 200]

Unrest broke out in Przytyk in the anti-Semitic terrain, under the influence of a certain Jan Karczak, who lived behind the city in Podgajek. In fact, he was the chief organizer of the anti-Jewish excesses, which began with the Endekje boycott. Karczak received moral and financial support from Radom. From there, he received the venomous leaflet “Polonia” which was distributed by the youth. The anti-Semitic agitation later came to action: pickets of Jewish businesses.

The pickets ruined Jewish business within a relatively short time, for what began with boycotts ended with the destruction of merchandise, breaking of windows, and driving away the customers. That inciter had an assistant, the painter Mirecki, a Volksdeutsche, who later revealed himself in town as a German spy.

The anti-Semites also attempted to ruin the Jewish tradesman in the hand-working field. They opened a cooperative for products, clothing, and shoes. This effort was led by the newly arrived resident Kornapel who had inherited a house from a relative. First, he evicted the Jewish tenants from his property, and opened a large cooperative enterprise. Despite all the terror and forceful means to take the customers from the Jewish business, the cooperative did not last even one year.

One day, a Christian quilter from Radom showed up. Since the shoe stores were for the most part in Jewish hands, he wanted to convince the Christian shoemakers to give him the work. However, he was unable to get orders from the Poles, who had to utilize the Jewish quilters.

Throughout the entire time, the Jewish youth patrolled day and night so as to not permit the Endekjes to attack Jews or destroy Jewish property. We also maintained contact with the merchant organizations

[Page 201]

A section of the proceedings of the trial that appeared in a Yiddish daily in Warsaw Photo on the page: Yaakov Leib Zajda

[Page 202]

in Łódź and Radom, asking them not to sell any merchandise to the Endekje merchants. The work continued for about three months – until the well-known, sorrowful Monday.

Sorrowful greetings began to arrive from the surrounding towns at the end of November 1935, regarding unrest, especially on market days. Several weeks before the pogrom in the town, we heard about attacks on Jews in Opoczno, Przysucha, Nowe Miasto, and other places. The news brought all Jewish groups to their knees. The distribution of help for the suffering people was organized. I traveled by taxi to transport a wounded Jew and his two grandchildren to a hospital in Radom. I had weapons with me.

On the basis of information that we received from the police (with whom we were in contact), we organized the defense. The Jewish youth received an order to leave the town and be prepared. Simultaneously, we went to open places and houses and calmed the moods.

Our preparations were sensed on the Polish street. There was anger between both sides of the population. That same Friday, strong incitement began in Przytyk and the area.

The following Monday, the fair day, we took the following steps to avert an organized attack: we informed the Starosta (regional governor), Wojewoda (district), as well as Jewish Sejm deputies about the unfolding situation.

The incitement and agitation increased. Attacks on Jewish passers-by took place. Stones were thrown at Jewish houses and businesses. Pickets of Jewish stores did not permit any customers to enter, and disrupted the supply of products in the city…

[Page 203]

Why were there unfortunate conflicts between the Polish and Jewish populations in 1936?

Why specifically in Przytyk, in a town where the reciprocal relations between Jews and Poles in societal, political, and economic realms were organized in the best fashion.

In order to answer this question, one must overanalyze the situation in the country at that time. The politics of the Sanacja regime were explicitly oriented toward an understanding with Hitlerist Germany. Extreme national elements gave forth words that expressed fascist theory to their adherents. The studying youth in the high schools demanded quotas. A motion was proposed in the Sejm (which was passionately discussed) to forbid ritual slaughter for supposed humanitarian motives. The national-radical camps which were later called “falanga” [Phalangists] found their adherents not only from among the chauvinist student youth. The Hitlerist agitation found fertile ground for Nazi theories also in the Polish village, among the simple peasants, who suffered greatly due to the economic crisis. From Warsaw and Łódź, a new religion was preached in the villages around Przytyk by the NARA^[1] people.

Did the local authorities know about this? They knew it very well, but it was an era of a battle of pamphlets with the progressive forces: the era of Bereza and court cases in Brisk and Łuck. This was also taking place

[Page 204]

with our region. In his report about the situation in April 1936, the Starosta of Radom wrote, “After the arrests of former activists of the Communist Party on April 1, 1936, nine of them were taken to Bereza. The Przytyk activist of the K.P.P^[2], Shaya Fajntuch, was also among that group.

On March 28, 1936, the low-level member of the K.Z.M.P.^[3], Y. Bornsztajn, was sentenced to five years in a correction house. He lost his rights of citizenship for five years for writing Communist slogans in a notebook of a student in Gutman's folk school.

The police command in Radom determined at that time that the leadership of the O.N.R.^[4] organized the older gymnasja students, for they considered them a positive element for their actions, especially in the realm of anti-Jewish appearances.”

Our regional government organs also considered that if matters would come to actions, to excesses in our region, they would turn against the Jewish population of Przytyk, a town with the largest number of Jewish residents (80%) in comparison to the Poles.

And Przytyk, with its revolutionary traditions already from the era of the battles in 1905, with the belief of the Sanacja that it was a nest of the “Jewish community” – was indeed taken by the Endekjes.

For 20 years between both world wars, no folk (primary or elementary) school was even built in Przytyk. They built a fine building for the municipality, and installed a secretary who knew how to forge the votes for the benefit of the Sanacja, as was written in the Warsaw “Rabotnik”^[5].

There was a large police division in Przytyk, housed in a single-story building. In Przytyk, they were especially concerned about such buildings for social oppression.

Under such conditions, the reaction, with the quiet approval of the organ of the authorities, conducted its vile work in the town and the surrounding villages.

[Page 205]

On a Monday market day, March 9, 1936, a lot of people gathered in Przytyk. Youthful agitators wandered around the peasants.

The first clashes ensued shortly thereafter, and later – an open battle between the Jews and the peasants. The Radom Starosta wrote the following in his political report of March 1-31:

“On March 9, 1936, having been provoked by the Jews, the peasants beat them and demolished Jewish residences in Przytyk. As a result, there were three deaths and several injuries.”

On March 16, 1936, 39 Christians and 12 Jews were arrested as a result of the Przytyk excesses.

In March 1936, the police command registered 76 incidents between the Polish and Jewish populations in the Radom district.

The national party organized penal meetings on March 13, 1996 in the following places: Pogolyn, Czarnocin, and Ratoszyn. They frequently called for boycotts and chasing away Jews.

The trial regarding the events in Przytyk lasted from April 2-26, 1936. The Radom Starosta describes the time with boasting:

“The arduous judgment against the Jews left a strong impression on the Jewish population. On the other hand, the Polish population reacted to the judgment with joy.”

The applied terror of the authorities did not break the activity of the left camp. The well-informed Starosta of Radom wrote in one of his accounts that, “The initiative of the K. P. P.^[6] led to an understanding between members of the regional left political groups and the Jewish professional unions.”

[Page 206]

A section of the proceedings of court In the photo: the Polish lawyer Patroszewic, the defender of the Jewish accused

[Page 207]

With the news of the drawn-out court case, a protest strike took place on April 30 in Przytyk, Radom and BiaŁobrzeg, which was strongly supported by the Jewish population.

The Communist union of Polish youth issued a call to the farmers and land workers with respect to the anti-Semitic incitement by the Endekjes in Przytyk. In an accounting from August 7, 1936, the researches of the police command in Radom wrote that “It is not possible to control what relates to the Communist activity in several places, therefore he deals with the first place – Przytyk. And in Łódź, upon being greeted, he stated the following words to the fascist gangs: ‘There in Przytyk’…”

Today, after so many years, we can look at those events without a special passion. I give the reckoning that the same dark forces that incited the murder of Jews in 1936 – incited the bourgeoise militias in 1945. Then, five young men were murdered in Przytyk by the fascist bands of Zegadlo. The bourgeois Banszyk killed them, and those people gave their lives only because they had decided to be on the side of the current realities in Poland.

Przytyk 1963-64

Original footnote:

1. Sent by a special editing committee in Przytyk, created there after we approached the Przytyk National Council for material for the Yizkor Book. This article was written in Przytyk in 1963 with a clear bias, and even a certain deficiency. We bring this material without amendments and without commentary. Return

Translator's Footnotes

1. There is a footnote in the text here: National-Radical camp (extremely nationalistic and anti-Semitic organization in pre-war Poland. Return
2. Communist Party of Poland. Return
3. Communist Youth League of Poland. Return
4. There is a footnote in the text here: Obóz Narodowy-Radykalny – National Radical Camp (see footnote noted in #1). Return
5. There is a footnote in the text here: Central organ of the Polish Socialist Party (P.P.S.) Return
6. There is a footnote in the text here: Polish Communist Party. Return

Pogrom and Resistance

Impressions and experiences of a Jew from Przytyk (name unknown) from the photostats sent by the Yiddish Scientific Institute (YIVO) of New York. There were written pages from a living witness of the events of Przytyk in March 1936. We publish them without changes and abridgement, with the exception of a few improvements of the format and language. The title of the following memoir as well as the subheadings on various section are ours.

(the editor)

… This time, from a window on the first story of a house that stands on the right side of the street, in the direction of the retreating masses and the police,

[Page 208]

a hand with a revolver moved through a broken window. It was lifted up in the direction of the crowd, and a series of shots emanated. (?)^[1] bent forward and ran a few more steps. 53-year-old Stanislaw Wyeszniak fell on the sidewalk. The policeman Pawelowski noted that a young Jew with glasses had shot from the window. Pawelowski ran to the wounded man to help him. The crowd carried him to the side of the bridge where the residence of Dr. (?] was located.

The rush after the wounded shooter: The policemen, Merta and Wengzszyn, who were below the window at the time of the shooting, pointed the guns at the shooter, which caused him to disappear into the depths of the house. Someone then jumped in together with the police through a corridor in that house to capture him. It later became clear, however, that the entrance of the house from which the shot took place led to the other dwellings of the house and not to the steps. This led to the police coming too late to that room.

In the lower level of that house they found Lesko and his 16-year-old daughter. They declared that nobody shot from their dwelling. Shortly thereafter they found the leader Optonos (?) in the place.

At the time of the search in the room on the first floor, three 35 mm. revolver cases were found on the right side of the window from which the shots emanated. Other weapons were not found. In the meantime, they held the elderly Lesko and his son Shalom, who described the facial features of the shooter to the policeman Pawelowski. When he was asked by the deputy prosecutor, Lesko denied that he had shot. At first, when he was interrogated by the investigating judge, he admitted that he shot three times with a revolver from the window where the casings were found at the side. He shot in the air in order to scare the masses who wanted to tear open the door from his father's shop and enter. He had obtained the revolver from an unknown person in Radom to use defensive means for warning at the time of the anti-Semitic disturbances that are being judged. After shooting, he threw the revolver into the river.

[Page 209]

A section from the court case In the picture: the Polish lawyer Szymansky, the defender of the Jewish accused

The upper portion of Stanislaw Wyeszniak's dead body demonstrated that the bullet entered through the right shoulder, two fingerbreadths from the arm bone, causing an internal hemorrhage that killed him. They removed a revolver bullet from the right lung, the caliber of which fit the case that was found in Lesko's house.

From the statements given by eyewitnesses who were present when he fell, it was determined that Wyeszniak fell from the bullet shot by Lesko. Since no revolver was found on the banks of the river at the point that Lesko indicated, they took him out of the Przytyk prison once again so that he can personally indicate the location where he cast away the weapon.

However, the search yielded no results that time as well. One must stress that at the moment that the accused shot, six policemen were near his house, who must have seen this. Wyeszniak met the bullet so close to the policeman Pawelowski, that he was pushed over. The masses did not attack Lesko's house or the neighboring houses at that time. Only the person who was shot from Lesko's window was killed. According to the statement of Jozef Wyeszniak, the brother of the deceased, he was found incidentally on Warszawska Street, looking for his son who had been left in the city.

The witness Mariana Sobestel, the defendant Wojciech Zarichta and others declared during the interrogation that several shots also emanated from the window of Swieczki's house at the same time as the shots from Lesko's house. According to the declaration of the witness Sobestel, after that, there were shots from a room of Leizer Feldberg's house. Osjowek saw the son-in-law of that Feldberg, Leibush Lenger, loading a revolver in the alleyway. Zofia Szikorsko saw Itzik Bonden in the door of Swieczki's bakery with a revolver in his hand, with which he threatened the peasants. They saw revolvers with several other Jews. The accused Wojciech stated that he had seen how Avraham and Yitzchak Frajdman had shot into the masses through the window in

[Page 211]

Lesko's house. He also saw Avraham Swieczki fleeing in the yard of his house, from which he was later felled by a shot.

Through the course of the investigation, insufficient witnesses were gathered to accuse the aforementioned people of committing a murder. Therefore, the investigation against them was called off. The police witnesses ascertained that nobody shot from the window near which Wojciech was found. Furthermore, the local visibility made it clear that it was impossible to see the people standing in the window from the vantage point of where Wojciech was located, especially since the window had been hit by sticks. At approximately the same time, the witness Rubienczyk had seen on Zachenta how the accused Borensztajn had shot at people who were standing on the street. He did not hit anyone, however. According to the statement of the policeman Nowicki, approximately 30 shots were fired. The witness Stanislaw Kornapl, a 35.16-centimeter^[2] caliber casing was found at the place where Lozer Kirszenzwajg had shot, according to the statements of witnesses. A bullet of the same caliber had been removed from Stanislaw Popiel's body.

When the three policemen were busy looking for those who shot from Lesko's house, the rest of the policemen were involved with controlling the crowd. This, however, did not succeed. The appearance of Wyeszniak's dead body being dragged through the entire suburb of Zachenta, accompanied by the weeping of his family, and later being laid on the street in front of the doctor who was not in Przytyk at the time, as well as the news about the shooting by the Jews – infuriated the masses and ignited the first for revenge. They set out to demolish the Jewish dwellings.

According to a witness report from the policemen Adamiec, Szmedro, Rokacz, Margulies and others, the head of the crowd, who directed them at certain moments and incited them to excesses, were: Jozef Pitelewski, Olszewski, Zarichta, Wlazla, Kubiak, Czubak, Aleksander, Pitelewsi, and Kodparski.

The first two should have had revolvers, but the search that later took place regarding them yielded no results. The version given over by several Jewish witnesses was not confirmed: that

[Page 212]

the shots emanated from a truck diving through Warszawska Street, upon which businessmen were traveling.

The excesses of the masses began not at all far from the bridge. The witnesses and the policemen Baraczewski and Barek claimed that during the events, an inconspicuous role was played, aside from the aforementioned, by Jan Korczak, Bienkowski, Bankiewicz, and Kwiatniewski. They all damaged doors and windows, and stormed Jewish shops. Due to the intervention of the police, neither Lesko's or Swietszko's house was demolished. The first place to which they broke into on Warszawska Street was the beer tavern and residence of Rachel Milsztajn. They hacked the shutters and a window through which they broke in. They overturned the buffet and broke the tables in the tavern. Mrs. Milsztajn and Hersh Fisz were saved by escaping through the window into the yard and hiding in the open lavatory. According to their statements, the dwelling was destroyed by Jozef Pitelewski and Franciszek Wlazlo.

On the same street, Aleksander Pitelewski beat Mrs. Chaya Holcman with a stick, and Jozef Skaczik made threats with a stick and beat Moshe Baumel with an iron rod. Rachel Minkus found a piece of that stick on the side of the beaten Baumel, which was later presented as evidence.

The unrest first reached a large scale in the suburbs of Zachenta and Podgajek. Groups of 20-30 people armed with bars ran through the streets and broke into the houses.

Leibush Tober received two wounds in the head and an injury to the right arm as a result of the beatings. Meir Tober also received wounds in the head. Splattered blood was noticed in the dwelling. There, they found pitchforks, iron bars, stones and rods that the attackers had thrown away. A crowd of several tens of people broke into the store of the Przywyszewices and hacked the windows. Then they broke a few doors. In the last house, they found Yisrael Przywyszewic beaten. Someone had broken his left hand. Przywyszewic recognized Rajiek and Wlazlo among those who had beaten him. They

[Page 213]

had stabbed him with a knife, along with his mother Jozefa Wiezszowicko. They later found a rod and traces of blood in the bed in the kitchen. They tore four blankets of Mrs. Hinda Haberberg. Stanislaw Praski participated in this. Ester Malc stated that after they broke into her house, she was beaten by Wlazlo, Zarichta, Plinak, and Stepaniak. Golda Bornsztajn also identified Slizak and Stepaniak as the persons who beat her. They had taken some merchandise from her store. Aleksander Prus broke the windows of Gitel Minkowski. Stepan Zarichta and Kaska broke the windows of Shaul Frenkel.

Jan Wacek beat up David Margulies. Kacporski, Wlazlo and Bogajczyk and broke into Baruch Ajzenman's workshop after hacking the windows. The following people broke into residence of Yerachmiel Plachta on number 36 after breaking the door: Zarichta, Wlazlo, and Prosek. Plachta hid with his family in the attic. The intruders destroyed the household objects, utensils, a grand piano, and pictures, and then they moved on. However, the intruders could not go to the attic because they did not have the ladder, as Plachta had taken it with him.

In Akiva Frajdman's bakery, Zachenta banged a clock with a weight. Zarichta and Biszinski participated in the attack on the bakery. Zarichta, along with Kacparski, Kaszcz, and Kubiak destroyed the dwelling of Leibush and Hersh Mordechai Rozenhalc. While sitting in the attic, the Rozenhalces heard shouting the words, “Kill these Jews!”

In the dwelling of Chaya Frajdman, they broke through a window and began to beat her with rocks. Mrs. Frajdman was five weeks after childbirth. She protected her infant with her own body. The other children succeeded in escaping from the house. Kacparski participated in the attack against Mrs. Frajdman. Bodzyk participated in the attack on the dwelling of Shlomo Majerfeld. The dwelling of the Jew Alter Kozlowski, located in a house on the other side of the church, especially suffered. A crowd of 20 people, headed by Kozszes, knocked down the windows and the doors with rods. They began to throw stones through the windows. They completely broke down the closet in which Kozlowski was hiding with the children. They made a ruin of a bed and chairs. Aside from this, they wrecked several tens of Jewish dwellings, breaking through the windows and doors along with the frames, with

[Page 214]

the help of iron poles, rods, and rocks weighing several tens of kilo. The crowds were easily able to deal with the locks using stones, for the stones lay under the church hill. The merchandise and interiors of the houses and shops were destroyed. People even took the merchandise and objects with them, even though this was an uncommon occurrence. There were a few claims of abuse, stating that money had been stolen. Wherever they found the residents, they beat them, shouting, “Kill them! Don't protect them!”

Numerous Jewish families avoided being beaten or injured only due to the fact that they hid in the cellars or attics, where the crowds had no time or energy to search, as they were expecting the police reinforcements to arrive at any moment. The crowd retreated, moving from the bridge to the church, and further on to Podgajek. The victims succeeded in identifying one or more of the attackers whom they knew previously as peasants who would come on market days or whom they employed as gardeners and orchard keepers. The witnesses gave over the family names and places of residence of those people, who were later confronted.

Passing by the houses, beginning from the bridge over the Radomka River until the church, you see the following picture:

In the dwelling of Sara Bornsztajn, in which a few tens of people hid, the stepson of Rajek Zarichta, Aleksander Pitlowski, and Zielinski broke in. Bodzi stood with a bar his hand behind the window. Pitlowski struck Mrs. Bornsztajn. Zielinski and Bodzyk beat Gedalia Hemplen as he was running out of the house. He was wounded on the head and the right side.

During the medical investigation, Hemplen claimed that he was beaten by Rajek and Bodzyk. Zielinski, Bodzy, Pitlowski, Kasz (?) broke into the dwelling of Yankel Bornsztajn, ruined the fine tables and chairs, and beat Yankel Bornsztajn and his wife with rods and stones. During the investigation, they found 48 stones

[Page 215]

of various sizes there. In our house in the dwelling and shop of Hinda Bornsztajn, they ruined five beds, ripped the feather beds, and broke the windows. The owners hid in the attic with their family. From there, they recognized the attacker Kacparski. During the attack, Mrs. Bornsztajn lost 220 zloty, which she had hid in her bed.

Meir and Leibush Toker's^[3] dwelling in house number 3 and others were destroyed by unidentified attackers. Rajek, who was called nuworyz (nouveau-riche), beat Leibush Tobar with a bar. Aleksander Pitlowski also beat Tobar, not over the shoulders, but rather over the head.

Meir Tober stated that, aside from the aforementioned, he was beaten by Jan Damanalski and Krawczyk. Leibush Tober recognized Zarichta, Damanoski, Aleksander Pitlowski, and Stepaniak from among those who beat him. Zimlinski and Prasel participated in the attack. Kozlowski's maid Chana received a blow from Stanislaw Zielinski, wounding her in the head.

They destroyed houses in the suburb of Podgajek, which extends from the church on the side of Żerdź. Among others, they destroyed the house of Feiga Pietszantka. Sidzinski, Kubiak, and Hosiec participated in the destruction of Golda Przyticka's house. The most important example that recreated the crimes perpetrated by the masses during the disturbances took place in the home of Shmid Rogicki, through which they dragged Wyeszniak's dead body, opposite Dr. Gandowski's house.

After breaking down the shutters and the windows of the home of the shoemaker Minkowski, several people from among the crowd, armed with rods and sticks, gathered in the yard. A stone thrown through the door hit 15-year-old Gavrish Minkowski, who fell on the floor and lost consciousness. The three other Minkowski sons, aged 6 to 14, hid under the bed. Both Minkowskis ran through the door into the corridor at the last moment. There, in the front part of the house, Yosel Minkowski was killed. Chaya Minkowski was attacked with sticks in the yard and fell from being beaten with sticks. She was later taken to the hospital, and died a few hours later.

[Page 216]

They dragged the Minkowski's six-year-old son Shmuel from under the bed and beat him over the head with rods. Hershel and Rachel were saved, hiding deep under the bed.

The investigation regarding the Minkowskis determined that Yosel had received five wounds in the head, three of which were made by a hard, blunt weapon. This broke his neck bone and destroyed his brain. The wounds were fatal. The two other wounds were made by a hard, sharp utensil. Chaya Minkowski received three wounds in the head, breaking the right bone of her neck and temple, and destroying the right half of her brain. She also received a cutting wound on the other side of her cheek. Gavriel Minkowski was wounded in the head, causing the bone of the left side of the chest and the right side of the vertebrae, stopping the functions of the nervous system for more than 20 days. Six-year-old Shmuel received three impulse wounds on the soft part of the head. According to the testimony of witness Yisrael Bas, who fled from the crowd and was on the other side of Dr. Nazdowski's house, a distance of 15 yards from Ragolski's house, a crowd of people, armed with rods and sticks, attacked that house. From among them, the witness recognized Jan Prus, Pawel Kenscie, Kopcza, and Wytszek. They broke into the house. The witness did not see this, because this took place on the other side of the house. Baruch Hersh, who had observed the happenings from a distance of 65 yards, stated that he recognized Czubak, Wojciech, and Olszewki from among the people who ran into the house and later exited. He first heard how Czubak told the crowd that a Jew lives in the dwelling of the Minkowskis.

A medical investigation was first conducted regarding the evidence: the power of his sight. The doctor-oculist claimed that it is doubtful whether one can recognize someone's face from a distance of 65 yards. However, this was not conclusive. Hershek, one of the Minknowski's sons who survived, stated that at the moment when they knocked out the windowpanes, he saw Stanislaw in the first row of the crowd, standing there at the window. Behind him, he recognized Frankiewicz, Iwenski, and Kwiatniewski.

In the moment when those people banging with the rods in their hands began

[Page 217]

to enter the house through the window, the witness hid under the bed. Minkowski then saw several other people aside from the aforementioned, who he was unsure if he recognized.

From their testimonies, it was clear beyond doubt that Frankiewicz, Iwenski, and Kwiatniewski directly participated in the murder of the Minkowskis and the wounding of the Minkowskis' son. Due to psychological issues related to being beaten, the six-year-old orphan and witness Gavrish Minkowski did not give over any evidence related to the murder, and did not recognize any of the perpetrators.

The six-year-old witness, who was interrogated twice, stated that he was dragged from under the bed and beaten by youths whom he did not recognize. During the judicial-medical investigation on March 18, he stated that Franciszek Sobal and Ragolski beat him. However, they did not succeed in obtaining relevant information from him with respect to the young people, and it was not clear why he did not talk about them. Franciszek could possibly be one of the so-called Frankiewiczes of Przytyk.

Ragolski, the owner of the house in which the Minkowski's lived, did not take part in beating them, but rather hid the Jewish family in his dwelling. Nevertheless, he stated in court twice under oath that he does not know the murderer. He did not recognize anyone of the defendants presented to him.

Minkowski's dwelling was completely destroyed during the disturbance. Two beds were overturned. The bedding, the wardrobe, and the folding screen over the bed were badly streaked with blood. Minkowski's dead body lay in the corridor of the house in a pool of blood, which had also splattered the walls. Twenty stones, broken sticks, as well as a hatchet with streaks of blood on the handle were found in the room. It was determined that the hatchet had been owned by Minkowski.

The death of the Minkowskis, the assault on their children, and the destruction of their house assuaged the hatred and sated their thirst for revenge to a significant degree. The excesses began to diminish, and approximately a half hour after

[Page 218]

the murder of the Minkowskis, police reinforcements arrived in Przytyk from Radom and restored order.

Lawyer Ettinger: Do you know any testimony about a robbery of Kolbassa?

Witness: I do not recall.

Lawyer Petroszewicz: Are you guilty of taking any money from Haberberg?

Finally, the first Jewish witnesses appeared. The Jewish crowd in the courtroom breathed a bit easier after hearing a series of testimonies over two days that blamed everything on the Jews… Pomrok, a huckster, was the first witness. At the critical moment, he stood by his stall with ready-made clothes. The hucksters Lesko and Zalman were near him. When they began to knock out windowpanes and beat Jews in the market, several of the accused (the witness pointed with his hand toward several young peasants in the accused dock) ran to the Jewish hucksters and began to rob their merchandise. Several pairs of trousers were taken from the witness. He ran after them shouting, “Give back the trousers!” The attacker escaped in the direction of Warszawska Street. When the witness returned to his stall, he saw Zalman lying unconscious. Blood flowed from his head. He saw a broken stall near Lesko, and Lesko was shouting that they had robbed merchandise from him. This all took place during the fair. We quickly took the bit of merchandise and hid it where we were able.

The first clash between Kowalski and the Jewish lawyers Berenson and Ettinger took place. During Pomrok's testimony, the lawyer Kowalski suddenly stood up and shouted out with a loud voice.

“The Jews wish to besmirch the accused Poles, claiming that they robbed. This is unheard of.”

“We are witnesses that lawyer Kowalski usually does not mix into his

affairs. Seeing this only as a civil matter, he crossed the bounds of his competency. However, everything must have a measure, and I request this court to make lawyer Kowalski aware that he must desist from mixing into these matters.”

“Lawyer Kowalski speaks about Jews. I wish to make him aware that Jews have nothing to do with Mr. Kowalski in this matter, and therefore he should speak little about Jews. Here, in court, we only have complaints about him, and he must talk about only them.”

However, the Jewish crowd in the courtroom could not have these thoughts for long. The name of a new witness was called: Franciszek Rogolski, the shadow of Minkowski in the courtroom. A shudder went through the hall. People knew that he is one of the prime witnesses regarding the murder of the Minkowski family. Rogolski is the owner of the house in which the horrendous murder took place.

A tall Christian with a typical peasant face entered. He had yellow mustache and long boots. His appearance evoked a harsh nightmare over the entire room. People felt that the shadows of the murdered Yosel and Chaya Minkowski were hovering about.

Rogolski spoke. He told about the accursed hour in Podgajek. A gang had thrown stones at the Jewish homes. They also perpetrated assaults. He broke into the home of one of my Jewish neighbors and warned that he should close down the house, for a misfortune could ensue. Later, I saw how a band attacked in the yard of my house. They approached

[Page 220]

Minkowski's house, and threw stones at the windows. They broke down the doors. I ran into the corridor and saw the Jewish shoemaker was lying in a pool of blood. He was still alive, but was no longer talking. Outside, in the yard, his wife Chaya was lying in the same state.

[Those in] the Jewish accused dock went into mourning. More difficult voices were heard in the hall. One could hear there the quiet sound of suppressed spasms. Minkowski's daughter from Warsaw, who had arrived that day at the trial, was sitting in the public bench. The Jewish journalists were not embarrassed to wipe tears from their eyes. All those in the Jewish accused dock broke out in weeping. Yankel Bornsztajn lay his head upon the accused Haberberg. Eliezer Kirszencwajg nestled against his brother Yaakov, as did the other accused. Everyone was weeping. Everyone was mourning for the memory of the martyrs Yosel and Chaya Minkowski, whose name had been mentioned in the courtroom.

Rogolski spoke. He stated the same thing several times, exactly as if he was reading from a protocol: He saw two or three young peasants attack in the yard. He saw that they rained down a stream of blows upon the victim. He saw how the unfortunate, young orphans crawled out from the bed. He saw everything… but who did it all?

The chairman asked this. The prosecutor asked this. The Jewish lawyers asked this: who were the attackers? Who were the murderers? Look at the accused bench, do you recognize anyone?

Rogolski already had a prepared response. He did not even have to look at the accused dock. He gave his response coldly and smoothly…

“I saw a crowd. I do not know them.”

“And perhaps the accused Frankiewicz was there? And perhaps Iwenski?”

“No. I know them well; they were not there.”

“A lie! You do know who the murderers are!” But suddenly: what happened there? The 70-year-old Feldberg stood up in front of the accused bench. He was pale as the walls. His head drooped down, and he barely succeeded in calling out:

“I can no longer hold back! He is the murderer!”

A terrible ruckus broke out in the hall. The chairman immediately called the sitting to order. Ragolski stood before the witness stand and turned many colors. He was shuddering all over.

Outside, they attempted to revive the old man. They gave him water. A policeman boarded a wagon and quickly brought the Jewish doctor Szenderowicz. It took ten minutes for the old man to come to. He was not taken back into the hall. The court resumed its session. The examination of Rogolski ended quickly, and the session was recessed, in a somber mood, until 8:00 a.m. Saturday.

“Give over the Cholera”

Judge Plewoko: “How far from the police post were you standing?”

“A few meters.”

“Which Jews [zhidkes] were still standing?”

“I do not recall.”

Judge Plewoko: “Were you standing among the peasants?”

“If I were standing among the peasants, I would not be able stand today…”

They summoned the witness Pinchas Frajdman. A young Hassidic man appeared

[Page 222]

wearing a frayed kapote and glasses. He had a shop next to the post. On the critical day, he saw the entire scene with the attack on the police. The same people who hauled Sczalkowski out of the police post later ran through the market with rods and sticks, and beat Jews.

Judge: “Do you recognize anyone from the accused dock?”

“Yes.”

“Point out whom!”

Lawyer Margulies: “Did you see any people other than the accused?”

“I saw Jan Bizenski and…”

The chairman interrupted: “I request that no names be mentioned.”

“Lawyer Margulies: “I wish to only confirm that among the summoned witnesses of the accused, there are those that took part in the beating. Karczak is barely interested…”

The witness Chaim Mandel stated that the blacksmith Bogajczyk was the first to throw a stone at the police. Bogajczyk took the stone from his pocket. The witness further related the course of the attack on the Jews. A Jew from Warszawska Street came running and issued an alarm:

“Woe, they are stealing and killing!”

Prosecutor: “Did Jews have revolvers?”

“I know nothing of such. If there was no incitement, there would have been no boycott.”

[Page 223]

and inciters. If a peasant tried to purchase something from a Jew, the agitators would come running and say,” We will kill you on the spot if you purchase from a Jew.”

Lawyer Kriger: “Which of the accused conducted the terror?”

“I was standing next to my stall with ready-made clothing. Suddenly, several hooligans with sticks came running and began to assault. I abandoned the merchandise and attempted only to save my life. One of the attackers then pushed me to the ground and beat me over the head with a rod. I fell unconscious. When I came to, I was already in the house, and the Przytyk feldscher (medic) stood next to me.”

After Frajdman's testimony, the chairman turned to the accused Bogajczyk:

“Several witnesses declared before the court today that you were one of the first to attack the Jews, that you attacked the police, and that you called for the robbing of merchandise. Perhaps you wish to give a statement?”

The cynical statement of one of the chief hooligans of the Przytyk

[Page 224]

pogrom set the Jewish crowd in the courtroom on edge. The Jewish accused could not sit calmly in their places.

Then, the examination of the Jew Shmuel Rokacz took place. It did not bring forth any new details. The series of Jewish witnesses who had to give their testimonies today concluded with Rokacz.

Then the Christian witness Stepan Pemczinski, a house painter from Radom was summoned. He is a tall, blond shegetz [derogatory term for a gentile], dressed in a brown uniform which made him look like a veritable Hitlerist.

Several days before the disturbance, he traveled to Przytyk in an auto together with the Jew Cymbalist. The Jew had a discussion with him about Communism. During the discussion, Cymbalist showed him two magazine-revolvers. Cymbalist told him that he had purchased the revolvers illegally from a Jew in Radom. Cymbalist said that the revolvers will be put to good use. The witness also saw many papers with the Jew – these must have been Communist proclamations.

Lawyer Fenigsztajn cross examined the witness. The shegetz got confused in his speech, and could not give clear responses.

The Jewish civil representatives asked:

“You saw a Jew with two revolvers, a Communist – and you did not report anything to the police?”

The witness: “Because I wanted to speak with him a few times, so that I can find out where the Jewish weapons arsenal in Radom is located…”

Lawyer Fenigsztajn: “Were the revolvers that Cymbalist showed you magazine type, or were they a bomb revolver?”

“A magazine type.”

The fourth accused, Franciszek Kwietniewski, also denied. He was in church during the disturbance, and then in Olszewski's shop.

[Page 225]

He found out about the murder later. The rest of the accused did not give any statements. They only confirmed the first statements with the prosecutor.

After hearing out the Endekja accused, the prosecutor asked several questions to the accused Shalom Lesko regarding the plan of his father's house.

Lawyer Szumanski then stood up and asked the chairman whether the specified plan of Warszawska Street and of the house of the Leskos had been displayed during the proceedings, and had been recognized by the court as an official document. The chairman responded that the specified plan was private. The prosecutor had shown it to the court, but it was not an official document. Lawyer Szumanski again brought forth his proposal regarding the visibility. “If the court throws out the suggestion for a second time, then I request that you delegate the investigation judge along with an engineer from Przytyk to go to take measurements of Warszawska Street and produce a new plan of Lesko's house. For the fate of Shalom Lesko is bound up with this, and I request that the court fulfill my request.”

The chairman declared that he would give the decision of the court after the recess.

Immediately after that, Lawyer Kowalski stood up and demanded a new proposal. A motion was proposed in court, and was listened to attentively. One felt as if a fresh anti-Jewish incitement scandal was being prepared. Kowalski spoke calmly, with a non-bold voice. Slowly, he expressed the true tone: “I request that the court summon by telegraph the Rector Professor Czeczak, who lives on Podwale 4 in Warsaw. My request is based on the fact that yesterday, there was a full series of Jewish witnesses who washed down my civil claim with their statements, and especially regarding the accused Feldberg, and since those witnesses gave a religious oath before the court, I demand that the expert Czeczak be summoned to demonstrate that there are laws in the Talmud and Code of Jewish Law that Jews are allowed to lie and give false declarations before a non-Jewish court.”

Those unbelievable words from Kowalski evoked a terrible commotion. One could see the Jewish lawyers controlling themselves from their own places.

[Page 226]

The elderly Feldberg became as pale as the walls. Shalom Lesko, the Yeshiva lad, also trembled. The chairman made no remark to Kowalski, who continued with his inciteful speech: “If lawyer Margulies questioned yesterday my knowledge of the Talmud and the Jewish religion, I therefore propose to call as an expert one of the best experts on Talmud, to confirm my aforementioned thesis. Czeczak is a great authority in that domain, which is confirmed by the fact that such an institution as the Polish Sejm called him as an expert for the question of ritual slaughter. The new law on ritual slaughter was upheld based on his experience. Therefore, I believe that he can serve as an appropriate authority before the court.”

As soon as Kowalski ended, the prosecutor Zatkiewicz stood up and declared in a sharp tone: “There are no experts on matters of custom. Everyone knows that the Christianity took the Ten Commandments from the Torah of Moses, the eighth of which states that one must not bear false witness. That argument is sufficient to throw out the motion regarding Father Czeczak as an expert. I wish to further note that the Chumash upon which the Jewish witnesses have taken oath lies on the judge's desk, and one can find the Ten Commandments in that Chumash.”

The Jewish civil representative Lawyer Fenigsztajn took hold of those words and declared:

“A motion is proposed before the court to summon the true Christian expert on Talmud, Dr. Tadeusz Zaderecki, who will confirm before the court that everything that the honorable man stated regarding the Jewish religion is slander!”

After the lawyer Fenigsztajn retracted the word, lawyer Margulies stated:

“I am, already for the second time, reacting to the unbelievable statements of the honorable Kowalski. I do this very reluctantly, and do not want to engage with him. However his intention to lead the trial in a different direction must evoke the sharpest protest. The trial is about issuing penalties, and this is not the place for religious disputes. I have

taken into account the declaration of the chairman regarding the character of the trial. The honorable person, however, wishes to turn this into a judgment of the Jewish religion. In general, I am against issuing an opinion about who is an expert, but if the judge has decided to call Father Czeczak, I will request that a series of experts be called who will first certify the “scholarship” of Father Czeczak. There have already been responses published regarding the Talmudic expertise of Father Czeczak. There are the brochures of Mr. Zajdman and others which brand him as an ignoramus regarding Jewish religious questions. Therefore, one must also call experts in this manner. I join with the proposal of my colleague, Fenigsztajn, to possibly summon the true Talmud expert, Professor Zaderecki.

The “second Kowalski,” the Endekja lawyer Pasowski, supported the proposal regarding Father Czeczak. He utilized hypocritical arguments: “If this court will realize that a group of witnesses are under somebody's influence, this court will certainly clarify that situation. We are convinced that the Jewish witnesses are under the influence of the laws of the Talmud and Code of Jewish Law, which permit Jews to tell lies before a foreign court. Therefore, Czeczak's statement will be very important.”

The Endekja lawyer then made a hypocritical gesture and stated that he is not against also calling Dr. Zaderecki.

Kowalski could not sit still. He had not yet had enough. He shot off a fresh, impudent statement. He finally mentioned that lawyer Fenigsztajn had insulted him, as he was taking minutes, stating that he does not feel the Jewish suffering.

The chairman rang [the bell]. People waited for him to react to Kowalski's impudence, but unfortunately, nothing came. Lawyer Szumanski requested that the Mizrachi party's legitimization of Shalom Lesko be placed into the record. Lawyer Gavriel Lewin presented a sentence from the military court against witness Susmienczyk for presenting false testimony. A recess was then declared.

The session resumed after a recess of an hour and a half. The chairman

[Page 228]

stated that all requests were rejected by the court. Thus, the request from Lesko's defense for a survey of the location, and the scandalous request regarding Father Czeczak were finally rejected. Of course, the other requests of the Jewish defense were also rejected. The chairman declared that the trial is recessed until Friday.

On Friday morning, the prosecutor delivered his great prosecuting speech. After the prosecutor came the lawyers. The first was lawyer Fenigsztajn. Then the lawyers Gajewicz, Kowalski, and Zditawecki. The defense will speak only about the row of accused and the act of accusation. The first will be the Endekja lawyers. Then the Jewish defenders will speak. At the end, the other Endekja lawyers will speak.

We wait as the verdict will finally come during the second week.

(The diary is cut off that this point, as is the record.)

Translator's Footnotes

1. These question marks in parentheses are in the original text, indicating uncertainties or lacunae in the original. Return
2. Although the text indicates cm, I assume that mm (millimeter) would be correct. Return
3. From the following sentences, I believe the name is Tobar. Return

I met them completely accidentally. I met them at Neila on Yom Kippur, when their eyes were moist with tears, at the end of the prayers, “Our Father our King, avenge before our eyes the spilled blood of your servants.”

It is interesting to wander through the Jewish neighborhood in Krakow. It is interesting to fall into the labyrinth of the countless synagogues and Beis Midrashes that are centered in Kazimierz, nestled one against the other. They link together the generations, from the oldest to the newest. Hundreds of years of Jewish tears and Jewish suffering have been experienced within those walls.

It is more interesting to absorb the spirit of those sanctified walls on Yom Kippur, when the unity of the generations comes to such a strong expression, during the hours of the outpouring of the soul, when crowds of Jews come to seek comfort among the cold, but so hot, holy walls.

[Page 229]

From Kol Nidre and onward, I worshipped in one synagogue or the other – first in the old synagogue the next day in the Remu Shul, Reb Izak Reb Yankel's, in the Hoicher, in the Papier Synagogue and even in the Synagoga, where the worshippers wear elegant hats for the “Torah.”

At Neila time in the evening, it was the turn of the Megaleh Amukot Beis Midrash. The worshippers were a mix of regular people, Hassidim, simple Jews, and even well-known Krakower wealthy people who are not embarrassed by the common folk.

I arrived. Two pairs of eyes were gazing at me, eyes that cast glances of boundless terror and sadness, glances of the grief of children who were cruelly torn away from their parents. The eyes were known to me – I had seen them somewhere during the moments of horror.

However, as I recall – they both stared at me. They had known me previously; they knew me from Przytyk – from the trial.

Gavrish and Hershel Minkowski – the orphans of the Przytyk martyrs. They had changed greatly. They had grown up, and were neatly and cleanly dressed. They were not the same, but completely different. Inside, the pain was still the same from that day… The gaze we even more sorrowful.

This was at the Radom trial. Colleague Mozes from Nowy Dziennik took interest in those two orphans. A few days after the trial, they were already in the Krakow orphan fund. The well-known Krakow activist and philanthropist, Zygmunt Aleksandrowicz, took the unfortunate children under his supervision. He made sure that they would learn a trade and become educated.

Today, Hershel's master, a women's tailor from Krakow, praises his student. Gavrish brings a nice few zlotys that he earned to the orphan's fund every week. They studied Polish and Hebrew, and are under the supervision of a teacher.

The chairman of the fund's board, Mr. Aleksandrowicz, relates to them in a fatherly fashion. He spends hours with them every Sabbath. On holidays, he takes them with him to services. Now, they are under his wings in the Megaleh Amukot Beis Midrash.

They lack nothing. However, they lack everything. In the greatest straits,

[Page 230]

the children lived in the dark home in the Przytyk Podgajek, not eating or tasting any finery. Now they are in a warm environment – someone cares for them. However, how strong is their longing for the dark Przytyk home where there was a father and a mother.

The children of the Minkowski family: Shmuel, Charna, and Eli

The remaining orphans are scattered over countries and cities. Only two of the Minkowski daughters are in the Land of Israel. Twelve-year-old Charna and 11-year-old Eliahu are in the Radom orphanage. Seven-year-old Shmulik is in the Medem Sanatorium of Miedzeszyn^[1]. Gavrish and Hershel are here in Krakow. Letters arrive from the Land of Israel from time to time. The sisters take interest in the brothers. They dream of all being together in one place. In the meantime, they work very had and are unable to take in the orphans. In time, however, they hope to actualize this.

However, the orphans do not wish to remain here. The sisters in the Land of Israel approached a rich aunt in New York, through the agency of the Organization of Polish Jews in America, to take in the orphans. Recently

[Page 231]

a response arrived from Mrs. Sara Potop, an aunt of the Minkowskis, that they are dealing with this matter in America. It was clear that Mrs. Potop was already an old lady, and she could not take in the Minkowski orphans herself. Her son, however, has an automobile business in New York, and he wishes to bring over Gavrish. Mr. Potop writes, “The boy will have a home with me… ”

Since Gavrish is a lacquerer, he will immediately obtain employment in Potop's business.

They are growing and developing. However, the hope for a home, for the family surrounding that they lost, grows with them.

Hershel tells me, “I was in Radom and Przytyk the other day. I met with the family. However, I immediately returned. I cannot remain there for long.”

He bends over his machzor and begins to pray in order to end the conversation. However, he soon calls out again:

“Perhaps you know Professor Schorr's address?”

“Why do you need it?” I asked him.

His sad face took on a strong look of terror. He put his arm around his brother and announced to me:

“I wish to write to Professor Schorr about the monuments over the graves of Daddy and Mommy. I spoke about this in Radom and Przytyk. I have already written to Warsaw a few times. The graves remain without monuments.”

I was ashamed before the orphans. In the meantime, the cantor was reciting the verses of Avinu Malkeinu ^[2]. The congregation responded ecstatically, “Act on behalf of those who were slaughtered in Your Name” Act on behalf of those who have sanctified Your Name…”

This was a moment when an iniquity accused the Jews. This was the moment of “and seal”^[3]. I could not under any circumstance free myself from the thought that I was desecrating the memory even of our own martyrs.

An unforgettable reproach remains upon the Jews of Przytyk for having, to this day, forgotten to perpetuate the memory of Yosef and Chaya Minkowski. That obligation lies, first and foremost, upon them – the closest relatives. Radom, which is also “the city close to the corpse” ^[4], and where the grave

[Page 232]

of Chaya Minkowski is located, could also fulfill that honorable duty. However, if this has not been possible as of yet, it must be done as soon as possible. Indeed quickly. Immediately! The graves of the Przytyk martyrs must no longer remain desolate. Over a year and a half has passed ^[5] since that March 9, 1936. How long must one wait?

I promised the orphans that their request would be published in a column in Moment, which takes every opportunity to call out Jewish tragedies… It must mention this matter again. From our own initiative, the readers of Moment should conduct an action to place two monuments on the graves of the Przytyk martyrs.

(Moment, Warsaw 1936)

Translator's Footnotes

1. See https://yivoencyclopedia.org/article.aspx/Medem_Sanatorium Return
2. At the end of the Neila service. Return
3. During the Neila service, one asks to be sealed (as opposed to being written, as was asked during the preceding ten days from Rosh Hashanah) into the Book of Life. Return
4. Based on Deuteronomy 21:3 Return
5. This contradicts the date given at the bottom of the article, which would indicate that it was written in 1936 rather than 1937. Return

  Przytyk, Poland     Yizkor Book Project     JewishGen Home Page

Copyright © 1999-2024 by JewishGen, Inc.
Updated 06 Feb 2023 by JH