Gallery

 

> The Polish Post office at the Railway Station in Danzig 

decision of 25 May and during negotiations between Polish and Free City representatives, in Geneva on 30 August, the two parties had already come to an agreement on this. Also, during negotiations on 10 June, the High Commissioner and the Free City hadn’t questioned the Polish right to a transfer and sorting office at the railway station. Plucinski asked the High Commissioner to send this information to the president of the Harbor Board, so that he could give permission to equip the Ubernachtungsgebände rooms for the postmen.

On 21 October, the Harbor Board gave its permission. They stated clearly in this letter that this decision did not mean permission to establish a ‘service de l’adrninistration des Postes Polonais”. The governments of Poland and the Free City were negotiating on this.

Indeed, on 19 October, the Senate had written that they were willing to negotiate on a post office at the railway station. The negotiations already began on 23 October and it turned out that the Free City was not unwilling to negotiate. In spite of this, no definite results were obtained.

On 20 November, the Senate received a Polish letter justifying the request for a Polish post office at the railway station. Because of the high volume of mail at the station, a post office was needed for servicing this mail, which is common practice over the world. The post of the Free City was using the post office Danzig 5 at the railway station for the same purpose, and the Polish post felt it had the right to use the same means of communication as the Free City post enjoyed. This was also a matter of internal administration of the Polish post and the Polish Railway Administration and had nothing to do with the Free City. Besides that, the establishment of a Polish post office at the station didn’t cause any financial burden for Danzig because the space for the office was furnished by the Polish Railway Administrat ion. Because of this, the establishment of the office wasn’t contrary to the second paragraph of the High Commissioner’s decision of 25 May. The direct nature of the service was not violated; therefore, paragraph 3 of the same decision was not violated, either. The necessity of the post office was quite clear.

 

Danzig Report  Nr. 92 - July - August - September - 1996,  Page 7.