1. On the history of Thuringia during the Weimar Republic, consult Witzmann, Georg, Thiiringen von 1918 bis 1933 (Meisenheim am Glan, 1958).Google Scholar For short sketches of the state see Pollock, James K., Germany in Power and Eclipse (New York, 1952), ch. 26,Google Scholar and Facius, Friedrich, “Thüringen,” in Sante, Georg, ed., Geschkhte der Deutschen Lander. (Würzburg, 1971), 2: 533ff.Google Scholar

2. Occupational divisions within the population were as follows: industrial workers, 50%; agriculture, 21%; commercial, professional, and other pursuits, 29%. The proportion of industrial workers was one of the highest in Germany. Statistisches Jahrbuch für das Deutsches Reich (hereafter SJDR), 1926, p. 42.

3. In the 1919 National Assembly elections the DDP hadpolled about 23% of the vote, but this dropped to 8 % in 1920, and subsequently lower, when the party lost its large rural following to the Landbund, which allied itself with the conservative parties.

4. This tendency toward political extremism was encouraged by Thuringian patterns of settlement, for most of the population lived in smaller towns and villages which were often specialized in occupation. On the radicalism of isolated occupational groups see Lipset, Seymour Martin, Political Man (New York, 1960), pp. 87–88, 232–34.Google Scholar Gotha and the industrialized villages of the Thuringian Forest exemplify this receptivity to extremism. Witzmann, pp. 15–17; Deutschlands, Kommunistische Partei, Illustrierte Geschichte der deutschen Revolution (Berlin, 1929), pp. 483–87.Google Scholar During 1921 NSDAP branches appeared in Gotha, Ilmenau, and Hirschberg. Sauckel, Fritz, ed.,KampfundSieg in Thiiringen (Weimar, 1934), p. 39.Google Scholar

5. The Thuringian states included Weimar, Gotha, Coburg, Meiningen, Altenburg, Sondershausen, Rudolstadt, and the two small Reuss principalities. On the period of the revolution and unification, see Facius, Friedrich, “Das Ende der kleinstaatlichen Monarchien Thüringens 1918: Ein Überblick,” in Schlesinger, Walter, ed., Festschrift für Friedrich von Zahn, Mitteldeutsche Forschungen (Cologne, 1969), 1: 50–64,Google Scholar and Mont, Karl du, Der Zusammenschluss Thüringens (Gotha, 1927).Google Scholar

6. The southern state of Meiningen joined the unified Thuringian state only with reluctance, while Coburg joined neighboring Bavaria instead. Du Mont, pp. 69–73. One of the first southern NSDAP branches was founded in Possneck in 1922. Sauckel, Kampf und Sieg, p. 39. State police raids in the south early in 1923 uncovered NSDAP activity. Tribüne (Erfurt), Apr. 9, 11, 1923.

7. For a summary of this period, which is the key to much that followed in Thuringia, see Tracey, Donald R., “Reform in the Early Weimar Republic: The Thuringian Example,” Journal of Modem History 44 (06 1972): 195–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Pulzer, Peter G. J., The Rise of Political Anti-Semitism in Germany and Austria (New York, 1964), pp. 193–94.Google Scholar Also see Mosse, George L., The Crisis of German Ideology (New York, 1964). pp. 52–63, 273–74.Google Scholar

9. Bartels (1862–1945) was known for his work on Friedrich Hebbels and his encouragement of Heimatkunst, a reaction to naturalism and “asphalt literature.” His anti- Semitic writing dates from about 1913. For a summary of his works, see Bartels, Adolf, Geschichte der thüringische Literatur (Jena, 1942), 2: 268–69.Google ScholarLoose, Walter, ed., Festgabe zum sechzigsten Geburtstag von Adolf Bartels (Leipzig, 1922),Google Scholarand Cölln, Detlef, ed., Adolf Bartels: Leben, Wesen, und Werk (Heide, 1935), are panegyrics issued by the Bartels- Bund, but give biographical details. Also see Der Spiegel, Jan. 20, 1965, pp. 44–48.Google Scholar

10. See the comment on Saxony, which also applies to Thuringia, in Pulzer, p. 103.

11. Orlow, Dietrich, The History of the Nazi Party, 1918–1933 (Pittsburgh, 1969), pp. 47–49.Google Scholar The distinctions between these two groups, which are somewhat simplified for purposes of this paper, are further dealt with in Noakes, Jeremy, “Conflict and Development in the NSDAP 1924–1927,” Journal of Contemporary History 1, no. 4 (10 1966): 3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. For biographical particulars, see Dinter, Artur, Die Sünde wider die Lithe (Leipzig, 1928), pp. 519–21, and Bartels, Gesch. thiir. Lit., 2: 340–41.Google Scholar

13. There are only two letters to Dinter in Chamberlain, H. S., Briefe, 1882–1924 (Munich, 1928), pp. 81–84, 86–87.Google Scholar However, there was an extensive correspondence between the two, much of it devoted to Dinter's personal difficulties, according to Dr. Donald E. Thomas, who has examined the Chamberlain archives in Bayreuth. Dinter's novels included Die Sünde wider das Blut (235,000 copies by 1927), Die Sünde wider den Geist (100,000 copies by 1921), and Die Sünde wider die Liebe (30,000 copies by 1928). Miserable literary productions, they were largely ignored by the literary world. However, the popularity of Dinter's novels was ultimately sufficient to bring denunciations from such cultural figures as Mann, Thomas. C. V. Zeitung: Organ des Central Vereins deutscher Staatsbürger jüdischen Glaubens (Berlin), 1922, p. 234.Google Scholar

14. He settled at “Waldruh,” Dorrnberg bei Grafenroda, in the Thuringian Forest, the former home of his one-time friend, Friedrich Lienhard (1865–1929). Also a writer of Alsatian background, Lienhard was associated in a general way with völkisch literary tendencies.

15. Maser, Werner, Die Friihgeschichte der NSDAP (Frankfurt am Main, 1965), p. 315.Google Scholar

16. Witzmann, p. 85.

17. The Thuringian DNVP was sympathetic, but remained within the parent party. Hertzmann, Lewis, DNVP: Right-Wing Opposition in the Weimar Republic, 1918–1924 (Lincoln, 1963), p. 148.Google Scholar

18. Erich Buchmann, “Aus dem roten Thüringen,” in Sauckel, Kampfund Sieg, p. 12.

19. Noakes, “Conflict and Development,” pp. 5–6.

20. Orlow, pp. 49–51.

21. Landesamt, Thüringischen Statistischen (hereafter TSL), Die Wahlen zum Thüringer Landtag am 10. Februar 1924 (Weimar, 1924), p. 20.Google Scholar

22. SJDR, 1924–25, pp. 390–91, and TSL, Die Wahlen zum Reichstag am 4. Mai 1924 im Lande Thüringen (Weimar, 1924), p. 18.Google Scholar The national Wahlkreis XII included the Schmalkalden and Erfurt districts in addition to Thuringia, so that some discrepancy may appear between TSL and SJDR figures. Only TSL figures are cited for Thuringia in this study.

23. SJDR, 1926, pp. 448–49, and “Ergebnis der Reichtagswahl vom 7. Dezember 1924,” TSL, Vierteljahrsberichte, 1924, pp. 226–27.

24. There were 35 Ordnungsbund deputies, 30 SPD and KPD members, and 7 völkisch delegates. Witzmann, 109–10.

25. Verhandlungen des III. Landtags von Thüringen (Weimar, 1924–1927), Stenographische Berichte (hereafter III. Landtag and St.B.), pp. 168–84.Google Scholar

26. Sauckel, Kampfund Sieg, p. 39.

27. The best guide to this complicated series of events is Jastrow, Ignaz, Der angeklagte Staatsamvalt (Berlin, 1930).Google Scholar This is primarily concerned with Frieders, but deals with the other cases and places them in overall perspective.

28. III. Landtag, St.B., p. 819.

29. For a premature announcement of his candidacy, see U.S. National Archives, Microcopy T-81, serial 224, reel 116 (hereafter Sauckel Files), frame 136436. Also see the C. V. Zeitung, 1924, p. 180.

30. Sauckel Files, fr. 136947.

31. Ibid., fr. 136994, 136996–98.

32. Dinter to Streicher, Oct. 31, 1925, and Feb. 24, 1926, Berlin Document Center, Partei Korrespondenz (hereafter BDC, PK), Akte Dinter.

33. The GDVG in Thuringia retained the NSDAP designation. Dinter to Ortsgl. Gossnitz und Schmöllen, NSDAP Hauptarchiv (hereafter HA), reel 7, folder 160. Also see Orlow, p. 49, and C. V. Zeitung, 1924, pp. 680, 704.

34. III. Landtag, St.B., p. 2073.

35. Bullock, Alan, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny (London, rev. ed., 1964), p. 129.Google Scholar

36. Völkischer Beobachter (Munich) (hereafter VB), June 4, 1925.

37. Hennicke claimed allegiance to Hitler, but refused to accept Dinter, probably because he expected to be appointed to Dinter's position himself. Sauckel Files, fr. 136552, 136553.

38. Ibid., fir. 136967.

39. Gau Thüringen corresponded to Wahlkreis XII. See n. 22, above.

40. Sauckel Files, fr. 136781–86. This is a statement made by Frau Sauckel in April 1938; see the corrected reference to Strasser on fr. 136785. For Sauckel's reorganization of the Ilmenau district, see ibid., fr. 136948–49, 136954–58.

41. A sketch of Ziegler's early career is given in the preface to Ziegler, Hans Severus, Wende und Weg (Weimar, 1937).Google Scholar

42. Dinter to Streicher, Jan. 20, 1925, BDC, PK, Akte Dinter.

43. Dinter to Hitler, Mar. 27, 1925, ibid.

44. VB, Apr. 29, 1925. Most of the items cited here are found in the section “Aus der Bewegung.”

45. Ibid., May 6, 1925.

46. Ibid. Also Apr. 7, 1925.

47. Ibid., May 13, 1925.

48. Ibid., May 24/25, 1925.

49. Ibid., June 4, 16, 1925. On Marschler, see Krebs, Albert, Tendenzen und Gestalten der NSDAP (Stuttgart, 1959), pp. 217–18.Google Scholar

50. The latter designation was not accepted until about mid-1926, apparently. Until this time the fraction was referred to as the NSFP or NSFB. While usage was loose in such matters, there was a splinter group known as the NS Freiheitsbewegung. See the segment of a report from the Reichskommissar fur die überwachung der öffentlichen Ordnung, “R. Ko. v. 28. 3. 27,” in HA, reel 87, folder 1815.

51. VB, Sept. 19,1925.

52. Ibid., Dec. 9, 20/21, 1925.

53. Ibid., Oct. 15, 1925.

54. Ibid., Nov. 1/2, 24, 1925.

55. Ibid., Dec. 22, 1925.

56. Sauckel, Kampf und Sieg, p. 26. All of the Gau membership figures, taken in December of each year, which are cited below are from the chart on this page and will not be individually cited.

57. III. Landtag, St.B., p. 5931; VB, Apr. 17, 1926. An account of a party member who followed Hennicke into the NSDAP at this time is given in Rudolf Wartmann, Jr., to Hitler, Aug. 15, 1934, BDC, Oberstes Parteigericht, Akte Wartmann.

58. On the party congress and its effects, see Orlow, pp. 68–75. Goebbels argued for an urban-revolutionary plan, while Dinter was the parliamentarian spokesman. For Dinter's remarks, see the VB, July 6, 1926. Goebbels not only differed with Dinter on this issue, but had a very low personal opinion of him. Heiber, Helmut, ed., Das Tagebuch von Joseph Goebbels 1925/26 (Stuttgart, 1961), pp. 67, 88.Google Scholar

59. See the laudatory description of the Gau in the VB, July 3, 1926. This is also indicated by the frequency of organizational news about Thuringia in the paper during 1925, of which many items are cited above.

60. He was allowed to speak only in Mecklenburg, Brunswick, and Thuringia. See Orlow, p. 84.

61. NSDAP Landtag proposals for fiscal, tax reform, and anti-Jewish measures were given coverage. To cite a few examples, see VB, May 11, 16/17, June 6/7, Oct. 26, 1926, and May 1/2, July 2, Aug. 6, 1927. The party also claimed such minor victories as a ban on the Women's League for Peace and Freedom in Thuringia. Ibid., Oct. 25, 1925.

62. Ibid., June 26/27, 1926.

63. Ibid., Jan. 12, 1927. This issue contributed to the prevailing dissension within the local DVFP, in the course of which the local DVFP Gauleiter resigned in protest against his party's policies.

64. Ibid. Also see the issues of May 5, June 19/20, June 29, 1927.

65. For an account of this episode which places it in the perspective of national party development, see Orlow, pp. 97–99.

66. Under Theodor Diisterberg, who became its leader in 1926, the Stahlhelm became fully politicized by 1929. By 1927–28 it had reached a membership of one million Bracher, Karl D., Die Aujldsung der Weimarer Republik (Stuttgart, 1957), pp. 134–37.Google Scholar Internal Stahlhelm developments at this time are covered in Berghahn, Volker, Der Stahlhelm (Dusseldorf, 1966), pp. 103–14 and passim.Google Scholar

67. Wehrwolf was a Central German organization founded by Fritz Kloppe. Bracher, 138–39. Kloppe, and particularly Hermann Müller-Brandenburg, the former Thuringian police commandant who had become a Wehrwolf leader, took leading roles in the events described here. Müller-Brandenburg indicated interest in the NSDAP during August, when he attended a party meeting, an event reported in the VB, Sept. 9, 1926. Also see “Der ‘Wehrwolf’ und seine Stellung zu der Parteien,” ibid., Sept. 10, 1926.

68. What appears to be the original membership list was dated Sept. 22, 1926. HA, reel 7, folder 160.

69. Görtz to Wulle and Görtz to von Grafe, Sept. 26, 1926, HA, reel 7, folder 160.

70. Sauckel Files, fr. 136453–62.

71. Schauen had become a member of the DVFP Landtag fraction in June 1926. III. Landtag, St.B., p. 6252. He was also a leading member of the Thuringian Stahlhelm. Stahlhelm, , Sechsjahre Stahlhelm in Mitteldeutschland (Halle, 1925/1926), p. 142 and passim.Google Scholar

72. Sauckel Files, fir. 136447. For the date of this meeting, see Müller-Brandenburg to Dinter, Dec. 30, 1926, HA, reel 7, folder 160.

73. Sauckel Files, fr. 136980–83 and 136463–65. This took place on Nov. 7. Gortz to FVTh, Nov. 4, 1926, HA, reel 7, folder 160.

74. This took place by Nov. 12, according to the signatures on a motion of that date. III. Landtag, I. Abteilung, p. 478.

75. Müller-Brandenburg to Dinter, Dec. 28 and 30, 1926, HA, reel 7, folder 160.

76. Müller-Brandenburg to Görtz, Jan. 7, 1927, ibid.

77. VB, Jan. 14,1927.

78. “Die Wahlen zum Thüringer Landtag vom 30. Januar 1927,” Vierteljahrsberichte, 1927–28, pp. 28–29.

79. VB, Feb. 6/7, 1927.

80. Müller-Brandenburg to Görtz, Feb. 8, 1927, and VFTh, to Hitler, Feb. 15, 1927. HA, reel 7, folder 160.

81. Hitler to Gortz, Feb. 23, 1927, ibid.

82. Orlow, pp. 96–97, and VB, Feb. 26, 1927.

83. See Hitler's article, “Die WiedergesundungdernationalsozialistischenBewegung: Gedanken zur Thiiringer Wahl,” ibid., Feb. 2, 1927.

84. Ibid., Feb. 6/7,1927. Ziegler became press and propaganda chief. Dinter had begun to turn over authority to Sauckel during the Landtag campaign. Ibid., Oct. 15, 1926.

85. Ibid., Oct. 2/3,1927. Dinter continued to participate in party affairs. Ibid., July 23, Aug. 20,1927, Jan. 11,1928. The influx of new personnel and the urban-oriented tactics currently adopted by the party made him somewhat of an anachronism and may have contributed to his withdrawal. On party tactics, see Orlow, ch. 4.

86. 197 Thesenzur Vollendung der Reformation (Leipzig, 1926). Dinter had combined his own expurgated version of the New Testament, the idea of reincarnation, the law of karma, and his personal prejudices into a theological monstrosity which defined race as an exponent of spiritual worthiness and provided a “metaphysical basis” for anti-Semitism. This he considered his greatest original contribution.

87. C. V. Zeitung, 1927, p. 265.

88. Ibid., 1928, p. 261. Also Ruhr Gauleiter to Maj. Buch, June 12, 1928; Ruhr Gauleiter to Uschla, June 19,1928. BDC, PK, Akte Dinter.

89. Dinter to Streicher, June 28, 1928. BDC, PK, Akte Dinter.

90. See Orlow, pp. 135–36.

91. Ibid., p. 143. Dinter reacted violently against Streicher, from whom he had expected support, and formally broke their friendship. Dinter to Streicher, Oct. 8, 1928, BDC, PD, Akte Dinter. Also C. V. Zeitung, 1929, p. 176.

92. Dinter's hopes were apparently raised after 1933 by the vague references of some party figures to the “positive Christianity” mentioned in the party platform. While he had earlier prophesied the failure of the party, he now began to refer to his Volkskirche as the “handmaiden of the National Socialist state.” In 1937 the sect was banned, however. See Zipfel, Friedrich, Kirchenkampf in Deutschland (Berlin, 1965), pp. 1–5, 210–12,Google Scholar and Dinter's pamphlet Die Deutsche Volkskirche (Leipzig, n.d.).Google Scholar In 1945 the indefatigable Dinter was arrested for resuming his religious and anti-Semitic agitation. He finally died in 1948. Kosch, Wilhelm, ed., Biographisches Staatshandbuch (Munich, 1963), 1: 246.Google Scholar

93. “Ergebnis der Reichstagswahl vom 20. Mai 1928,” Vierteljahrsberichte, 1928–1929, p. 139.Google Scholar

94. Witzmann, pp. 141–43, 152.

95. Ibid., pp. 149–51 and passim.

96. Orlow, p. 171.

97. “Die Thuringer Landtagswahlen vom 8. Dezember 1929,” Vierteljahrsberichte, 1929, p. 166.Google Scholar

98. Ibid., p. 161.

99. Ibid., pp. 161 and 166. The cities were Apolda, Weimar, Gotha, and Eisenach.

100. Ibid., pp. 171–72. The number of female voters declined 12% compared to 1927. Women were least likely to vote for the KPD and NSDAP, most likely to vote for the DVP, DNVP, or Volksrechtspartei.

101. Ibid., p. 167. In comparison with the 1928 Reichstag elections, the NSDAP gain of 53,000 votes in Thuringia roughly equalled the losses of the DVP (20,701), DNVP (12,501), and the KPD (19,312). Also see the Vossische Zeitung, Dec. 10, 1929.

102. Brill, Hermann L., “Das politische Ergebnis der thiiringischen Kommunalwahlen,” Gemeinde, 1929, p. 597.Google Scholar

103. Based on TSL, Wahlen zum Thüringer Landtag 1924, pp. 20–21, and Vierteljahrsberichte, 1929, pp. 172–73.

104. Vierteljahrsberikhte, p. 168. The NSDAP won 10.9 to 13.8% of the vote in all settlements of more than 1,000. In the villages of less than 1,000 the agrarian Landbund, traditionally strong there, won 44.7 %, the SPD 27.6 %, and the NSDAP 8.6 %.

105. Ibid. The SPD won between 30.8 and 35% of the vote in all classifications of settlements, dropping below this range only in the villages under 1,000.

106. The allocation of seats was Landbund 9, Wirtschaftspartei (WP) 6, DVP 5, and DNVP 2, for a total of 22 seats on the right, and SPD 18, KPD 6, and DDP 1, for a total of 25 opposing, so that the NSDAP bloc of 6 deputies was essential for a conservative coalition.

107. Kiihnl, Reinhard, Die nationalsozialistische Linke, 1925–1930 (Meisenheim am Glan, 1966), pp. 220–23.Google Scholar

108. Ibid., pp. 224–29, and Frankfurter Zeitung, July 4, 1930. However, also see Lane, Barbara Miller, “Nazi Ideology: Some Unfinished Business,” Central European History 7 (03 1974): 25–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

109. The new government, which took office on Jan. 23, 1930, consisted of three ministers and five Staatsräte: Minister President Erwin Baum (Landbund), Finance; Willy Kästner (WP), Justice and Economics; Wilhelm Frick (NSDAP), Interior and Education; and Staatsrate Theodor Bauer (DVP), Franz Furth (WP), Karl Kein (DNVP), Willy Marschler (NSDAP), and Erich Port (Landbund).

110. Hitler outlined these plans in a letter dated Feb. 2, 1930. Dickmann, Fritz, “Die Regierungsbildung in Thüringen als Modell der Machtergreifung,” Vierteljahrshefte fur Zeitgeschichte 14 (1966): 454–64.Google Scholar

111. Witzmann, pp. 149–50.

112. The DDP supported this idea of Reichsreform, and in the 1929 Landtag campaign called for Prussian-Thuringian union as the first step toward a unitary national state. This was good logic but bad politics, as the election returns showed. See the Vossische Zeitung, Dec. 4, 1929.

113. The policy statement of the new government which was delivered by Minister President Erwin Baum on Jan. 30, 1930, pledged the maintenance of “die politische Selbstständigkeit unseres engeren Vaterlandes Thüringen.” V. Landtag, St. B., pp. 142–43. This was fairly typical of Thuringian political rhetoric at the time.

114. See the Vossische Zeitung, Jan. 9, Mar. 18, 1930, and “Das Gutachten des Reichssparkomissars iiber die Landesverwaltung Thiiringens,” Reich und Lander, 1930, pp. 25–30.

115. Vossische Zeitung, Feb. 4, 16, 1930.

116. Severing to Thüringian State Ministry, Feb. 17, 1930, and Wolff's Telegraphisches Büro (WTB), Nr. 571, Mar. 19, 1930, Bundesarchiv, Koblenz, RA 431/2315 (hereafter BA).

117. Baum to Severing, Mar. 20, 1930, ibid.

118. Haentschel, notes on meeting of Apr. 2, 1930, ibid.

119. WTB, Nr. 770, Apr. 17, 1930,ibid.

120. Extract from cabinet minutes of Apr. 16, 1930, ibid.

121. See the attack on Frick's policies by SPD Landtag deputy Max Greil, which summarizes many of the administrative changes and their effects. V. Landtag, St.B., pp. 882–84 and passim.

122. Amtsblatt des thüringischen Ministeriums für Volksbildung, Apr. 22, 1930, pp. 39–40. This same issue carried Frick's decree against Negerkultur (jazz, modern drama and art). Also see Frankfurter Zeitung, Apr. 16, 1930. While the prayers did not mention Jews explicitly, Frick did state that he considered their use of the term “aliens” a reference to Jews. V. Landtag, St.B., p. 881. In any case, the implication was clear.

123. One appointee had joined the party recently, the other was generally considered to be a party sympathizer. Vorwärts, May 20, 1930.

124. Frankfurter Zeitung, July 4, 1930.

125. Vossische Zeitung, May 29, 1930.

126. WTB, Nr. 1394, July 11, 1930, BA (school prayers); Frankfurter Zeitung, July 1 and 2, 1930 (enabling act).

127. For a summary of arguments before the court, see WTB Nr. 1436, 1438, both dated July 17, 1930, BA.

128. Frick accused Wirth and the Reichsbanner of engaging in espionage against the Thuringian police, and suspended several police officials on the grounds of such activity. Baum to Briining, Nov. 11, 1930, BA. These charges coincided with investigations by court officials in Thuringia during November.

129. Frankfurter Zeitung, Dec. 23, 1930.

130. Based on data in “Die Reichstagswahlen vom 14. September 1930 im Lande Thüringen,” Vierteljahrsberichte, 1929–30, pp. 106–8. The combined losses of the Landbund, DNVP, DVP, WP, and several splinter groups equalled 89,656 votes. However the NSDAP alone gained 89,501 votes in 1930, the KPD 54,476, the SPD 28,462, and the Deutsche Staatspartei 4,040. The KPD won 10.5 %of the vote in 1929,15 2. %in 1930.

131. Ibid. The ratio of female to male voters, about 105:100 in the total population, was 95.8:100 in 1929,101.7:100 in 1930. Among the major parties women were highest in support of the DNVP, Center, and DVP, lowest in their backing of the KPD and NSDAP, so that female voting tended to offset the general trends of the election.

132. Ibid., p. 106, and SJDR, 1931, pp. 546–47.

133. VB, Jan. 25/26, 1931.

134. Witzmann, pp. 174–82.

135. For further commentary on this see Dickmann, “Die Regierungsbildung in Thüringen,” pp. 456–60.

136. Wilhelm Frick, “6 Monate nationalsozialistischer Minister in Thiiringen,” Nationalsozialistisches Jahrbuch, 1931, p. 174.

137. Franzen was from Kiel. For biographical details see Horkenbach, Cuno, Das Deutsche Reich von igi8 bis Heute (Berlin, 1930), p. 664.Google Scholar

138. Frankfurter Zeitung, Apr. 2, 1931. Franzen was much less effective than Frick. He had given false information to the Berlin police late in 1930. This led to court proceedings against him and finally his resignation in July 1931. Horkenbach, pp. 326, 331; Frankfurter Zeitung, July 28, 1931.

139. Witzmann, p. 154.

140. Ibid. pp. 157–58.