• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Fifty-first day: Tuesday, 5 February...
 Fifty-second day: Wednesday, 6...
 Fifty-third day: Thursday, 7 February...
 Fifty-fourth day: Friday, 8 February...
 Fifty-fifth day: Saturday, 9 February...
 Fifty-sixth day: Monday, 11 February...
 Fifty-seventh day: Tuesday, 12...
 Fifty-eighth day: Wednesday, 13...
 Fifty-ninth day: Thursday, 14 February...
 Sixtieth day: Friday, 15 February...
 Sixty-first day: Monday, 18 February...
 Sixty-second day: Tuesday, 19 February...














Title: Trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 November 1945-1 October 1946
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076568/00001
 Material Information
Title: Trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 November 1945-1 October 1946
Physical Description: 42 v. : ill. ; 24 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Gèoring, Hermann, 1893-1946
International Military Tribunal
Publisher: s.n.,
s.n.
Place of Publication: Nuremberg Germany
Publication Date: 19471949
Copyright Date: 19471949
 Subjects
Subject: Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946   ( lcsh )
War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg   ( lcsh )
Nuremberg, Procáes de, 1945-1946   ( rvm )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Language: "Documents admitted in evidence are printed only in their original language."
General Note: Trial against H.W. Gèoring, R. Hess, J. von Ribbentrop, R. Ley, W. Keitel, E. Kaltenbrunner, A. Rosenberg, H. Frank, W. Frick, J. Streicher, W. Funk, H. Schacht, G. Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, K. Dèonitz, E. Raeder, B. von Schirach, F. Sauckel, A. Jodl, M. Bormann, F. von Papen, A. Seyss-Inquart, A. Speer, C. von Neurath, and H. Fritzsche, individually and as members of any groups or organizations to which they belonged.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076568
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 00748042
lccn - 47031575
isbn - 0404536506

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

UF00076568 ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Title Page
        Page i
        Page ii
        Page iii
    Table of Contents
        Page iv
    Fifty-first day: Tuesday, 5 February 1946
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
    Fifty-second day: Wednesday, 6 February 1946
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
    Fifty-third day: Thursday, 7 February 1946
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
    Fifty-fourth day: Friday, 8 February 1946
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
        Page 156
        Page 157
        Page 158
        Page 159
        Page 160
        Page 161
        Page 162
        Page 163
        Page 164
        Page 165
        Page 166
        Page 167
        Page 168
        Page 169
        Page 170
        Page 171
        Page 172
        Page 173
        Page 174
        Page 175
        Page 176
        Page 177
        Page 178
        Page 179
        Page 180
        Page 181
        Page 182
        Page 183
        Page 184
        Page 185
        Page 186
        Page 187
        Page 188
        Page 189
        Page 190
        Page 191
        Page 192
        Page 193
        Page 194
        Page 195
        Page 196
        Page 197
        Page 198
        Page 199
        Page 200
        Page 201
        Page 202
        Page 203
        Page 204
        Page 205
        Page 206
        Page 207
        Page 208
    Fifty-fifth day: Saturday, 9 February 1946
        Page 209
        Page 210
        Page 211
        Page 212
        Page 213
        Page 214
        Page 215
        Page 216
        Page 217
        Page 218
        Page 219
        Page 220
        Page 221
        Page 222
        Page 223
        Page 224
        Page 225
        Page 226
        Page 227
    Fifty-sixth day: Monday, 11 February 1946
        Page 228
        Page 229
        Page 230
        Page 231
        Page 232
        Page 233
        Page 234
        Page 235
        Page 236
        Page 237
        Page 238
        Page 239
        Page 240
        Page 241
        Page 242
        Page 243
        Page 244
        Page 245
        Page 246
        Page 247
        Page 248
        Page 249
        Page 250
        Page 251
        Page 252
        Page 253
        Page 254
        Page 255
        Page 256
        Page 257
        Page 258
        Page 259
        Page 260
        Page 261
        Page 262
        Page 263
        Page 264
        Page 265
        Page 266
        Page 267
        Page 268
        Page 269
        Page 270
        Page 271
        Page 272
        Page 273
        Page 274
        Page 275
        Page 276
        Page 277
        Page 278
    Fifty-seventh day: Tuesday, 12 February 1946
        Page 279
        Page 280
        Page 281
        Page 282
        Page 283
        Page 284
        Page 285
        Page 286
        Page 287
        Page 288
        Page 289
        Page 290
        Page 291
        Page 292
        Page 293
        Page 294
        Page 295
        Page 296
        Page 297
        Page 298
        Page 299
        Page 300
        Page 301
        Page 302
        Page 303
        Page 304
        Page 305
        Page 306
        Page 307
        Page 308
        Page 309
        Page 310
        Page 311
        Page 312
        Page 313
        Page 314
        Page 315
        Page 316
        Page 317
        Page 318
        Page 319
        Page 320
        Page 321
        Page 322
        Page 323
        Page 324
        Page 325
        Page 326
        Page 327
        Page 328
        Page 329
        Page 330
        Page 331
        Page 332
        Page 333
        Page 334
        Page 335
        Page 336
        Page 337
        Page 338
        Page 339
    Fifty-eighth day: Wednesday, 13 February 1946
        Page 340
        Page 341
        Page 342
        Page 343
        Page 344
        Page 345
        Page 346
        Page 347
        Page 348
        Page 349
        Page 350
        Page 351
        Page 352
        Page 353
        Page 354
        Page 355
        Page 356
        Page 357
        Page 358
        Page 359
        Page 360
        Page 361
        Page 362
        Page 363
        Page 364
        Page 365
        Page 366
        Page 367
        Page 368
        Page 369
        Page 370
        Page 371
        Page 372
        Page 373
        Page 374
        Page 375
        Page 376
        Page 377
        Page 378
        Page 379
        Page 380
        Page 381
        Page 382
        Page 383
        Page 384
        Page 385
        Page 386
        Page 387
        Page 388
        Page 389
        Page 390
        Page 391
        Page 392
        Page 393
        Page 394
        Page 395
        Page 396
        Page 397
        Page 398
        Page 399
        Page 400
        Page 401
        Page 402
    Fifty-ninth day: Thursday, 14 February 1946
        Page 403
        Page 404
        Page 405
        Page 406
        Page 407
        Page 408
        Page 409
        Page 410
        Page 411
        Page 412
        Page 413
        Page 414
        Page 415
        Page 416
        Page 417
        Page 418
        Page 419
        Page 420
        Page 421
        Page 422
        Page 423
        Page 424
        Page 425
        Page 426
        Page 427
        Page 428
        Page 429
        Page 430
        Page 431
        Page 432
        Page 433
        Page 434
        Page 435
        Page 436
        Page 437
        Page 438
        Page 439
        Page 440
        Page 441
        Page 442
        Page 443
        Page 444
        Page 445
        Page 446
        Page 447
        Page 448
        Page 449
        Page 450
        Page 451
        Page 452
        Page 453
        Page 454
        Page 455
        Page 456
        Page 457
        Page 458
        Page 459
        Page 460
    Sixtieth day: Friday, 15 February 1946
        Page 461
        Page 462
        Page 463
        Page 464
        Page 465
        Page 466
        Page 467
        Page 468
        Page 469
        Page 470
        Page 471
        Page 472
        Page 473
        Page 474
        Page 475
        Page 476
        Page 477
        Page 478
        Page 479
        Page 480
        Page 481
        Page 482
        Page 483
        Page 484
        Page 485
        Page 486
        Page 487
        Page 488
        Page 489
        Page 490
        Page 491
        Page 492
        Page 493
        Page 494
        Page 495
        Page 496
        Page 497
        Page 498
        Page 499
        Page 500
        Page 501
        Page 502
        Page 503
        Page 504
        Page 505
        Page 506
        Page 507
        Page 508
        Page 509
        Page 510
        Page 511
        Page 512
        Page 513
        Page 514
        Page 515
    Sixty-first day: Monday, 18 February 1946
        Page 516
        Page 517
        Page 518
        Page 519
        Page 520
        Page 521
        Page 522
        Page 523
        Page 524
        Page 525
        Page 526
        Page 527
        Page 528
        Page 529
        Page 530
        Page 531
        Page 532
        Page 533
        Page 534
        Page 535
        Page 536
        Page 537
        Page 538
        Page 539
        Page 540
        Page 541
        Page 542
        Page 543
        Page 544
        Page 545
        Page 546
        Page 547
        Page 548
        Page 549
        Page 550
        Page 551
        Page 552
        Page 553
        Page 554
        Page 555
        Page 556
        Page 557
        Page 558
        Page 559
        Page 560
        Page 561
    Sixty-second day: Tuesday, 19 February 1946
        Page 562
        Page 563
        Page 564
        Page 565
        Page 566
        Page 567
        Page 568
        Page 569
        Page 570
        Page 571
        Page 572
        Page 573
        Page 574
        Page 575
        Page 576
        Page 577
        Page 578
        Page 579
        Page 580
        Page 581
        Page 582
        Page 583
        Page 584
        Page 585
        Page 586
        Page 587
        Page 588
        Page 589
        Page 590
        Page 591
        Page 592
        Page 593
        Page 594
        Page 595
        Page 596
        Page 597
        Page 598
        Page 599
        Page 600
        Page 601
        Page 602
Full Text














"47$ R DRT

ON.

'R Tk
A WRt.

qF
g nat f








1A**

:7 W4:i MAI~,
K~ 4
14 -A .. 'R


4 -') -- -- R

% :



L* E
~ 1 y









W _* -. a 2
PR~r`.;s,4,, M I
EDP
E-;
iffl
44-~7
or



r"M II1 i~l -
:RQ
RR -A. 4 Q ipi 7
i;I.. N;
nz -egF-av -OP.
-RAT r



.. .

a;i m l'1 i
*''ir~j~~~,,,-p-j -'.. WM~
U ";,i

~:CI,,,~,nCL~Il~~:IgO~"
:IF,':.7,
~1"AIM
F.N .2

xE"~j~"l''P j:F f~y
''NN!
T; 2










.................. .....*.... ...*......*..*..***..*U... ...........









R oMB o



Editor's Note

In spite of the meticulous care given to this
edition certain inexactitudes may slip in, some
originating with the speakers themselves. In
order to give a faithful rendering of the Record
S we are avoiding alterations, but corrective
notes will be printed in the final volume.
The General Secretary's Office would be
grateful if the reader would draw to his atten-
tion any errors or omissions, so that they may
also be included in the list of corrections.


S. Paul A. Joosten
Deputy General Secretary.




Address:
Lawrence Deems Egbert, Editor
International Military Tribunal Record
APO 696 A, United States Army.



..................................................................










TRIAL
OF

THE MAJOR WAR CRIMINALS

BEFORE

THE INTERNATIONAL

MILITARY TRIBUNAL


NUREMBERG
14 NOVEMBER 1945 1 OCTOBER 1946


PUBLISHED AT NUREMBERG, GERMANY
1947









This volume is published in accordance with the
direction of the International Military Tribunal by
the Secretariat of the Tribunal, under the juris-
diction of the Allied Control Authority for Germany.


















VOLUME VII


OFFICIAL TEXT

IN THE

ENGLISH LANGUAGE


PROCEEDINGS

5 February 1946 19 February 1946
op










CONTENTS


Fifty-first Day, Tuesday, 5 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . . .. . ..
Afternoon Session . . . . .. . .. ..

Fifty-second Day, Wednesday, 6 February 1946,
Morning Session .. . ...... . . . ...
Afternoon Session ..... . ...........

Fifty-third Day, Thursday, 7 February 1946,
Morning Session.. . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .

Fifty-fourth Day, Friday, 8 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . .. . . . . .

Fifty-fifth Day, Saturday, 9 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . . . . .

Fifty-sixth Day, Monday, 11 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . . .

Fifty-seventh Day, Tuesday, 12 February 1946,
Morning Session... . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . . .

Fifty-eighth Day, Wednesday, 13 February 1946,
Morning Session.. . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .

Fifty-ninth Day, Thursday, 14 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .

Sixtieth Day, Friday, 15 February 1946,
Morning Session... . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .
Sixty-first Day, Monday, 18 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .

Sixty-second Day, Tuesday, 19 February 1946,
Morning Session . . . . . . .
Afternoon Session . . . . . .


77
105


146
177


209


228
253


279
309


340
370


403
428


461
485


516
540


562
589









FIFTY-FIRST DAY

Tuesday, 5 February 1946



Morning Session

MARSHAL (Colonel Charles W. Mays): May it please the Court,
I desire to announce that the Defendant Kaltenbrunner will be
absent from this morning's session on account of illness.
M. EDGAR FAURE (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the French
Republic): One of the counsel would like to address the Tribunal.
DR. HANS LATERNSER (Counsel for'the General Staff and
High Command of the German Armed Forces): In the name of the
organization I represent, I make application that the testimony of
the witness, Van der Essen, who was heard yesterday should be
stricken from the Record for this reason: That the witness made
declarations, firstly, concerning the alleged wanton destruction of
the library in Louvain; secondly, concerning the treatment of the
local population during the Rundstedt offensive, which led him to
the conclusion that orders to this effect must have been received
from higher quarters.
I wish that this testimony should be stricken from the Record
for these reasons: Firstly, as regards yesterday's testimony there was
no question of testimony by a witness. A witness should base his
testimony on his own knowledge, which can be based only on- his
own observations. These prerequisites are not present in the points
to which objection is made. For the most part the witness repeated
statements made by other people, some of them actually made by
people whom he himself did not know. The knowledge of this
witness can. consequently be ascribed only to a study of the docu-
ments.
Secondly, any third party is in a position to give similar testi-
mony as soon as the documents to which this witness had access
are put at his disposal, and if he is also in a position to talk to
the people to whom the witness talked and who gave him his
information. It is consequently proved that this witness, Van der
Essen, was not a genuine witness at all, because such a witness
cannot be replaced by a third person who may happen to come
along.
Thirdly, although the Tribunal, in accordance with Article 19 of
the Charter, is not bound by the ordinary rules of evidence, this







5 Feb. 46


evidence must be rejected because it has no probative value which
can be determined by the Court. This emerges of necessity from
the fact that the sources of the witness' testimony cannot be taken
into consideration.
I regard it as my duty to point out that the introduction of such
indirect proof cannot lead to the discovery of the truth regarding
the points in dispute.,
THE PRESIDENT (Lord Justice Sir Geoffrey Lawrence): The
Tribunal would like to hear, M. Faure, what you have to say in
answer to the motion which has just been made.
M. FAURE: Gentlemen, Your Honors, I should like, first of all,
to observe that, as already indicated by the counsel who has just
spoken, the Charter of this Tribunal provides that it shall not be
bound by the formal rules concerning the burden of proof. But,
apart from this, I consider that counsel's objection cannot be upheld;
this objection being based on three considerations which he has
enumerated but which, as I understand, boil down to one sirigle
objection, namely, that this witness was an indirect witness. I would
like to emphasize the fact that I called Mr. Van der Essen as a wit-
ness precisely because of his capacity as a member of the official
and governmental Belgian commission of inquiry into the study
and research of war crimes.
It is in conformity with all legal procedure with which I per-
sonally am acquainted that a person who has made investigations
in connection with criminal matters may be called before a court
of justice to state the conditions under which the inquiry was made
and the results arrived at. It is therefore not necessary that the
witness who has just testified regarding an investigation should
have been himself an eye-witness of the criminal activities which
this investigation is intended to bring to light.
Mr. Van der Essen, therefore, in my opinion, testified to facts
of which he has personal knowledge, to wit, as regards the matter
of Stavelot, he stated that he himself had heard witnesses and that
he verified the authenticity of this testimony. As concerns the
matter of the Library of Louvain, he testified. as to the existing
minutes of the commission of which he is a regular member.
I add that this procedure appears to me to have the advantage
of avoiding the necessity of calling a large number of individual
witnesses to the witness stand. However, in order to have every
possible guarantee regarding the facts laid before the Tribunal in
evidence, I have decided to bring here the briefs, the texts of the
testimonies to which the witness referred. I shall then be able to
communicate to the Defense the affidavits of the witnesses who
were mentioned yesterday, and I think that this will give the
Defense ample guarantee.








5 Feb. 46


I therefore propose to the Tribunal to reject the objection as far
as the admissibility of the testimony is concerned; it being under-
stood that the Defense will discuss the value and probative force
of this testimony as it sees fit.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, you said something about the affi-
davits of witnesses which you could furnish to the Defendant's
Counsel. I understand that you intended also to put in the govern-
mental report or the committee's report with reference to which the
witness had testified, did you not?
M. FAURE: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: But you intended also, as a matter of cour-
tesy, to furnish the affidavits which were before that committee to
the Defendants' Counsel; is that what you meant?
M. FAURE: Yes, Mr. President; if this meets with the approval
of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: The governmental report, I suppose, does not
actually annex the affidavits, does it?
M. FAURE: Yes, Mr. President, precisely.
THE PRESIDENT: It does? The affidavits are part of the report,
are they?
M. FAURE: The report which was submitted does not contain
the elements on which the witness depended yesterday with regard
to certain points, particularly because the investigation on Stavelot
was very long and very conscientious and has not been summed
up in time. I said, therefore, that I proposed to submit these comple-
mentary elements as evidence and in this way to communicate them
to the Defense.
THE PRESIDENT: That is what I thought; that is to say, the
report did not contain all the details which were in the affidavits
or evidence?
M. FAURE: No, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Therefore, you thought it right, as a matter
of courtesy, to allow the Defendants' Counsel to see those details
upon which the report proceeded. The Tribunal understands that.
The Tribunal will consider the motion which has been made.
We will consider the motion which has been made at a later stage.
You can now proceed with your argument.
M. FAURE: Your Honors, I should like, first of all, to point out
to the Tribunal that since a certain amount of time has been given to
witnesses and discussions, and as I do not wish to exceed the time
limit which was announced, I am compelled to shorten to a con-
siderable extent the presentation of the brief which I am now







5 Feb. 46


presenting on the subject of propaganda. I shall therefore ask the
Tribunal kindly to excuse me if I occasionally hesitate during this
presentation, inasmuch as I shall not follow my brief exactly.
I indicated yesterday the method employed by the Germans with
regard to the freedom of public meetings and of association, which
they suppressed. When they did uphold these rights they exploited
them to their own advantage. I should like now to say something
about books and publishing.
The German authorities, first of all, issued .an ordinance on
30 August 1940, published in the Journal Officiel of 16 September,
forbidding certain school books in France., We have already seen
that they had done the same thing in Belgium.
Another step taken by the Germans was to prohibit a certain
number of books of which they disapproved. I present in this con-
nection Document Number RF-1103, which is the "Otto" list, pub-
lished in September 1940; it is a list of 1,074 volumes forbidden by
the Germans. I shall not, of course, read it to the Tribunal. It
appears in the document book under Document Number RF-1103,
as I have just said.
A second "Otto" list, longer than the first, was drawn up later
and published on 8 July 1942, and I present it as Document Number
RF-1104. The conclusion to this second document, which is the last
page in my document book, gives a clear indication of the principles
on which the German authorities worked. I read a few lines:
"As a matter of principle, all translations of English books,
except the English classics, are withdrawn from sale."-And
further-"All books by Jewish authors, as well as books in
which Jews have collaborated, are to be withdrawn from sale
with the exception of works of a scientific nature where
special measures are anticipated. From now on biographies
of Jews, even if written by French Aryans, as, for instance,
the biographies of the Jewish musicians Offenbach, Meyer-
beer, Darius Milhau'd, et cetera, are to be withdrawn from
sale."
This method of procedure may have appeared fairly harmless
at first, since only about 1,200 volumes were involved, but one can
see the significance of the principle itself. By this procedure the
German authorities achieved the practical result they sought, which
was essentially, apart from other prohibitions, the complete dis-
appearance of serious and objective works permitting a study of
German doctrines, the policy of Germany, and the philosophy of
Nazism.,
Apart from prohibiting works already existing, the Germans
naturally established a censorship. At first they proceeded in a







5 Feb. 46


veiled manner by making a kind of agreement with publishers in
which the publishers themselves were made responsible for indi-
cating which of the books appeared to them to be subject to censor-
ship. I submit this censorship agreement as Document Number
RF-1105; and I wish, without reading it, to make but one obser-
vation in this regard which is highly characteristic of the invariable
German method.
In the printed brochure of this agreement, of which the original
is submitted, there appears, in addition to the agreement itself, a
notice drafted in terms which do not reflect French feeling. This
notice was not drafted by the publishers upon whom the agreement
itself was imposed but was drafted by the Germans and published
in the same brochure, which bears the words, "National Syndicate
of Publishers," so that one might think that the French publishers
accepted the phrases occurring in this preamble. For that matter,
the attentive reader has only to see that this brochure does not bear
the printer's name to realize that this is a German publication and
not one put out by French publishers, for only the Germans were
exempted from the French rule requiring mention of the printer's
name.
The Germans did not limit themselves to this procedure which
was apparently rather liberal; and later an ordinance of 27 April
1942 entitled, "Concerning the Rational Use of Printing Paper," was
published in the Journal Officiel of 13 May. This ordinance stated,
on pretext of the rational utilization of paper, that all publications
without exception should bear the German authorization number.
I point out in addition that in their control of paper the Ger-
mans had a very effective weapon with which to put a stop to
French publishing. I submit as Document Number RF-1106 the
affidavit of M. Marcel Rives, Director of Internal Commerce at the
Ministry of Industrial Production., In order to shorten the pro-
ceedings I shall not read this document. I may say in short that
this document makes it clear that the distribution of available paper
stocks was made entirely under the authority of the Germans and
that the Germans reduced the amount of paper placed at the dis-
posal of publishers in a proportion exceeding that of the general
reduction in paper quotas as compared with the prewar situation.
I must add that the Germans also took for their own propaganda
publication a certain amount of the reduced paper quota allotted
to the French publishers. Thus, they not only used for their propa-
ganda the paper which they themselves had in Germany, but they
also took some of the small amount of paper which they allotted to
the French publishers. I should like simply to read in this con-
nection a few lines of the document which constitutes Appendix 2
of Document Number RF-1106, which I have just submitted. I







5 Feb. 46


merely read a few lines of this Appendix 2, which is a letter from
the German Military Command to the Ministry of National Economy
dated 28 June 1943:
"More especially during the month of March, which you par-
ticularly mention, it has been impossible to allot the publishers
any quantity from current production, as this was needed for
urgent propaganda purposes."
The other aspect of this German activity in the publishing
sphere was, in fact, the carrying on of an intensive propaganda by
means of all kinds of pamphlets and publications. This propaganda
literature is extremely tedious. I should like to mention only one
detail, which shows the method of camouflage always employed by
the Nazis. I have here a few German propaganda pamphlets which
I shall submit, naturally without reading them, as Document Num-
ber RF-1106 (bis). The first ones are part of a series entitled England
Unmasked. The first numbers of this series, taken at random, have
on the flyleaf, "Office of German Information, England Unmasked
Number..." et cetera. No attempt at concealment is made, and the
reader knows what he has before him. But by some curious acci-
dent, Number 11 in the same series no longer bears the words,
"German Office of Information," and we see instead, "International
Publishing House, Brussels." Here again, however, we are warned
of its origin, for the author's name is Reinhard Wolf, and this is
a German name.
But here, by way of a final example, is a pamphlet entitled The
Pact against Europe, which is also published by the International
Publishing House, Brussels, (Document Number RF-1106(ter)). We
know after seeing the other specimens that this publishing house
is only a firm attached to the German office; but people who are not
so well informed may believe the pamphlet to be a French or Bel-
gian compilation, for in this case the name of the author is Jean
Dubreuil.
I shall not dwell further on publishing, and I should like now
to say a few words about the press. It is a matter of common knowl-
edge that all the newspapers of the occupied countries were con-
trolled by the Germans, and that most of these newspapers had
been founded at their instigation by persons who were in their pay.
As these facts are well known, I shall refrain from submitting
documents on this point, and shall limit myself to the following
remarks:
Firstly, restrictive measures-censorship. Although all these
newspapers were practically "their" papers, the Nazis nevertheless
submitted them to a very strict censorship. I shall submit, as evi-
dence of this, Document Number RF-1108, which is a report of a
press conference held on 8 January 1943 in the course of which the








5 Feb. 46


new censorship orders and regime are defined. I point out to the
Tribunal that this document and others of the same nature were
found in the archives of the French Office of Information, which was
under German control. They have been deposited either in the
Biblioth6que Nationale in Paris or in the Document Library of the
War Museum. These documents have been selected by us from the
reports, either in the form of original documents, photostats, or
from the French collection.
I should like simply to point out, by means of this Document
RF-1108, that the Germans were concerned with the institution of
a more liberal regime of censorship. On reading the document,
however, it becomes evident that almost all news items and articles
are subject to censorship, with the exception of serial stories, reviews
of films and plays, items of scientific or university news, radio pro-
grams, and a certain number of completely trivial subjects.
The second aspect of the German interference, the positive aspect,
appears in the directives given to the press; and these directives
were given by means of press conferences such as that which I have
just described.
I shall submit to the Tribunal, without reading them, a certain
number of documents numbered RF-1109 to RF-1120. I produce these
documents in evidence not for the sake of their contents, which are
simply a repetition of German propaganda, but merely as proof of
their existence, that is, continued pressure exerted on the press.
I should like to say, however, how this was done. The press
conferences were held either in the Propagandastaffel, Avenue des
Champs-Elys6es, or at the German Embassy. The representatives
of the press were summoned by the competent Nazi officials who
issued directives. After the conference, the substance of these
directives was embodied in a dispatch from the French Office of
Information. The Tribunal knows that agencies sent dispatches to
the papers for their information. When a dispatch had been drawn
up by the office it was submitted for checking to the German bureau,
which affixed a seal to it. After that it could be distributed to the
papers.
I stated that I would not read anything on these press confer-
ences dr on the agency's minutes and notes which form Documents
RF-1109 to RF-1120. I should like to read only a very brief docu-
ment, which I submit as Document Number RF-1121, the minutes
of a press conference held on 16 April 1943 in the Propaganda-
abteilung. I quote:
"At the end of the conference the German commentator
declared that on Tuesday, 20 April-the Fiihrer's birthday-
the newspapers would consist of four pages instead of two,







5 Feb. 46


and on Wednesday, 21 April, they would consist of two pages
instead of four. He asked the reporters present to stress the
European orientation of the Fiihrer's political personality and
to treat Franco-German relations very generously. A great
deal of tact and reserve are necessary, however, in order not
to give the newspapers the appearance of being no longer
French, and in this way shocking public opinion."
I am not forgetting the fact that we are participating in a crim-
inal trial and that we must select from the extremely varied facts
which we have to present those elements characteristic of the inten-
tion and realization of an act condemned by criminal law. In con-
sideration of this, I quote Document Number RF-1124, which I am
also presenting and which is an attempt to promote, by means of
press and propaganda, the entlistment of Frenchmen in the enemy
army. Article 75 of the French Criminal Code provides for this
crime and I recall that in juridical theory proceedings can be taken
even against enemy nationals for crimes of this kind. I read this
document, which is extremely short:
"At the end of the military conference, Dr. Eich announced
that the O.F.I. would broadcast this afternoon an article
devoted to the necessity of the inclusion of French sailors in
the German Navy. He asked the newspapers to add commen-
taries to this text in which, for instance, the following theme
might be treated: 'To be a sailor is to have a profession.'
"The article broadcast by the O.F.I. must appear tomorrow-a
four-page day-on the first page, or the beginning, at least,
must appear on the first page."
Finally, I must point out that, apart from the press conferences
proper, there were so-called cultural conferences at which the Ger-
man authorities gave their orders on all subjects. I should like to
read a few very brief extracts from one of these cultural confer-
ences in order to indicate the general oppression resulting from the
interference of the Germans in every field without exception. I
present these Documents RF-1125 and RF-1126; and 1 read two
sentences on Page 1 of Document Number RF-1125, which is a report
of the minutes of the conference held on 22 April:
"Reproductions of paintings by Picasso have recently been
made in spite of the directives to the contrary previously
given.
"Theater: Certain press publications have seen fit to praise
the operetta Don Philippe to an extent belied by the reception
given to this work by the general public. This goes beyond
the bounds of the permissible."
I shall read a little further, on the top of Page 2:








5 Feb. 46


"The press has lent an obviously exaggerated backing to jazz
concerts, particularly those of Fred Jumbo. This shows a lack
of tact which is all the more regrettable in that a very minor
place has been accorded in general to concerts of real value."
Finally, at the end of this document, there is a general note
which is interesting:
"The nationality of persons of standing in the world of science,
art, et cetera, whose names occur in articles appearing in the
press, is to be given as that of the Greater German Reich in
the case of those born in any of the countries which have
been restored to the Greater German Reich or incorporated
into it."
We thus see that even in what might seem to us the most fanci-
ful connections we can find evidence of the will to enforce Germani-
zation and of the criminal will to strip men of the nationality which
they have the right to retain.
I shall now say a few words about the cinema. The Germans, to
do them justice, have never failed to understand the exceptional
importance of the cinema as a means of propaganda. In France they
devoted to this subject seven ordinances or decrees.
You must know that, in the first place, the Germans prohibited
the showing of films of which they disapproved.:.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, don't you think that evidence that
the Germans used the cinema as a method of propaganda is really
somewhat cumulative? You have shown already that they forbade
a great number of books which they considered hostile to their
ideology, and that they controlled the press, and is it not almost
cumulative and a matter of detail that they also controlled the
cinema?
Unless there is some evidence on behalf of the defendants con-
tradicting the evidence which you have given, I think the Tribunal
will be satisfied that the Germans did adopt all these methods of
propaganda.
M. FAURE: When a brief is presented it sometimes does produce
the impression that the arguments contained in it are cumulative,
although that may not have been so apparent when the preparation
was going on.
I shall not speak, then, on the subject of the cinema. I wish
simply to point this out to the Tribunal. We thought that with
regard to these questions of propaganda with which we are dealing
in the abstract it would perhaps be as well to provide concrete
illustrations of a few of the themes of German propaganda, and to
this end we propose presently, with the permission of the Tribunal,
to project very briefly a few of the themes of German propaganda.








5 Feb. 46

I wish to point out that these themes are taken from archives which
we found. On the other hand, we intend to present, for one minute
each, two pictures taken from a German propaganda film produced
by a Frenchman at the instigation and with the financial support of
the German office.
As we are now going to present these pictures, with the per-
mission of the Tribunal, I consider it indispensable to present just
one document, Document RF-1141, since it is the interrogation of the
producer of the film and establishes the fact that this film was made
by order of the Germans and paid for by them. I therefore present
in evidence this Document Number RF-1141, which is necessary for
the presentation which we are about to make. Since it seems to me
that sufficient evidence has already been advanced concerning the
various methods of propaganda, I shall apply the same line of
reasoning to the part anticipated for broadcasting.
Here I merely wish to present a document which goes beyond
the field of pure propaganda. This is Document Number RF-1146.
I must point out, first of all, that as regards broadcasting, the Ger-
mans obviously encountered an obstacle which was not present to
the same degree in other fields. This obstacle lay in the transmis-
sions broadcast by the free radios which, as the Belgian witness
said yesterday, were followed with the greatest enthusiasm by the
inhabitants of the occupied countries. The German Command then
had the idea of penalizing the persons who listened to these broad-
casts. In the document which I am going to quote, the Military
Command went to the length of asking the French authorities most
urgently to institute the most stringent penalties, even going so far
as to prescribe the death penalty for persons repeating news heard
on the foreign radio service.
I think it will be useful, if I deposit in evidence this document
emanating from the Military Command and signed by Stiilpnagel,
which demonstrates the criminal intentions of the German staff.
I should like to read this document, RF-1146. I read from the begin-
ning of the third paragraph:
"The French law of 28 October 1941 does not provide for
special sanctions for the broadcasting of news from foreign
stations calculated to endanger order or public security,
although this offense constitutes a particularly grave danger.
It is indispensable that the dissemination of such news should
be punished by hard labor and in particularly serious cases
by the death penalty. It is immaterial whether the dissemina-
tor of the news was listening in himself or obtained knowl-
edge by other means.
"The possibility of legally prosecuting the mentioned offense
by the state tribunal does not suffice to hinder the population








5 Feb. 46


from listening to the British radio and spreading the news.
Since the law regarding the state tribunal does not mention
listening to foreign stations there is no direct relation between
listening in and dissemination on the one hand and punish-
ment by hard labor or death sentence on the other. The
population has, therefore, no idea that such acts are already
punishable by hard labor or the death penalty.
"For this reason I request a draft to be submitted, amending
the law of 28 October 1941 with deadline 3 January 1943.
"For your instruction I am adding, as an appendix, a draft
of the German decree relating to extraordinary measures
about broadcasting, by which you may learn the details of
the German regulation."
I shall now submit a document bearing the Document Number
RF-1147. I think this document may interest the Tribunal. It
presents quite a different character from that of the documents
which I have produced up to now. This document consists, firstly,
of a letter from Berlin dated 27 October 1941, the subject of which
is an agreement relating to collaboration with the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs. I read this letter, which is very short, and which
authenticates our document:
"By authorization of the ministry, we enclose for your infor-
mation, as a secret matter of the Reich, a copy of the agree-
ment relating to collaboration with the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, as well as a copy of the agreement of execution. The
agreement itself is not confidential, but details of the contents
must not be given."
The document enclosed with this is the full text, which I shall
not read, of the agreement made between the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Ministry of the Reich for Public Enlightenment and
Propaganda relating to collaboration between their respective
branches. I think that this document is of some interest, and that
is why I submit it. I shall simply point out to the Tribunal that
it shows at once the extent of the hold which the Germans wished
to make sure of possessing over the minds of the populations of
occupied and even foreign countries and the way in which they
organized this.
Chapter I of this document is entitled, "Collaboration by Branches."
Letter "a" concerns the cinema, the theater, music, and exhibitions.
Letter "b" concerns publications.
I think it might be interesting to read the first few lines of
letter "b," for after expounding the propaganda from the point of
view of the .receivers, it is worth while looking at the question from
the point of view of the persons who put out this propaganda. And,


11








5 Feb. 46


on the other hand, I think we must not lose the opportunity of
observing the extraordinary variety and skill of the German
methods. This quotation is very brief:
"The Foreign Office and the Ministry of Propaganda are
operating jointly a holding company, the Mundus A.G., of
which they have equal shares and in which the publishing
houses controlled by both ministries at.home and abroad are
combined, as far as they are concerned with the production
of publications for abroad or their export to, and distribution
in, foreign countries. All firms or partnerships which will be
founded or acquired in future for this purpose by both min-
istries will be incorporated in this company."
On Page 3, Paragraph 4, I should like also to read a sentence:
"Both ministries participate in the drawing up of propaganda
matter issued by them or upon their initiative, at home, but
intended for distribution abroad."
Finally, on Page 4, I shall read a sentence in the second last
paragraph, and I quote:
"In order to consolidate the broadcasting stations and the
partnerships openly controlled by Germans, the Foreign Office
and the Ministry of Propaganda are jointly operating a
holding company, Interradio A.G., Berlin, each owning
50 percent."
The Tribunal has noticed the phrase "openly owned by the
Germans."
This will be completed by a final quotation of a sentence on
Page 5 at the beginning of Paragraph 2:
"The camouflaged (not apparent) influence exercised upon
the foreign broadcasting stations must not be mentioned in
connection with the joint holding company."
I should like, in concluding this brief on propaganda, to present
Document Number RF-1148, which is a message circulated to all
the propaganda offices. I think a very brief quotation from this
document will be interesting for the definition of the very general
use of propaganda as the tool of one of the most premeditated and
most serious enterprises of Nazism, namely, the extermination of
nationality and existence of a country. In this case Czech culture
and tradition are involved.
I quote from Paragraph 4:
"The close relationship of the Czechs and European culture
must always be pointed-out in a positive manner. The fact of the
far-reaching influence of German culture on Czech culture and
even the latter's dependence on the former has to be stressed
at every opportunity. The German cultural achievements in







5 Feb. 46


Bohemia and Moravia and their influence upon the cultural
work of the Czechs are to be mentioned particularly.
"Attention has always to be paid to the fact that although
the Czechs speak a Slav language, they are subject to German
culture by virtue of their living together for centuries with
superior German peoples in German-directed states, and
have scarcely anything in common with other Slav peoples.
"From the historical point of view, attention has always to
be focused on the periods or personalities by which the Czechs
sought and found contact with German culture: St. Wenceslas,
the time of Charles IV, of Ferdinand I, Rudolf II, Bohemian'
baroque, et cetera."
Finally, I submit, without reading it, Document Number RF-1149.
I was anxious to include this document in our document book for
it constitutes a report of a year's propaganda activities in one of
the occupied countries-Norway, to be exact. I have spoken, at
some length of this country, and that is why I do not wish now
to quote the text of this document; but I do wish to mention that
German propaganda formed the subject of extremely regular
reports and that these reports touched on every subject: press,
cinema, radio, culture, theater, schools, education.
This propaganda, then, as I have already stated, is something
which covers a much wider range than that previously ascribed
to it. No aspect of our life is unknown to it; it respects none of
the things that are precious to us; it can become a real penitentiary
for the spirit, when even the idea of escape is imprisoned.
If it please the Tribunal, may I suggest that the session be
suspended now, so that the films may be shown immediately after
this presentation.
My only purpose in showing these films is to illustrate one of
the most common and disagreeable features of life in the occupied
countries, the fact that wherever we went we were always
compelled to see before us the stupid and ugly German propaganda
pictures.
THE PRESIDENT: The Court will adjourn for 15 minutes.

[A recess was taken.]

THE PRESIDENT: With reference to the motion which was
made before the adjournment by counsel for the General Staff, the
opinion of the Tribunal is this:
In the first place the Tribunal is not confined to direct evidence
from eyewitnesses, because Article 19 provides that the Tribunal
shall admit any evidence which it deems to have probative value.








5 Feb. 46


Secondly, there is nothing in Article 21 of the Charter which
makes it improper to call the member of a governmental committee
as a witness to give evidence with reference to the governmental
committee's report. But the Tribunal considers that if such a
witness is called the governmental committee's report must be put
in evidence; as a matter of fact, the Counsel for the Prosecution
have offered to put the committee's report in evidence in this case
and not only to do that, but also to make available to Counsel for
the Defense the affidavits of witnesses upon which that report
proceeded.
Thirdly, there were other matters upon which the witness, Mr.
Van der Essen, gave evidence which was altogether outside the
report or so it appeared to the Tribunal.
As to the weight which is to be attached to the witness' evidence,
that, of course, is a matter which will have to be considered by
the Tribunal. It is open to the Defense to give evidence in answer
to the evidence of Mr. Van der Essen and also to comment upon or
criticize that evidence, and so far as his evidence consisted of his
own conclusions drawn from facts which he had seen or evidence
which he had heard, the correctness of those conclusions will be
considered by the Tribunal, conclusions being matters for the final
decision of the Tribunal.
For these reasons the motion of counsel is denied.
It is suggested to me that I did not in that statement say that
the report was to be filed in evidence. I intended to say that. I
thought that I had said so. The report must be filed in evidence and
the affidavits, as they are to be made available to the defendants'
counsel will, of course, also be made available to the Tribunal.
M. FAURE: If it please the Tribunal, M. Fuster is going to
project the films of which I spoke just now.
M. SERGE FUSTER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French
Republic): Mr. President, I am to show you a few examples of direct
propaganda in the occupied countries.
During the whole period of the occupation the inhabitants of
the occupied countries had the waals of their houses covered with
enormous posters, varying in color and text. There was very little
paper in any of these countries, but there was always enough for
propaganda; and this propaganda was carried on without regard
for probability or moral considerations. If the Nazis thought any
sort of campaign would prove effective, no matter in how small a
degree, they immediately launched this campaign.
In France, for instance, the most illustrious names in history
appeared on posters and were made to proclaim slogans against
the enemies of Germany. Isolated sentences were taken from the







5 Feb. 46


works of Clemenceau, Montesquieu, and many others who in this
way were made to utter sentiments in favor of Nazism.
But German propaganda went beyond the adulteration of the
works of the great historical geniuses of our nation. They also tried
to pervert and cripple most sacred sentiments. We saw in France
posters advertising work in Germany, which showed a mother
saying to her children, "How happy we are now that father has
gone to work in Germany." In this way, the family sentiment was
made to further the ends of Nazism.
German propaganda tried also to attack the sentiment of national
patriotism. We saw posters asking young men to serve in the
German forces; and these existed in every country. M. Faure
stated yesterday that these unfortunate wretches who had served
in the various legions must, in spite of their guilt, be considered
to a great extent as victims of the Nazi system. In this way,
German propaganda, in attacking simultaneously the genius of a
nation and the most intimate sentiments of its people, committed
a crime against the spirit; and that is something which, according
to the quotation used by M. Dubost in his peroration, cannot be
pardoned.
Publicity may be permitted, by all means, but publicity must
remain within limits. It must have some respect for persons, laws,
and morality. Guarantees for the protection of the individual exist
in every country; there are laws against libel, against defamation;
but in international matters, German propaganda had an unlimited
field, without restrictions or penalties, at least until the day when
this Tribunal was established to judge it.
That is why it seemed to us a useful and necessary duty to
submit to this Tribunal one or two practical illustrations. We did
not choose the best-known examples, but rather those which were
most genuinely characteristic of the excesses and extremes of this
propaganda.
First of all, we are going to show a very short extract from
a very specialized film directed against Freemasonry, which was
imposed by the Germans in the manner explained in the brief.
The film in itself is of no interest, but it contains pictures
illustrating the crude campaign of lies in which the Germans
indulged in France.
As it is a very short film and will be shown very rapidly-we
cannot slow it down on account of technical difficulties-I should
like before showing it to draw attention to the Tribunal to the two
kinds of pictures which will follow one another without transition:
First you will see a map of the world. This map will be rapidly
covered by a color indicating the influence of the Jews and the








5 Feb. 46


Freemasons, except for the two victorious islands, the Nazi-fascist
bloc in Europe, on the one hand, and Japan on the other.
We give this picture to show the degree of crude simplicity
arrived at by Nazi propaganda and how it submitted to the people
the most stupid and misleading formulas.
An even worse example of calumny follows the portrait of
President Roosevelt with the heading, "Brother Roosevelt Wants
War."
This is all we have taken from the film. It will now be shown.
Mr. Abbett, you can begin.
[Moving pictures were then shown.]
M. FUSTER: It is taken from the film "Hidden Forces." Here
is the map of the world [indicating] with the zones of influence: the
Soviet zone of influence, the British zone of influence, the American
zone of influence. It is May 1939.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it necessary to have the accompaniment
of music?
M. FUSTER: I am sorry, but it is impossible to cut out the sound
from this film.
THE PRESIDENT: It cannot be helped? Very well.
M. FUSTER: The rapidity of the film made it necessary for us
first to give a few details of the pictures which passed before the
Tribunal. I think, however, that the Tribunal could appreciate
them.
Now, we are going to show a few photographs of posters. These
will be easier to deal with than the film, which cannot be slowed
down. We are going to show them one by one, commenting on
each as may be necessary.
I should like to point out to the Tribunal that the film which
it has just seen is submitted as Document Number RF-1152 and
also under Document Number RF-1152 (bis).
The scenarios of other propaganda films, entitled "M. Girouette"
(M. Weathercock), "French Workmen in Germany" and taken from
the dossier of the proceedings taken against M. Musard before the
Seine Court of Justice, will also illustrate the tendency and the
subject matter of the German propaganda carried on by this means.
The photographs of posters which we are going to show now are
submitted as Document Number RF-1153. Before showing these
films, we must say something about the way in which poster propa-
ganda was organized. It was organized with extreme care. In this
connection we submit a pamphlet which contains full instructions
for mounting and shows that a real administrative service existed
to carry out projects which had been under consideration for a








5 Feb. 46


long time. This is Document Number RF-1150. We shall not read
it, since it is a publication, but we will summarize the most impor-
tant contents. The Tribunal will see that the most exact provision
has been made for every detail, the sites for the billboards and so
forth. All these posters were issued by the central bureau in
Berlin, D.P.A. In their original form, they consisted only of
pictures. The text was added later in the country for which they
were intended. The text had to be printed in the language of this
country and adapted to suit local conditions.
The Germans very often refrained from indicating their official
German origin or even attributed a different origin to them. For.
instance, they used the phrase "Printed in France," which has no
particular meaning since it never appears on genuine French
posters. The French posters bear only the printer's name; and this,
in its turn, never appears on German posters. By the use of the
phrase "Printed in France," however, the Germans could undoubt-
edly make the French believe that the propaganda put before them
was not directly of enemy origin. This is a feature at once curious
and revealing.
As we have said, publicity has been practiced for a long time,
but Nazi Germany made propaganda into a public institution and
applied it internationally in a most reprehensible manner.
We are now going to show to the Tribunal a few of the stages
in the development of this poster propaganda.
[Pictures were then projected on the screen.]
M. FUSTER: Here ig the first poster [indicating]. I am obliged to
describe it because we see it rather badly. The text seems to in-
dicate the noble attitude of the victor towards the French victims
of war. It is expressed as follows: "Abandoned populations: Have
confidence in the German soldier," and we see a German soldier
with little French children in his arms.
At the same time that the Germans tried to gain the confidence
of the French population a second poster, which we are going to
show you, was posted in Germany regarding French prisoners of
war.. This is what they said to the Germans. I read the text of the
poster:
"Companions: Retain your national dignity. Attitude toward
prisoners-the attention of every member of the Party is
drawn to the following points: It is unworthy to show the
slightest sign of friendship to a prisoner. It is strictly forbid-
den to give food or drink to prisoners of war. Your fathers,
sons, and brothers are fighting with all their strength against
an enemy whose purpose is the annihilation of the German
people. We have no reason to show the slightest friendship








5 Feb. 46


to such an enemy, even when he comes to us as a prisoner.
The enemy remains the enemy."
We are now going to show a series -of photographs of posters
which were intended to show the French who their real enemies
were; but first I should like to ask the Tribunal whether they can
see the posters sufficiently well, considering the bad light.
THE PRESIDENT: We can see clearly enough, I think.
M. FUSTER: I thank you. We shall continue. This first photo-
graph of the series, intended to show the populations who their real
enemies were, is entitled, "Fake always comes out of the same
spot." The enemy aimed at is England. The caricature shows by
means of birds with human heads that the voice of the Free French
is only a big story, symbolized by Masonic signs or emblems of the
Jewish religion. The placards attached to these birds and which
appear to defy these slogans of British propaganda are rather
entertaining to read now: "The Germans Take All" and "We Have
the Mastery of the Seas"-it refers to the Allies.
Another photo-we are still dealing with anti-British propaganda.
It is a favorite theme of German propaganda. This photo is entitled,
"Thanks to the English, our Road to Calvary." It tries to prove to
the French by recalling certain historical events, that the English
have always been the cause of French sufferings: Joan of Arc,
Napoleon, the war of 1939-40 are the principal themes exploited by
means of the poster.
This one now represents the English hydra which is encircling
Africa; but it is mercilessly beheaded in Germany, in Norway, and
rather oddly, in Syria. The text of this poster reads, "The hydra is
still being systematically decapitated."
Poster Number 6 has the following text, which is almost invisible
here:
"The ally of yesterday, great promises before the war: No
help during the war. Retreat and flight of the English Ex-
peditionary Force. Bombardment of French cities and blockade
after the debacle. Let us be done with it!"
Poster Number 2, which is also anti-British, is constructed on
the same model. There are three parts, "Yesterday, Today,
Tomorrow."
The Germans developed not only the theme of Anglo-Saxon greed
which they represented by a hydra or a bulldog, but also the theme
of the prestige of the occupied countries at sea. On this point we
show photographs of French and Norwegian posters.
This poster is entitled, "You won't catch anything with that
De Gaulle, Gentlemen!" British corpulence and Jewish capitalism
bulge out from a fishing boat stopped by the coastal guns of Dakar.







5 Feb. 46


The style of the wording and the sailor's gesture are purely
German. A Frenchman would have said, "With that Gaulle (fishing
rod)," and the allusion would have been clear enough.
Poster Number 9 invites enrollment in the German Navy, "The
Time Has Come to Free the Seas."
Here is a Norwegian poster: "Defend Norway. Enlist in the Ger-
man Navy." The inscription might apply, firstly, to all the services
of the German uniformed police; secondly, to all the commands of
the German Wehrmacht; thirdly, to German harbor masters and
port control officers; fourthly, to the commander of the SS Reserve
Corps of Norway in Oslo, et cetera. Another Norwegian poster, with
the following title, "All for Norway.... Help from England." This
poster tries to prove to the civilian population that ruin, fire, and
devastation are the only benefits of the English alliance.
The second enemy, America, is the subject of the posters we are
going to show now.
Poster Number 11-"The American Press: 97 percent in the
hands of the Jews." That allows the Germans to kill two birds with
one stone: The Jews and America.
Poster Number 12-in the middle of this poster is the inscription,
"They Wanted War," and the persons concerned are represented by
six photographs. These persons, who were responsible for the war,
are not any of the men whom you see in the dock, but six Amer-
icans: magistrates, officials, men in the public eye. Their names
were not familiar to the French public, who had rarely seen them
on the screen, except for Mr. La Guardia. Those who read articles
on economics knew of Mr. Morgenthau; but it was difficult to
persuade the French that Messrs. Baruch, Frankfurter, Wise, and
Lehman were the instigators of the present war, and Hitler and
Gbring the victims. As I have said, however, Nazi propaganda did
not shrink from any improbability.
The photo Number 13 is more picturesque. It shows both sides
of a dollar bill and consists of two lines separated by a Masonic star
with the inscription, "A dollar has no value unless signed by Mor-
genthau." Here are the texts of the inscriptions showing the imag-
ination of the Nazi authors in this matter. On the left-hand side we
read:
"The Minister of the Treasury is Jew Morgenthau Jr., related
to the great racketeers of international finance. All the Jewish
attributes are found on this dollar: the Eagle of Israel,
the triangle, the Eye of Jehovah, the 13 letters of the motto,
the 13 stars of the aureole, the 13 arrows, the 13 olive
branches, the 13 steps of the unfinished pyramid. This money
is Jewish indeed."







5 Feb. 46


And on the right-hand side:
"This dollar paid for the Jewish war, the sole message which
the Anglo-Americans can address to us. Will it be enough to
repay us for the misfortunes arising from that Jewish war?
The money does not stink but the Jew does."
Number 14-"Mr. Churchill and Mr. Roosevelt are dividing
Africa."
Number 15-this is anti-Semitic propaganda properly speaking.
We have already seen it mingled with anti-British and anti-
American propaganda. This photograph shows children of a French
technical school who were taken to an anti-Jewish exhibition and
given anti-Jewish pamphlets to read.
Number 16-"Behold the Jewish invasion." France is gnawed by
a symbolical hydra and figures are scrawled across her. "In 1914,
200,000 Jews; in 1939, 800,000 Jews, without mentioning the half-
Jews."
Number 17-"For the Jews the right to live; for us the right
to croak. Beneath the recriminations of all-enveloping Jewry, the
crosses of the daily growing number of war victims are lined up."
This propaganda aims on the one hand at collecting the Jews into
a compact mass and isolating them, and on the other hand, at
arousing the hatred of the remainder of the population against
them. It aims at dividing France.
Number 18-finally, we see the terrible Russian foe. A tortured
human beast is hauling a barrow-load of stones while a monster
in uniform lashes him with a knout or nagaika and threatens him
with a revolver. This picture was first intended for inclusion in a
composite picture entitled "The Workers Paradise." This gives it
additional interest; but owing to the lack of time, the poster was
put out just as it was. We submit the plans for the entire project
as Document Number RF-1151.
Number 19-this is a lovely Norwegian poster: "No" in the form
of a flash of lightning strikes against the Russian hand which
attempts to tear the national flag.
Number 20-"Never!" A romantic picture reminiscent of certain
Russian pictures of the last century. Death escorts a train of
deportees. The Nazis showed something which they knew well!
Number 21-a final picture concerning Russia, "What Bolshevism
would bring to Europe." Scenes of mutilation, infanticide, rape,
hangings, murder-exactly what the Nazi movement brought to
Europe! However, this Europe must realize her good fortune in
being led by the Fiihrer, must realize her strength and her unity,
in order to fight victoriously against the barbarous enemy.








5 Feb. 46

And here is a photograph of a poster, "A Leader and His
People." Hitler is depicted as endowed with every charm: sweetness,
simplicity, understanding, while the text, unreadable on the repro-
duction, recalls that he, Hitler, is the unknown soldier of the first
war. We call the Tribunal's attention to the photo.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you let the Tribunal know how much
longer you are likely to be?
M:.FUSTER: About 10 minutes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: You may continue.
M. FUSTER: In the photograph to the left, Hitler is shaking a
little girl's hand and we read underneath, "The Little Congratulator."
This term, which is not French, betrays the origin of the document.
Here is a poster-Number 23-which was widely circulated in
France: "I work in Germany for my family and for France. Do as
I do."
Number 24-"1918 to 1943-History Speaks. 1918-The Debacle.
1943-The Great Unity." This poster is the counterpart of the
inscriptions which patriots used to write on the walls in France.
The German defeat was rapidly approaching; and they could hope
that the end of the year 1943, like the end of the year 1918, would
bring the final victory. The Nazis were unable to make any reply
to these crushing communiques except by issuing denials and posters
like this, affirming the great unity of Europe.
Number 25-here is a poster which combines the productive
and fighting forces, "The best workers make the best weapons for
the best soldiers."
Number 26-finally propaganda attains the level of the conflict
of political doctrines, "Socialism against Bolshevism or a free
Europe."
Number 27-religious doctrine. This is a Norwegian poster which
makes fun of the Anglo-Russian alliance. It is entitled, "A
Blessed Meeting." An Anglican bishop, armed with a phosphorous
bomb, presents a cross symbolizing Finland to Pope Stalin. Stalin
accepts it with eyes lifted to heaven and a machine gun in his
arms. A placard says, "Christianity is introduced into the country
of the Soviets," and the motto says, "My dear brother, we wish
to strengthen your faith with these beautiful crosses."
Number 28-"Anti-Christ: Communism, the scourge of civili-
zation. Bolshevism against Europe. International Exhibition,
12 July to 15 August 1941." The Nazis pose as the defenders of
Christianity.
Number 29-and to conclude, this is what the defenders of
Christianity did to the Church of Oradour-sur-Glane.







5 Feb. 46

We have now finished showing the films. We have taken the
liberty to submit to the Tribunal a few pictures forming concrete
illustrations of a tendency whose spiritual character makes it
perhaps more difficult of recognition but whose importance is
considerable. In treating an emotionally subtle theme of this kind,
we have used pictures in preference to words, since pictures can
make clear in an instant something which it takes time to put into
words. In this way we hope we have contributed towards making
lain the truth.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn until 10 minutes
past 2.
[The Tribunal recessed until 1410 hours.]








5 Feb. 46


Afternoon Session

MARSHAL: May it please the Court, I desire to announce that
the Defendant Kaltenbrunner will be absent until further notice,
on account of illness.
M. FAURE: Mr. President, I shall now take up the last chapter
of my brief, which is devoted to the organization of criminal activi-
ties. I shall begin this last chapter by quoting a few words spoken
by Monseigneur Piguet, Bishop of Clermont-Ferrand, in the course
of a pontifical Mass on Whit Sunday, 20 May 1945. Monseigneur
Piguet had just been liberated from the concentration camp to
which he had been sent by the Nazis. He said:
"The criminal institutions of which we have been witness
and victim bear within themselves all the scourges of
barbarism and old-time servitude systematized and applied
by a new method capable of increasing human misery by
the whole range of modern scientific possibilities."
The evidence that I intend to present to the Tribunal with
regard to the occupied countries of the West bears upon this aspect
of the systematizing of German criminal enterprises. We have
said that Germanization did not consist in the particular fact of
the imposition of German nationality or of German law, but in the
general imposition of the standards established by the Nazi regime,
and in a general way, of its philosophy. This aspect of Germani-
zation implies criminal activity at once as a means and as an end-
as a means, because the criminal means is very often highly effec-
tive, and we know that Nazism professes indifference in regard to
the immorality of the means; as an end, on the other hand, since
the final organization of Nazi society postulates the elimination of
elements hostile to it or which it regards as undesirable. Under
these conditions the criminal activities therefore do not appear as
accidents or regrettable incidents of war and of occupation. They
must not be ascribed to un-coordinated action on the part of
subordinates due to overzealousness or lack of discipline.
As the elimination of adversaries is recommended in principle,
it will be carried out in fact by the normal and regular functioning
of the administrative apparatus. If Nazism has a philosophy of
criminal action, it also has, properly speaking, a bureaucracy of
criminal activity.
The will which inspires this action is transmitted from one to
another of the chief and secondary centers of the state organism.
Each of the misdeeds or series of misdeeds of which we have told
you already or shall do so again, assumes the existence of a whole
series of transmissions: orders passed by superiors to inferiors,
requests for orders or reports passed by inferiors to superiors, and








5 Feb. 46


finally the relations maintained between corresponding echelons of
different services. This administrative organization of criminal
activity appears to us a very important datum for the determination
of responsibility and the proving of the charges formulated in the
Indictment against the higher leaders and against the group
organization.
The responsibility of any one of these superior'leaders in regard
to a determined criminal activity does not, indeed, require that an
exhibit or a document signed by the person himself be produced
or that it should involve him by name. The existence or non-
existence of such a document is a matter of chance.
The responsibility of the higher leader is directly established
by the fact that a criminal activity has been carried out adminis-
tratively by a service at whose head we find this leader.
This is all the more true in the case of a criminal activity
pursued over a long period of time, affecting a considerable number
of persons and whose development has given rise to a series of
complications, of consultations, and of solutions. There is in every
graded state service a continuous circuit of authority which is at
the same time a continuous circuit of responsibility. Moreover, con-
cerning charges made against organizations described as criminal
organizations, their criminal nature springs from the very fact that
their activity produces criminal results without there being any
lack of knowledge or modification of the normal rules of competence
and of functioning of their different organisms.
The collaboration which develops with a view to such an end
between a series of agents belonging to the organization both verti-
cally between the upper and lower grades and horizontally between
the different specialist departments implies no less forcibly the
existence of a collective criminal intent.
I shall speak first of the persecution of persons qualified as Jews
by the German code. The Tribunal already knows from other
evidence the Nazi doctrine on the subject of Jews. The historians
of the future will perhaps be able to determine how much of this
doctrine was the result of sincere fanaticism and how much was
the result of premeditated intent to deceive and mislead public
opinion.
It is certain that the Nazis found the theories which led them
to undertake the extermination of the Jews extremely convenient.
In the first place, anti-Semitism was an ever accessible means
of averting public criticism and anger. Moreover, it was a method
of psychological seduction that was very cleverly calculated to
appeal to simple minds. It made it possible to give a certain
amount of satisfaction to the most needy and underprivileged
person by convincing him that he was nevertheless of a superior








5 Feb. 46

quality and that he could despise and bully a whole category of
his fellow men. Finally, the Nazis obtained for themselves by this
means the possibility of whipping up the fanaticism of their
members by awakening and encouraging in them the criminal
instincts which are always latent to a certain extent in the souls
of men.
Indeed, it is a German scientist, Feuerbach, who developed the
theory that disposition to crime does not necessarily proceed from
long preparation. The criminal instinct present may spring to life
in an instant. The Nazis gave to the elite of their servants the
possibility of giving free rein to any inclination they might possess
for murder, looting, the most atrocious actions, and the most
hideous spectacles. In this way they fully assured themselves of
their obedience and of their zeal.
In order to avoid repetition, I shall not speak in detail of the
great sufferings endured by the persons qualified as Jews in France
and in the other countries of western Europe. I should like simply
to indicate here that it also caused great suffering to all the other
inhabitants of these countries to witness the abominable treatment
inflicted upon the Jews. Every Frenchman felt a deep affliction at
seeing the persecution of other Frenchmen, many of whom had
earned the gratitude of the fatherland. There is no one in Paris
who did not feel deeply ashamed to learn that the dying Bergson
had to be carried to the police commission to satisfy the census
requirements.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, you will forgive my interrupting
you, but the Tribunal feels that what you are now presenting to
us, however interesting-and it is interesting-is really an argument
and is not presenting evidence to us. And as we have already heard
an opening on behalf of the United States, an opening on behalf of
Great Britain, and an opening on behalf of France, we think that
you really ought to address yourself, if possible, to the evidence
which you are presenting, rather than to an argument.
I feel sure that, with your readiness to meet the wishes of the
Tribunal in expressing your presentation, you will perhaps be able
to do that.
M. FAURE: I understand perfectly the feeling of the Tribunal.
I simply intended to say a few words referring to the feeling shown
by Frenchmen in regard to these persecutions. But these words
have now been spoken, and I have just arrived at the object of the
demonstration which I am to present to the Tribunal with the docu-
ments. To show the Tribunal that the spirit of my presentation is in
accordance with the requirements of the Tribunal, I should like to
indicate that I am not presenting in this brief any document which
constitutes an individual story or even a collective story, and no








5 Feb. 46


document which comes from victims themselves, or even from
impartial persons.
I have tried to select only a certain number of German docu-
ments in order to furnish evidence of the execution of a criminal
enterprise consisting in the extermination of Jews in France and
the western countries.
I should like to observe first of all that the Nazi persecution of
the Jews included two sets of actions. This is important from the
point of view of the direct responsibility of the defendants. The
first category of actions is that resulting from the actual texts of
laws and regulations and the second category is that resulting from
the way in which these were applied.
As regards the texts of laws and regulations, it is evident that
these texts, which were issued by the German authorities-either
military authorities or commissioners of the Reich-constituted
particularly flagrant violations of the sovereignty of the occupied
countries.
I do not think that it is necessary for me to present these laws
and regulations in detail, for their main features are common
knowledge. In order to avoid reading, I have had two tables drawn
up and these are before the Tribunal in the document book,
although they are not documents properly speaking. These docu-
ments are to be found in an appendix. I should like to explain
what the two tables in this appendix show. The first table, in the
left-hand column, is arranged in chronological order; the other
columns indicate the names of the different countries. The Tribunal
will find arranged in chronological order the measures taken against
the Jews in different countries.
The second table classifies them according to subject-the concept
"Jews," economic measures, bullying and petty irritations, the
yellow star-and you will find in this table appropriate texts,
arranged according to subject.
I likewise present in the form of documents under Document
Number RF-1200 a certain number of decrees which were issued
in France concerning the Jews, and as these decrees are public
acts I shall simply ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of them.
I must now make this observation: These texts, taken as a
whole, considerably lowered the status of the Jews. Yet there are
no texts in existence of German decrees ordering the mass depor-
tation or murder of Jews. On the other hand, you must remember
that this legislation was developed by progressive stages up to 1942,
after which a pause ensued. It was during this pause that, as we
shall see, genuine administrative measures for the deportation and
consequently for the extermination of the Jews were introduced.







5 Feb. 46


This leads us to consider the fact that we are not dealing with
two separate actions-the legislative action, to be ascribed to the
military authorities, and the executive action, to be ascribed to the
police. This point of view, which regards the military authority
only as the author of the decrees and, therefore, as bearing a lesser
degree of criminal responsibility, would be false. In reality we are
looking at the development of a continued action which employs
by turns different means. The first means, that is to say, the legis-
lative means, are the necessary preparatory measures for putting
into force the other, or directly criminal means.
In order to put into practice their plan of extermination, the
Nazis had first of all to single out the Jewish elements in the
population and to separate them from the rest of the population of
the country. They had to be able to find the Jews easily and to find
them with decreased powers of self-defense and lacking in the
material, physical, and intellectual resources which would have
enabled them easily to avoid persecution.
They had to be able to destroy the whole of this doomed
element of the national community at a single blow, and for this
reason they had first to put an end to the constant interweaving
of interests and activities existing between all the categories of the
population. The Germans wished to prepare public opinion as far
as possible; and they could succeed in this by accustoming the
public to no longer seeing the Jews, as the latter were practically
forbidden to leave their houses.
I shall now present to the Tribunal a few documents bearing
on this general extermination deliberately undertaken by the
Nazis. I shall first present a series of documents, Documents
RF-1201, 1202, 1203, 1204, 1205, and 1206. I present these documents
with reference to a particular question, the emigration of the Jews
who tried to leave the occupied territories.
Inasmuch as the Germans made their desire to get rid of the
Jews apparent in every way, it would seem logical for them to look
favorably on the solution offered by emigration. On the contrary,
as we shall see, they forbade emigration and did so by a permanent
measure of general application. This is a proof of their will to
exterminate the Jews and a proof of the ferocity of the measures
employed. Here, to begin with, is Document Number RF-1201.
These documents are submitted to the Tribunal in a series of
photostatic copies for each member.
Document Number RF-1201 is a letter of 22 July 1941 emanating
from the Bordeaux service and requesting certain instructions from
Paris. I wish to read the beginning of this message:
"It has just been established that about one hundred and
fifty Jews are still in the territory of the District Command








5 Feb. 46


of St. Jean de Luz. At the time of our conversation with
the District Commander, Major Henkel, the latter asked
that these Jews should leave his district as quickly as possible.
At the same time, he pointed out that in his opinion it would
be far better to allow these Jews to emigrate rather than
to transfer them, to other departments or even to concen-
tration camps."
Here is the reply to this telegram. It is Document Number
RF-1202, dated 26 July 1941. The second sentence:
"We do not approve Major Henkel's point of view as the
Reich Security Main Office has stipulated again in a decree
the principle that the emigration of Jews residing in the
occupied territories of the West, and if possible also of those
living in Unoccupied France, is to be prevented."
Here is an exhibit which I submit as Document Number RF-1203
and which comes from the Military Command in France under date
of 4 February 1942. We are no longer dealing with the SS but
with the Military Command.
"The Reichsftihrer SS and Chief of the German Police at the
SR.M.d.I. has given orders that the emigration of Jews from
Germany or the occupied territories has to be prevented,
on principle."
The rest of the letter indicates that exceptions may be made.
This document establishes the collaboration between the Army and
the police, the Army assuring the execution of the orders given by
the Supreme Chief of Police.
I now submit Document Number RF-1205. This document
relates to the same subject, but I nevertheless submit it because
it shows the intervention of a third German authority, the diplo-
matic authority. This is a note of the German Consulate General
of Casablanca. I read the first sentence:
"The number of European emigrants hitherto leaving Casa-
blanca for the American continent only at long intervals
has greatly increased during the last month. On 15 March..."
The rest of the letter indicates that these are Jewish emigrants.
Document Number RF-1204, which is joined to this one,
constitutes a new report to the same effect from the Consulate
General Casablanca, under the date of 8 June 1942. I read the last
paragraph of this document:
"The emigrants leaving Casablanca are, for the most part,
Jewish families from Germany and Central Europe and also
some French Jews. There is no reason to suspect that young
people fit for military service have left Casablanca with the
avowed intention of entering military service on the side of







5 Feb. 46


the enemy. It is left to your discretion to inform the military
authorities about this."
I have quoted this document to show that there was no question
of a military emigration which they would have had an interest in
preventing, and also to show that this document would normally
have concerned firstly the German Embassy, to which it was
addressed, and secondly the military services which it suggests
should be informed.
Now, what is the sequel to these two communications? The
sequel is shown by Document Number RF-1206, of which the two
documents just read constitute appendixes. This Document RF-1206
emanates from Berlin, from the Reich Security Main Office, and is
addressed to the Chief of Police for France and Belgium.
"Attached are two copies of confidential reports from the
German Consulate General in Casablanca to the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs for your information.
"You are asked to give your special attention to the state of
affairs described and to prevent, as far as possible, an
emigration of this kind."
I therefore draw three conclusions. Firstly, as I have indicated,
the Nazis opposed the emigration of the Jews, although they claim
that they are undesirable. Secondly, this decision was made at a
higher level and with a general application. Thirdly, all the
services, the police, the Army, and the Department of Foreign
Affairs intervened to ensure the execution of these barbarous orders.
I now present to the Tribunal Document Number RF-1207. This
document is a voluminous German report. It is in fact 70 pages
in length. It was found in the German archives in Paris. This
document is interleaved with a series of graphs, drawings, and
models of census cards. It is mimeographed, and the copy which
we present does not bear the author's signature, but simply
the indication "SS Obersturmffihrer." This is Obersturmftihrer
Dannecker, who played an important role in regulating Jewish
questions in France and who was chief of this bureau.
THE PRESIDENT: That fact which you have just stated to us,
has that been verified by the French authorities, namely, that it
was a captured document in Paris?
M. FAURE: According to the report submitted to the Tribunal,
we took possession of these documents at the archives of the Sifret6
National. They were among the documents found in the German
offices at the time of the liberation. Besides, I point out to the
Tribunal that the other documents produced do bear the signatures
of the German officials. This report is the only document without








5 Feb. 46


a signature. The fact that it was written by Dannecker will be
proved by other documents, which constitute a r6sume of it.
I shall not read to the Tribunal the 70 pages of this report, but
I should like to read certain paragraphs which I think may interest
the Tribunal. Here is the first page. To begin with, it is entitled,
"The Jewish Question in France and Its Treatment. Paris, 1 July
1941." First page:
"Final solution of the Jewish question-this is the heading
and the goal for the work of those services of the Sipo and
SD which are handling the Jewish problem in France. It
has always been clear that practical results cannot be
achieved without a study of the political situation in general
as well as of the situation of the Jews.
"The following pages, next to giving a general draft of our
planning, are to explain the results achieved up to now as
well as the immediate aims.
"Everything touching the principle must be considered from
the following point of view: Since the chief of the Sipo and
SD has been charged by the Fiihrer with preparing the
solution of the Jewish question in Europe, his offices in
France are to carry out the preliminary work in order to be
able to serve abroad as the absolutely reliable agents of the
European Commissioner for Jewish Affairs, at the appointed
time."
I shall now point out to the Tribunal the chief headings of the
paragraphs in order to pursue the development of the idea and of
the operations of this German office.
THE PRESIDENT: I was considering, M. Faure, why this docu-
ment has not got any identifying mark upon it. I mean, of course,
we do not doubt for an instant what you say to us is true, but at
the same time it is not the correct way to do it-for us to have
to rely on counsel's statement as to the nature of the evidence.
And there is nothing on the document itself to show that it was
captured in Paris or to show what it is except what it states.
M. FAURE: Mr. President, the joining of this document to the
file of the French Prosecution was done by a report made in Paris,
which I shall present before the Tribunal, because as this report
concerns a certain number of documents, it was not especially
joined to the file of this particular document. On the other hand,
when I received these documents from the police, I did not wish
to write anything on the document or to place it under a seal, for
I wished to avoid altering the normal appearance of the document
in any way.







5 Feb. 46


I must state that if the Tribunal prefers not to receive this docu-
ment inasmuch as I do recognize that it does not bear a signature,
I shall not submit the document for I have a second report by
Dannecker which is signed by him. I submitted both in order to
make clear the continuity of the operation.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, in the case of the documents
presented by the United States, the captured documents by the
United States, as Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe reminded us the other
day, there is an affidavit, I think, of Major Coogan, which states
that all those documents of a certain series, PS, L, R, and various
other series, were all captured in Germany by the United States
forces. If there were such an affidavit with reference to documents
captured in Paris which might be identified by some letter such as
PS or some letter similar to that, the matter would seem to us to
be in order. But when a document is presented to us which has no
identifying mark upon it at all, we are then in the position which
we are in now of simply hearing the statement of counsel, which,
of course, is not evidence that the document was found in Paris or
found somewhere else; and therefore it occurs to me that one way
that it might be dealt with would be an affidavit by somebody who
knows the facts that this document and any other documents of a
similar sort were captured in the archives of the German forces
in Paris or elsewhere.
M. FAURE: I could very easily produce before the Tribunal the
affidavit which it requests. I say that if we do not have it in this
form it is because our habitual procedure is not exactly the same as
that which may be followed in the United States. In fact, as the
Charter of the Tribunal indicates that the Prosecution was charged
with the collection of evidence, we ourselves have authorized
magistrates in our service to look for documents in the archives
of the police and if the Tribunal wishes I shall ask the police in
addition for attestation of the seizure of these documents in the
German archives. I shall then ask the Tribunal to allow me to
produce this affidavit in a few days' time, so that I can ask the
police for it.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, the Tribunal think that we might
admit the document, subject to your undertaking that you would
do that in the course of a day or two.
M. FAURE: I cannot guarantee that I will have this document
in a day or two.
THE PRESIDENT: I wasn't stressing the number of days. If
you will undertake to do it that is sufficient.
M. FAURE: Certainly, Mr. President. I shall go on then with
the analysis of the Dannecker report. The first chapter is called,







5 Feb. 46


"History of the Jews in France." I shall not read it. It includes a
series of ideas on a very elementary intellectual level. The following
chapter is entitled,' "Organization of the Jews in France." It
includes a first part under the heading, "Before 14 June 1940."
This part does not seem to me interesting. The second part of this
chapter is entitled, "Operations of the Sipo and the SD (SS Einsatz-
kommando Paris) against these Organizations and against Leading
Jewish Personages." The report comes from the SS Hauptsturm-
fiihrer Hagen. I think I might read the beginning:
"From a study of the records collected in Germany, Austria,
Czechoslovakia, and Poland, it was possible to conclude that
the center of Judaism in Europe and with it the chief lines of
communication to overseas must be sought in France. Real-
izing this, first of all, the offices of great Jewish organizations
already known, such as World Jewish Congress"-then follows
an enumeration-"have been searched and sealed."
Beginning with Page 14, the report attempts to demonstrate the
existence of a bond between Judaism and Catholicism. It presents
the results of searches made in the homes of various persons: The
Rothschild family, the former minister, Mandel, the press attach
at the British Embassy, and other persons, including the lawyers
Moro-Giafferi and Torres. The end of this chapter is as indicated,
Page 16, last paragraph:
"To sum up, we can say on the basis of the records which
have been collected, that France, where Judaism was linked
with Catholicism and with certain important politicians, was
its last bulwark on the continent of Europe."
The following section has the title, "Life of the Jews after the
Entry of the Germans." The text describes the way in which the
Germans created a central and unified organization of the Jews and
imposed it on them. This is the beginning of the plan which I have
just described to the Tribunal, which consisted in singling out the
Jewish elements in the population, massing them together, and
separating them entirely from the rest of the population. I should
like to read the first paragraph, for the analysis of it is very
important:
"After the Armistice and the return to normal life it appeared
that almost all the Jewish associations had ceased to exist
(in the absence of responsible officials and financial supporters
who had fled into the unoccupied zone) while there was a
growing need for aid. The progressive German anti-Jewish
legislation caused a steady aggravation of the Jewish social
problems. Generally considered, these circumstances should
have provided a favorable ground in France for a Jewish
all-round organization."







5 Feb. 46


In this text there is a very subtle idea. We note that the
German legislation, that is to say, the legislation of the Military
Command, brought about a great aggravation of social problems;
and we conclude that this will facilitate the general organization
of the Jews., This reasoning confirms, I think, what I said to the
Tribunal a while ago, namely, that we were faced with a whole
system of measures, the first of which were intended to facilitate
the separation of the Jewish community which was to be exter-
minated.
Dannecker then explains how a co-ordination committee was
created. I skip the details and come to Page 21, Paragraph 2:
"An agreement has been made with the office of the Com-
mander of Greater Paris that, in the future, Jewish organi-
zations may address themselves to the German services only
by way of the Committee of Jewish Co-ordination. This
resulted in an enforced amalgamation of all minor Jewish
organizations.
"Moreover, an agreement has been made with the Paris
Office for National Relief (Bureau du Secours National) that,
after the expiration of a period of 4 weeks, no Jew can any
longer be fed and housed by National Relief. The S.N. will
appoint a special representative for controlling the co-
ordination committee on this matter. The blocking of Jewish
accounts will compel the Jews in the very near future to
ask that the co-ordination committee be authorized to receive
gifts intended for it from these blocked holdings. The
granting of this request will demonstrate the actual existence
of an enforced Jewish union.
"As can be seen this question too will be solved in the
manner desired, even if it is a 'cold manner.'"
The following chapter bears the title, "Political Activities of
the Office for Jewish Affairs of the Sipo and of the SD." I should
like to read some passages from this:
"After the promulgation of the Jewish statute of 3 October
1940 by the French Government, a certain slowing-down
occurred in the handling of the Jewish question in France;
and for this reason the Office for Jewish Affairs worked out
plans for a Central Jewish Bureau. The plan was discussed
with the military administration on 31 January 1941. The
latter showed no interest; and, as the question was a purely
political one, it was referred to the SD in agreement with the
German Embassy."
This is followed by an analysis of various discussions with the
French Commissioner Vallat, with Ambassador Abetz, and with







5 Feb. 46


De Brinon and indicates the various demands presented by the
Germans to the French authorities. I pass now to Page 26, the last
paragraph:
"The proposal of the Office for Jewish Affairs has been
referred to SS Brigadefiihrer Dr. Best by SS Obersturmbann-
fiihrer Dr. Knochen. This proposal suggests that a liaison
office ought to be created which should comprise the repre-
sentatives of the four offices cited above. The management
was to be in the hands of the Director of the Office for
Jewish Affairs of the SD in compliance with the rules
stipulating the competency of the OKW, the OKH, and
the Commander in France. As a result of this suggestion, a
conference was held on 10 June 1941. Those who attended
were: Ministerial Counsellor Dr. Stortz for the Commander in
France"-then German titles follow which have not been
translated into French and which are a little hard for me to
read-"Dr. Blancke, (Economic Service), Counsellor to the
Embassy Dr. Zeitschel (German' Embassy), and SS Ober-
sturmfiihrer Dannecker- The representatives of the military
administration stated clearly that the competence of the SD
resulted from the decrees of the OKW and of the OKH as
well as from the last confidential decree of 25 March 1941 of
the Commander in France. Dr. Stortz declared that for
various reasons it would be better to abstain from creating a
special liaison bureau, under the direction of the SD. SS Ober-
sturmfiihrer Dannecker explained for his part that we are
concerned with the final solution of the question only; and,
therefore, the SD must have the possibility of carrying out
the orders given by the RSHA."
THE PRESIDENT: M. Faure, can't you summarize this? It is a
very long document, and we have so many documents and so much
evidence in connection with the Jews already.
M. FAURE: I shall simply read one sentence on the same page:
"The result of the conference was the decision to meet every
week at the Office for Jewish Affairs. In the course of these
meetings they would discuss in common all their aims, expe-
riences, and objections."
I think it is interesting to note these regular conferences held every
week and in which representatives of the military services, the
embassy, and the police took part.
The following pages of the report can be passed over. They
contain remarks about Vallat, notes relating to the establishment of
files concerning the Jews, and an analysis of the German ordinances.
This is important as showing that these ordinances have their place







5 Feb. 46


in the general plan. Dannecker likewise speaks of the Anti-Jewish
Institute, and observes that this institute was financed by the Ger-
man Embassy.
The report goes on to give statistical notes and concludes with
a statement of which I shall read only one paragraph:
"I hope I have succeeded in giving an idea of the present
situation, and a summary of the manifold difficulties which
had to be surmounted. I cannot help but acknowledge in this
connection the really friendly and thorough support which
has been given to our work by Ambassador Abetz and his
representative, Minister Schleier, as well as by SS Sturm-
bannfiihrer and Counsellor to the Embassy Dr. Zeitschel."
To meet the desire of the Tribunal, I shall not submit all the
documents included in my document file. I shall therefore pass now
to Document Number RF-1210. I have not submitted Documents
RF-1208 and 1209. This Document Number RF-1210 is a new report
of Dannecker's. It is dated 22 February 1942. I submit it to show
the regular and progressive character of the activities of the Ger-
man offices. This is a letter of the 22d of February 1942. I shall
read simply the headings, and I shall quote two passages.
The first heading is "Task of the Sipo and of the SD in France";
the second is "Card Index of Jews"; the third, "French Commission
for Jewish Questions"; the fourth, "The French Anti-Jewish Police."
The fifth is entitled "Activity." I shall quote this paragraph:
"Up to now three operations have been carried out against
the Jews of Paris on a large scale. On each occasion the local
office has been responsible for selecting the Jews who were
to be arrested, as well as for the preparation and technical
organization of the operations. The Jewish card index de-
scribed above has considerably facilitated the organization of
all these operations."
The next heading is "Anti-Jewish Institute"; next is "Compulsory
Jewish Amalgamation"; and finally "Tuesday Conferences." I shall
read Paragraph 2:
"A conference has been held every Tuesday since the middle
of 1941"-Page 5 of the document-"attended by representa-
tives of the following offices: 1) Military Command, Adminis-
trative Staff, Administrative Section; 2) Administrative Staff,
Police Group; 3) Administrative Staff, Economic Section;
4) German Embassy in Paris; 5) Operations Staff West of
Reichsleiter Rosenberg.
"The result of these conferences was that (of course, for very
rare exceptions caused by outsiders) the policy regarding Jews







5 Feb. 46


in the occupied territories can be followed on absolutely uni-
form lines."
THE PRESIDENT: We will break off now.


JA recess was taken.]

M. FAURE: Gentlemen, in order not to prolong the discussion too
much, I should like, if it please the Tribunal, to submit as docu-
ments all the documents in my book, but to read and analyze only
some of the most important.
I shall then pass over Documents RF-1211, 1212, 1213, and 1214.
I should like, however, to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the
end of the mimeographed French text. As the letter "K" appeared
on the document, the word "Keitel" was written in, quite wrongly.
I should like to say that this does not occur in the document. I
should like to read this Document Number RF-1215, which is very
short:
"Secret-13 May 1942. To the Chief of Area A.
"In accordance with instructions from OKH, Quartermaster
General,. the words 'dispatch to the East' must not be used in
announcements referring to the forced evacuation of the
population, in order to avoid a defamation of the occupied
regions in the East. The same applies to the expression 'de-
portation,' this word being too strongly reminiscent of the
banishment to Siberia at the time of the Czars. In all publi-
cations and correspondence we must use the phrase 'dispatch
for forced labor.'"
Document Number RF-1216, which I offer in evidence now, is
another memorandum from Dannecker, dated 10 March 1942. The
purpose of this memorandum is defined as "Deportation from France
of 5,000 Jews." The quotation of the title suffices to indicate the
subject of the document. Dannecker alludes to a meeting of the
Office for Jewish Affairs, a meeting which took place at the RSHA
in Berlin on 4 March 1942 at which it was decided that negotiations
would be undertaken for the deportation of 5,000 Jews from France.
The memorandum specifies Paragraph 4, second sentence:
"Jews of French nationality must be deprived of their na-
tionality before being deported, or at the latest on the day of
the deportation itself."
In a subsequent passage of the document Dannecker explains
that the expenses of this deportation would have to be paid by the
French Jews, since in the case of impending mass deportations of








5 Feb. 46


Jews from Czechoslovakia provisions had been made for the Slo-
vakian Government to pay a sum of 500 marks for each Jew
deported and, in addition, to bear the cost of deportation.
I now offer in evidence Document Number RF-1217, which is a
memorandum of 15 June 1942 headed "Other Transports of Jews
Coming from France." It is still dealing with the same operation,
but I believe it is interesting to submit these documents without
reading them, since they show the extremely complex and regular
working of this administration whose purpose was to arrest and
deport innocent people. The beginning of the memorandum alludes
to a new conference held in Berlin on 11 June 1942 and attended by
those responsible for the Jewish departments in Brussels and The
Hague, as well as by Dannecker himself. In the fourth paragraph
on Page 1 of this document I read the last sentence of the paragraph,
"Ten percent of Jews unfit for labor may be included in these
convoys." This sentence shows that the purpose of this deportation
was not merely to procure labor, even if it involved labor to be ex-
terminated by work.
I should like also to read the fifth paragraph, which contains
only one sentence:
"It was agreed that 15,000 Jews should be expelled from
Holland, 10,000 from Belgium, and up to 100,000 from France,
including the unoccupied zone."
The last part of the memorandum relates to the technical ex-
ecution. It alludes first to negotiations with the transport service to
obtain the necessary trains. It then alludes to the necessity of
inducing the de facto French Government to take steps to deprive
of their nationality all Jews resident outside of French territory.
This would mean that deported Jews would no longer be considered
as French citizens. Lastly the French State was to pay the cost of
transport and various expenses connected with the deportation.
I now present Document Number RF-1218, which is a memo-
randum dated 16 June 1942, entitled "The Transportation of Jews
from France: Subject, Order from the SS Obersturmbannfithrer
Eichmann to SS Hauptsturmffihrer Dannecker, 11 June 1942." The
first three paragraphs of this memorandum show that there was
difficulty in transporting deportees, because of the large quantity of
railway stock necessary for the preparation of the eastern campaign.
I should like to read the last two paragraphs of this letter:
"We are now carrying out a large-scale reorganization of the
German transport agencies in France. The main feature of
this is that the numerous organizations existing hitherto will
be taken over by the Reich Ministry of Transportation, which
will be responsible for them. This reorganization, which was
ordered without notice, takes a few days to complete. Before







5 Feb. 46


that date it is impossible to give approximate information as
to whether the transportation of Jews can be carried out in
the near future or at a later date, on the scale anticipated,
or even partially."
These remarks seemed to me interesting as defining the respon-
sibility of the Reich Cabinet. Such a large undertaking as the
deportation of so many Jews required the intervention of many dif-
ferent administrative services, and we see here that the success of
this enterprise depended on the reorganization of transport on the
responsibility of the Reich Ministry of Transportation. It is certain
that a ministerial department of this kind, which, is above all a
technical department, intervened to help carry out that general
enterprise of deportation.
I now submit Document Number RF-1219 which is a memoran-
dum by Dr. Knochen dated 15 June 1942. This memorandum is
entitled, "Technical Execution of New Convoys of Jews from France."
Not to take too much time I shall read only the first paragraph of
this memorandum:
"To avoid any conflict with the operation in progress with
regard to 'French workmen for Germany,' mention will be
made only of Jewish resettlement. This version is confirmed
by the fact that the convoys may include entire families and
therefore the possibility is left open of sending at a later date
for the children under 16, who were left behind."
The remainder of the memorandum, like all these texts, which are
so extremely painful from a moral point of view, continues to
discuss the question of the deportation of the Jews in round figures
as if all these human beings were mere goods and chattels.
I now submit Document Number RF-1220, which. is a letter from
the German Embassy in Paris, from Dr. Zeitschel, dated 27 June
1942. I should like to read this letter, which is thus expressed:
"Following my conversation with Hauptsturmfiihrer Dannecker
on 27 June, during which he stated that he needed, as soon as
possible, 50,000 Jews from the free zone for deportation to the
East and that something had to be done to support the
operations of Darquier de Pellepoix, the Commissioner Gen-
eral on Jewish questions, I immediately informed Ambas-
sador Abetz and Counsellor Rahn of this matter. Counsellor
Rahn is to meet President Laval this afternoon and he prom-
ised to discuss with him at once the handing over of these
50,000 Jews, demanding at the same time plenary powers for
Darquier de Pellepoix, in conformity with the laws already
promulgated, and the immediate granting of the credits
promised him.







5 Feb. 46


"As unfortunately I shall be away from Paris for a week, I
request, in view of the urgency of the question, that Haupt-
sturmfiihrer Dannecker contact Counsellor Rahn directly, on
Monday, 29 June, or Tuesday, 30 June, at the latest, to learn
Laval's reply."
I thought it useful to read this letter, for it shows the respon-
sibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Defendant Ribben-
trop in this abominable matter of handing over 50,000 Jews as
required. It is quite evident that such a step cannot be taken by a
counsellor at an embassy unknown to his minister and without the
latter's full knowledge and consent.
I submit now Document Number RF-1221. It is a memorandum
dated 26 June 1942 of which I shall give only the title, "Directives
for the Deportation of Jews."
Now I come to Document Number RF-1222, of which I shall also
read only the title, "Conference with the Specialists for Jewish
Questions of the Security Police, Command of the Section IV-J on
30 June 1942. Deportation to Auschwitz of Jews from the Occupied
Territories."
In this memorandum Dannecker again alludes to the conference
which took place at the RSHA, according to which 50,000 Jews were
to be transferred. There follows a list of trains, the stations in
which they were to be assembled, and a request for reports.
I now submit Document Number RF-1223. It is a memorandum,
dated 1 July 1942, summing up a conference between Dannecker and
Eichmann, who, as we already know, was in Berlin but had to come
to Paris on that occasion. "Subject: Departmental Conference with
SS Hauptsturmfiihrer Dannecker, Paris, Concerning the Impending
Evacution from France." It still deals with the preparation of the
great operation envisaged.
I now submit Document Number RF-1224, of which I read only
the title and the date, "4 July 1942: Directives for a Major Round-up
of Jews in Paris."
I now offer in evidence Document Number RF-1225, which is a
Dannecker memorandum dated 6 July 1942. Subject: "Deportation of
Jews from France." It concerns a conference held with represent-
atives of French authorities. We see in the document the expression
"Judenmaterial," which was translated in a roundabout way by the
words "Jewish livestock."
I now submit Document Number RF-1226. I should like to read,
if the Tribunal please, the first paragraph of this document which is
very revealing both in regard to the collaboration with the transport
services and the horrifying mentality of the Nazi authorities. The
memorandum is the sequel to a telephone conversation between the
signatory R6thke and the SS Obersturmfiihrer Eichmann at Berlin:







5 Feb. 46


"The SS Obersturmfiihrer Eichmann in Berlin telephoned on
14 July 1942 about 1900 hours. He wished to know why the
train provided for the transport of 15 July 1942 had been
cancelled. I replied that originally the star bearers in the
provinces were to be arrested too but that by virtue of a new
agreement with the French Government only stateless Jews
were to be arrested to begin with.
"The train due to leave on 15 July 1942 had to be cancelled
because, according to information received by the SD Kom-
mando at Bordeaux, there were only 150 stateless Jews in
Bordeaux. There was no time to find enough other Jews to
fill this train. SS Obersturmfiihrer Eichmann replied that it
was a question of prestige. They had to conduct lengthy
negotiations about these trains with the Reichsminister of
Transportation, which turned out successfully; and now Paris
cancels a train. Such a thing had never happened to him
before. The matter was highly shameful. He did not wish to
report it to SS Gruppenfiihrer Miiller right now, for the
blame would fall on his own shoulders. He was reflecting
whether he would not do without France as an evacuation
country altogether."
I now submit Document Number RF-1227, which gives statistics
indicating that up to the 2d of September 1942 27,069 Jews were
evacuated and that by the end of October a total figure of 52,069
might be reached. They are anxious to accelerate 'the pace and to
attack also the Jews in the unoccupied zone of France.
I now submit Document Number RF-1228. It is also an account
of a conference where there were invited representatives of the
French authorities. I should like to read only the last paragraph of
this document:
"On the occasion of the meeting which took place on 28 Au-
gust 1942 in Berlin, it was stated that most of the European
countries are much nearer to a final solution of the Jewish
problem than France. In fact, these countries began much
earlier. We then must catch up with them in many matters
between now and 31 October 1942."
I now submit Document Number RF-1229 without reading it. It
is a memorandum by Dr. Knochen on this same subject of de-
portation dated 31 December 1942.
I now submit Document Number RF-1230, which is a memoran-
dum dated 6 March 1943, headed, "Ref: Present Situation of the
Jewish Question in France." In the first part of this document, the
deportations are stated to have reached a total of 49,000 Jews as on
6 March 1943. This is followed by a statement of the nationalities,
which are extremely varied, of a certain number of Jews who were








5 Feb. 46


deported in addition to the French Jews. Paragraph 3 of this
memorandum is headed, "Attitude of the Italians with Regard to the
Jewish Question." I shall read only the first and the last lines of
this long paragraph:
"The attitude adopted up to now in the French territory oc-
cupied by Italy must be changed by all means if the Jewish
problem is to be solved. A few conspicuous cases...."
I break off the quotation here. These conspicuous cases were cases
in which the Italians opposed the arrest of Jews in the zone occupied
by them.
I now read the last paragraph:
"A.A. has been informed by the RSHA (Eichmann) about
proceedings of the Italians."-A.A. appears to be the initials of
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and this is confirmed by the
following sentence. I continue the quotation-"The Minister
of Foreign Affairs, Ribbentrop, meant to discuss, in negoti-
ations with the Duce, the attitude adopted by the Italians
with regard to the Jewish question. We do not yet know the
results of these discussions."
I shall not submit Documents RF-1231 and RF-1232. I pass then
to the last documents which I want to present to the Tribunal.
These documents relate more specifically to the deportation of
children.
I submit Document Number RF-1233, which is a memorandum
by Dannecker dated 21 July 1942. I shall read Paragraph 2:
"The question of deporting children has been examined with
SS Obersturmbannfiihrer Eichmann. He decided that as soon
as deportations to the Government General could be resumed,
convoys of children could be sent by rail. SS Obersturmfiihrer
Nowak promised to arrange about six convoys to the Govern-
ment General at the end of August or the beginning of Sep-
tember, which may comprise all sorts of Jews (also disabled
and old Jews)."
Now I offer in evidence Document Number RF-1234. It is a
memorandum dated 13 August 1942. Before pointing out the interest
of this document I remind the Tribunal that I have already sub-
mitted Document Number RF-1219 and in that document there was
a formula which I recall, namely, "The possibility is left open of
sending at a later date for children under 16 who were left behind."
The Nazis wished to give the impression that they deported entire
families at the same time or at least that they did not deport whole
trainloads of children. To give this impression, they invented a
device which is wholly incredible unless you actually see it in black








5 Feb. 46

and white: the mingling of children and adults in definite pro-
portions. I read Paragraph 4 of this-Document Number RF-1234:
"The Jews arriving from the unoccupied zone will be mingled
at Drancy with Jewish children now at Pithiviers and Beaune-
la-Rolande, so that out of a total of 700 at least 500 Jewish
adults 300 to 500 Jewish children will be allotted. According
to instructions of the Reich Security Main Office, no trains
containing Jewish children only are to leave."
I read the next sentence too:
"Leguay has been told that 13 trainloads of Jews would also
leave Drancy in September and that Jewish children from the
unoccupied zone could be handed over."
I now submit the last document of the series dealing with the
Jewish question, Document Number RF-1235. I am going to read it,
as it is very short.
"6 April 1944, Lyons, 2010 hours. Subject: Home for Jewish
Children at Izieu, Ain.
"The home for Jewish children, 'Child Colony,' at Izieu (Ain)
was raided this morning and a total of 41 children aged from
3 to 13 were apprehended. Moreover, the arrest of the entire
Jewish personnel, numbering 10 in all and including 5 women
was successfully carried out. Money or other property could
not be seized. The convoy for Drancy will leave on
7 April 1944."
This document also bears a memorandum written by hand and
couched in the following terms:
"Matter discussed in the presence of Dr. V. B. and Haupt-
sturmfiihrer Brunner. Dr. V. B., stated that in cases of this
kind, special measures were provided for the billeting of the
children by the Obersturmfiihrer Rbthke. The Hauptsturm-
fiihrer Brunner stated that he knew of no such instructions
or plans and that on principle he did not approve of such
special measures. In this case he would also follow the lines
of the usual regulations for deportation. For the moment I
made no decision affecting the principle in this respect."
For me what is even more striking and more horrible than the
concrete fact of removing these children is the administrative color
given to the proceedings, the report made through official channels,
the meeting at which different officials placidly discussed the matter
as if it were part of the normal business of the department. All the
administrative mechanism of the State-I am speaking of the Nazi
State-was set in motion on such an occasion and for such a purpose.
It is a perfect illustration of the word used by Dannecker in his
report: "The cold manner."








5 Feb. 46


I now present the Tribunal with a continuation under the same
head, including a certain number of documents which have been
collected in order to show in accordance with our general line of
presentation the perpetual interference of the German adminis-
trative services.
As I am a little behind my timetable, I shall give the numbers
of only those documents which I should like to offer in evidence and
which I have no time to describe. These documents will be num-
bered Documents RF-1238 to 1249.
I would like to read to the Tribunal only the document which
bears the Number RF-1243, which is interesting as showing the
organic character and the juridical claims of the German organ-
izations. I shall quote a few sentences from this document:
"In the report made by the Chief of the Administrative Staff
on experience concerning the arrest from 7 to 14 December
1941 it was proposed to evade the execution of hostages in the
future by having the death sentences passed through court-
martial proceedings."
I shall skip the following two lines and continue:
"The reprisal will be carried out by pronouncing and inflicting
capital punishment on prisoners who would normally be
sentenced only to imprisonment, or else be acquitted alto-
gether. To influence the discretion of the judge concerning the
meting out of punishment for committing murder or sabotage
would answer the formalistic legal reasoning of the French."
I should like now, in the last paragraph of my presentation, to
submit documentary evidence in connection with criminal actions of
which the Tribunal has not yet been informed and which involve
the personal responsibility of certain of the defendants present here.
I must remind you that the criminal actions of the Nazis took
extremely varied forms which have already been put before the
Tribunal at some length. A particularly new and unusual mani-
festation of this consisted in causing crimes to be committed by
organized bands of murderers, who were ordinary criminals, under
conditions which made it appear as if these crimes were committed
by ordinary bandits or even by resistance organizations which they
tried in this way to dishonor.
Such crimes were committed in all the occupied countries; but
the precautions taken, with good reason, to camouflage them some-
times make it difficult to trace back the responsibility for these
crimes to the ringleaders, the leaders of the Nazi State. We were
able to find this evidence in the records of proceedings instituted in
Denmark. All the elements are contained in Danish reports of
which we were able to get possession only a short time ago.







5 Feb. 46


I can indicate the position very briefly. It concerns a series of
murders which were committed in Denmark and which were known
as "compensatory" or "clearing" murders. This definition is ex-
plained ...
Counsel for the Defense tells me that there is an error in trans-
lation in the last document which I read-RF-1243. He says that
"acquittal" is not the correct translation of "Begnadigung." As I do
not know German, it is quite possible that this error exists and that
the word means "pardon."
THE PRESIDENT: Which part of the document?
M. FAURE: This error really exists. I hope the Tribunal will
excuse me, because there is a considerable amount of translation
work. I shall read line 14 of Document Number RF-1243: "...who
would normally be sentenced to imprisonment only or else be ac-
quitted altogether." According to Counsel for the Defense that
should be, "... who would normally be sentenced to imprisonment
only or else be pardoned." The construction of the sentence does
not seem to be as good when this word is used, which explains the
error in translation if there was one. In any case, I think it is
sufficient to note the instructions given: The imposition of "capital
sentences" in cases where only a sentence of imprisonment would
normally have been justified.
To come back to the subject I was discussing, I should like to
make the situation clear by reading the definition given in the
Danish report. It is found on Page 19 of the supplementary mem-
orandum of the Danish Government. This document was sub-
mitted last Saturday under Number RF-901. As it is very bulky, I
see that it is not included in the document book but that the
passages which I cite can be found in my brief.
The page numbers start again at the end of this brief, and I am
now on Page 3 in the last series of numbers. I quote Page 19 of the
Danish report:
"From New Year 1944 onwards, a large number of persons,
most of them well known, were murdered at intervals which
grew steadily shorter. The doorbell would ring, for instance,
and one or two men would ask to speak to them. The moment
they appeared at the door..."
THE PRESIDENT: I do not have it. Is it in this dossier of the
-administrative and juridical organization of the criminal actions?
Under which document?
M. FAURE: It is not in the document book. It is in the dossier
of the brief.
THE PRESIDENT: No. In the dossier? Which part of the dossier?







5 Feb. 46


M. FAURE: It is the last part of the dossier. The numbering of
the pages starts again after Page 76. If the Tribunal will turn to
Page 76, the page numbers begin again after that with Page 1.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have it.
M. FAURE: I read from Page 19 of the report, the extract re-
produced on Page 3:
"From New Year 1944 onwards, a large number of persons,
-most of them well known, were murdered at intervals which
grew steadily shorter. The doorbell would ring, for instance,
and one or two men would ask to speak to them. The moment
they appeared at the door they were shot by these unknown
persons. Or, someone would pretend to be ill and go to a
doctor during the latter's consulting hour. When the doctor
entered the room, the unknown shot him. At other times,
unknown men would force their way into a house and kill
the owner in front of his wife and his children, or else a man
would be ambushed in the street by civilians and shot."
I do not need to read the following paragraph. I go on reading
at the last paragraph on Page 19:
"As the number of victims increased it was borne in upon the
Danes, to their amazement, that there was a certain political
motive behind all these murders; for they realized that in one
way or another the Germans were the instigators.
"After the capitulation of the German forces in Denmark,
investigations by the Danish police established the fact that
all these murders, running into hundreds, were in reality
committed on the direct orders of the supreme authorities
and with the active collaboration of Germans who occupied
the highest positions in Denmark."
I end my quotation here and I shall summarize what follows:
The Danish authorities were able to clear up these criminal affairs,
267 in number; and they are analyzed in the official Danish report
and the documents attached to it. These acts consisted not only
in actual crimes but also in other criminal activities, notably
explosions. It was established that all these acts were committed
by bands, consisting of Germans and some Danes, who constituted
real groups of bandits but -who acted, as I am going to prove to
you, on orders from the highest quarters.
The Danish report contains in particular the detailed story of
the investigation made into the first of these crimes, whose victim
was Kaj Munk, the well-known Danish poet and pastor of a
parish. The crime was confessed by the men who carried it out.
I summarize the document in order not to take too much time.
The pastor was taken from his home, forced into a vehicle, and







5 Feb. 46


killed on the highway. His body was found next day with a sign
pinned on it with the words, "Swine, you worked for Germany
just the same."
The Tribunal sees how many similar crimes were committed in
the vilest possible way. Now one of the first things discovered
was that the members of the gangs of bandits who committed these
different crimes had all received a personal letter of congratulation
from Himmler. The text of this letter, which was found on one of
the murderers, constitutes Appendix 14 of the Danish report; and,
on the other hand, we have here photostatic copies with Himmler's
signature.
But these extraordinary crimes involve in the most incredible
way other persons responsible besides Himmler, himself. The
Danish police were able to arrest Gunther Pancke, who exercised
the functions of Chief of Police in Denmark from 1 November 1943.
The inquiry was established by the tribunal of first instance in
Copenhagen and is in the Danish report. It contains an account
of the interrogation of Ginther Pancke on 25 August 1945. It is
necessary for me to read to the Tribunal an extract from this
document, which involves several of the defendants. I quote:
"On 30 December 1943 Pancke and Best were present at a
meeting at the FUihrer's headquarters attended by Hitler,
Himmler, Kaltenbrunner, General Von Hannecken, Keitel,
Jodl, Schmundt, and others. This agrees with Best's diary for
30 December 1943. There is a copy of this. A representative
of the German Foreign Office also attended; but Pancke does
not remember his name nor whether the person in question
made a speech. During the first part of the meeting, Hitler
was in a very bad temper and everything led one to believe
that the information that he had obtained concerning the
situation in Denmark was rather exaggerated."
I should like to skip the following page, which is not indis-
pensable and go on to Page 14 of my brief. In the passage which
I am omitting, the witness Pancke reports that he and Dr. Best
advised that saboteurs be fought in a legal way. He also points
out on Page 14 that Hitler-I quote-". .. was strongly opposed to
the proposals of Pancke and Best, declaring there could be absolutely
no question of judging saboteurs before a tribunal." He then said
that such methods would lead to those condemned being considered
as heroes.
I resume the quotation on Page 15, Line 3:
"There was only one way of dealing with saboteurs, namely,
to kill them, preferably, at the moment when the crime was
committed; otherwise, on arrest. Both of them received
strict orders from Hitler personally to start compensatory







5 Feb. 46


murders. Pancke replied that it was very difficult and
dangerous to shoot people on arrest, as they could not be
sure when the arrest was made if the person arrested was
really a saboteur. Hitler demanded compensatory murders
in the proportion of at least five to one. In other words: Five
Danes were to die for ever German killed."
The rest of the document shows that General Von Hannecken
made a report on the military situation. I shall read this paragraph,
Page 16 of my brief:
"Moreover, General Keitel took part in the conversation; but
he confined himself to a proposal to reduce food rations in
Denmark to the same level as rations in Germany. This
proposal was rejected by all the three representatives in
Denmark. As a result, the meeting ended with Hitler's
express order to Pancke to start compensatory murders and
counter-sabotage. After this meeting, Pancke had a conver-
sation alone with Himmler, who told him that he, Pancke,
had now been told by the Fuihrer, himself, how to act and
that he thought that he could rely on Pancke to execute the
order which he had received. It seemed that up to now he
had executed only those of Himmler. Pancke knows that
Best had a conversation with Ribbentrop immediately after
the meeting, but doesn't remember the result."
The document then shows that these compensatory murders
were carried out, not in the proportion of five to one, but in the
proportion of one for one. It shows that reports on these compen-
satory muders were sent to Berlin.
I read on Page 18 of my brief, second paragraph:
"Pancke explained that in his opinion these murders were
decreed deliberately by the supreme jurisdiction in Germany,
as being necessary for the protection of Germans stationed in
Denmark and Danes working for Germany; and so Pancke
had to obey the order. Bovensiepen stated the facts and
made suggestions when subjects of importance were raised.
Pancke does not know whether Bovensiepen selected his own
subjects in every case or whether in certain cases the subjects
were selected by his subalterns; but he, too, said that he was
subjected to strong pressure from the military side, especially
from General Von Hannecken, although General Von
Hannecken was at first opposed to reprisals by terror. Later
still more pressure was exercised by Colonel General Linde-
mann. When soldiers were killed or damage was caused to
military objectives, Pancke was immediately asked what
steps he had taken and what they were to report to general
headquarters, that is, to Hitler himself, from a military point







5 Feb. 46


of view. Pancke had to give a satisfactory reply, and he also
had to take action."
I end my quotation here. General Pancke then explains how
these terror groups were organized.
I must now say that the Danish police were also able to arrest
Dr. Best, the German plenipotentiary, and make an inventory of
his papers. Among them they found Dr. Best's private diary. This
diary has one leaf, dated 30 December 1943, which agrees with the
information given in the preceding testimony about the meeting held
on 30 December 1943 in the Fiihrer's tea house. This is at Page 21.
"Lunch with Adolf Hitler, Reichsftihrer Himmler, Dr. Kalten-
brunner, SS Obergruppenfiihrer Mr. Pancke, Field Marshal
Keitel, General Jodl, General Von Hannecken, Lieutenant
General Schmundt, Brigade Lieutenant Scherff. Lunch and
discussions on the Danish question lasted from 1400 to 1630
hours."
Dr. Best was naturally interrogated on the subject. From
official Danish documents, extracts from which are found on
Page 23 of my brief, it appears that Dr. Best corroborated the note
in his diary dated 30 December which I have cited. With regard
to the fundamental questions concerned, here is what Dr. Best says
at the bottom of Page 23:
"Dr. Best does not remember whether Hitler, who spoke at
considerable length, said anything about compensatory
murders being carried out in the proportion of five to one.
Himmler and Kaltenbrunner agreed with Hitler. The rest
of those present apparently expressed no opinion. The names
given by Best agree with Pancke's list."-This is on Page
24-"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs was not represented,
so that Sonnleitner did not attend the conference. After the
conference, Dr. Best had a conversation alone with Ribbentrop,
to whom he explained what had taken place. Ribbentrop
shared his opinion that some protest should be made against
such methods but that after all, nothing could be done." -
It is proved, therefore, that the Defendants Kaltenbrunner,
Keitel, and Jodl were present at a department meeting where it
was .decided that murder, pure and simple, should be organized in
Denmark. The witnesses certainly do not say that the Defendants
Keitel and Jodl showed any enthusiasm for this proposal, but it is
established that they were present and that they were present in the
exercise of their functions along with their subordinate, the military
commander of Denmark. This is a question of responsibility for
several hundred murders abominable in themselves but undoubt-
edly constituting only a small part of the crimes implied by the
Prosecution and carried out on millions of victims. I think, however,







5 Feb. 46


that it is important to learn that the military and diplomatic
leaders knew and accepted the systematic organization of acts
of banditry and murders committed by professional killers who fled
when they had committed their crimes.
The documents which I have just cited are the last of the series
which I wanted to present to the Tribunal. I shall not follow them
up by commentary. I think that there is so much monotony and
at the same time so many shades of variety in the innumerable
crimes committed by the Nazis that the human mind finds it difficult
to grasp their whole extent. Each of these crimes has in itself all
the intensity of horror and reflects the distorted values of the
doctrine responsible for them. If it be true that life has any
meaning whatsoever, if there is around and within us anything
else than "sound and fury," such a doctrine must be condemned
with the men who originated it and directed its enterprises.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you tell us what is proposed for
tomorrow?
M. FAURE: Tomorrow, M. Gerthoffer will, if it suits the
Tribunal, make a statement on pillage of works of art. A problem
is involved here. For at the time when this would normally have
been done, we decided to dispense with it, thinking that a reference
to the American documents would be sufficient. On consulting our
American colleagues, however, it appeared that they themselves
relied on that part of the matter being presented by the French
Prosecution. So, if the Tribunal does not object to our returning
to the subject now, a statement will be presented to this effect.
On the other hand, one of the magistrates of the French Dele-
gation proposes to present a brief which recapitulates systematically
the charges against each of the defendants, according to the docu-
ments and briefs submitted.
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Tribunal would hope that the
expos on the pillage of objects of art will be quite short because
it must be cumulative, because you will remember that we had at
some stage of the Trial presented to us 39 books, or 30, or some
number of books of objects of art which had been taken away from
various parts of Europe and France and all photographed by the
Germans themselves; and, therefore, any evidence which would now
be given would be cumulative to that spoliation.
M. FAURE: That is why I asked the Tribunal whether it would
agree to this procedure; but at any rate, if the Tribunal considers
that the statement can be made, it will be only a very short state-
ment which will take about two hours.
DR. ALFRED THOMA (Counsel for Defendant Rosenberg): If I
understood M. Faure correctly, he asked the Tribunal whether the







5 Feb. 46


confiscation and plundering of works of art in France would again
be dealt with tomorrow. I should like to add that the American
Prosecution has already declared before this Tribunal that the
question of the plundering of works of art could not be dealt with
again. Accordingly, I myself, representing Rosenberg, and my
colleague, Dr. Stahmer, representing Gdring, took steps to cancel
the calling of witnesses whom we had planned to bring. If,
however, the French Prosecution intends to submit new material,
we must have these witnesses called again. For this reason, I should
like to ask the Tribunal to decide whether it is necessary for the
confiscation of works of art objects in France to be taken up once
more.
THE PRESIDENT: I think defendant's counsel must be wrong
in thinking that the United States counsel said anything which
meant that the French Prosecution could not produce evidence with
reference to the spoliation of objects of art. I can't think the United
States had any authority to do that and I had understood myself
that this part of the Prosecution had been omitted by one of the
French Counsel on account of the request of the Tribunal to shorten
their argument. Was that not so?
M. FAURE: That is quite true, Mr. President. Your interpretation
is exact.
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Tribunal would wish that the
presentation should be made, if the French Prosecutors wish it;
and it should be made as shortly as possible.
M. FAURE: Thank you.

IThe Tribunal adjourned until 6 February 1946 at 1000 hours.]








FIFTY-SECOND DAY

Wednesday, 6 February 1946



Morning Session

M. FAURE: If it please the Tribunal, M. Gerthoffer will now
present the brief concerning the pillage of works of art.
M. CHARLES GERTHOFFER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French
Republic): The Economic Section of the French Delegation had pre-
pared a report on the pillage of works of art in the occupied coun-
tries of western Europe.
We had thought, at the session of 22 January last, of waiving
the presentation of this statement in order to expedite the proceed-
ings, while holding ourselves at the disposal of the Tribunal should
they consider the presentation necessary. However, since then-on
31 January-the American Prosecutor was good enough to inform
us that the Defendant Rosenberg intended to maintain that the
artistic treasures were collected only in order to be "protected."
We consider, from the documents which we are holding at the
disposal of the Court, that this cannot be a question of protection
only but that this was genuine spoliation; and I am at the Tribunal's
disposal to prove this, in a statement which I shall make as brief
as possible, while offering in evidence the documents which we had
already collected. If the Tribunal wish, I can make this very brief
statement.. In any case, I am at the disposal of the Tribunal.
Mr. President, Gentlemen, the pillage of works of art has a cul-
tural significance to which I shall not refer again since it was the
subject of a statement presented by Colonel Storey on 18 December
1945. I shall simply regard the subject from the economic point of
view in order to complete the report on the general spoliation of the
western European countries.
As the Tribunal will realize, the leaders of the Reich primarily
and systematically seized works of art belonging to private individ-
uals, mostly under the pretext that these individuals were Jews,
thus procuring for themselves very valuable means of exchange.
In Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, and France picture galleries,
public as well as private collections, ancient furniture, china, and
jewelry were stolen.
It was not a question of individual looting, of pillaging by sol-
diers, such as is encountered in all wars and of which we still find
examples; this campaign of plunder was carried out in a systematic







6 Feb. 46


and disciplined manner. The methods introduced varied in character.
Personal judgment and personal initiative could be exercised only
insofar as they contributed to the execution of plans already
elaborated by the National Socialist leaders before the month of
June 1940.
The official organization for pillaging was primarily Minister
Rosenberg's Einsatzstab for the occupied territories of western
Europe, and the Netherlands. If this organization was not the sole
agent, it was the most important one. Colonel Storey has already
drawn the attention of the Tribunal to this criminal behavior.
The urge to seize works of art, as well as material wealth, under-
lies the policy of National Socialist expansion. The behavior in
Poland of the Defendant Frank has already given sufficient proof
of this. The idea of protecting this valuable booty arose at the time
of the invasion of western Europe. From the very beginning, in
their haste and their desire to seize as much as they could, several
parallel authorities would carry out the confiscations, firstly by the
military authorities, either indirectly, as in Holland through the
special services of the Devisenschutzkommando or directly as in
France through the Department for the Protection of Works of Art.
Further, the same mission was entrusted simultaneously to the civil
authorities, whether represented by the German Embassy in Paris
or, in Holland, the Office for Enemy Property under the auspices
of the Reich Commissioner. This plurality of control, moreover, did
not end with the establishment of the Rosenberg Staff.
This is the first phase in the pillage of works of art. According
to official correspondence, as well as to the statements of Otto Abetz,
the initiative may be attributed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs,
beginning with the Defendant Ribbentrop. The first phase lasted
from the entrance of the Germans into the countries of western
Europe until October 1940.
The second phase opened with the arrival of Einsatzstab Rosen-
berg which appeared on the scene under the aegis of the Defendant
Goring., From now on this Einsatzstab must be considered primarily
responsible for the organized pillage.
Towards July 1942 a third phase opens in the history of the
Staff Rosenberg. The person primarily responsible is the Defendant
Alfred Rosenberg. The activities of this staff did -not cease in
Europe until the liberation. One part of the archives of the Rosen-
berg services fell into the hands of the French armies; another part,
which had been sent to Fiissen, was seized by the American Army
which also picked up the archives of the Defendant Rosenberg. This
is the origin of the PS documents submitted to the Tribunal.
The seizure of works of art began with the entrance of the
German troops into Holland, Belgium, and France. In Paris, as







6 Feb. 46


from the month of June, there was an Embassy service directed by
Dr. Von Kunsberg and Dr. Dirksen similar to a specialized service
of the Military Governor directed by Count Wolff Metternich. This
order of seizure, in defiance of the Hague Convention, applied to
public as well as to private property. The Defendant Keitel, on
30 June 1940, issued an order to the Governor of Paris, General
Von Bockelberg. I submit a copy of this order as Document Num-
ber RF-1301. Here it is:
"The Fiihrer, on receiving the report of the Reich Minister
for Foreign Affairs, has issued an order to safeguard for the
time being, in addition to objects of art belonging to the
French State, also such works of art and antiquities which
constitute private property. Especially Jewish private prop-
erty is to be taken in custody by the occupational power
against removal or concealment, after having been labelled
with the names of their present French owners. There is no
intention of expropriation but certainly of a transfer into our
custody to serve as a pawn in the peace negotiations."
Identical measures were soon taken in Holland, Belgium, and
Luxembourg. Exhibit Number RF-1302, which is a document dis-
covered by the Army of the United States and which was registered
under Document Number 137-PS, a copy of which I submit, was
drawn up by Defendant Keitel on 5 July 1940:
"Reichsleiter Rosenberg has suggested the following to the
Fiihrer:
"1. State libraries, and archives to be searched for documents
of value to Germany.
"2. The chancelleries and high authorities of the Church, as
well as the Masonic lodges, to be searched for proofs of polit-
ical activities directed against us and the proofs in question
to be seized.
"The Fiihrer has ordered that this suggestion be carried out
and that the Gestapo, assisted by the archivists of Reichsreiter
Rosenberg, be placed in charge of the search. The Chief of
the Security Police, SS Gruppenfiihrer Heydrich, has been
informed. He is to contact the military commander compe-
tent to deal with the execution of these orders.
"These measures to be executed in all regions of the Nether-
lands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France which are occupied
by us.
"It is requested that subordinate offices be informed.
"The Chief of the High Command of the Armed Forces,
(signed) Keitel."







6 Feb. 46


I submit under Exhibit Number RF-1303 a copy of Document
Number 139-PS, drawn up for Holland and expressed in approx-
imately the same terms, and under Exhibit Number RF-1304 I sub-
mit a copy of Document Number 140-PS which is an analogous order
for .Belgium.
At the same time, by a decree of 15 July 1940 in execution of
Keitel's orders, a decree for the protection of works of art was
issued in the occupied territories. This decree appeared in the
German Official Bulletin VOBIF Number 3, Page 49 and following.
I submit a copy of this decree under Document Number RF-1305,
and I request the permission of the Tribunal to quote the two
following paragraphs:
First paragraph, Section 1:
"Moveable works of art will not be taken from the place
where they are at present or modified in any way whatsoever
without the written authorization of a commander of the mili-
tary administration."
Section 3:
"Moveable works of art whose value exceeds 100,000 francs
must be declared by their owners or custodians in writing
prior to 15 August 1940, to the competent field command or
some other authority indicated by the latter."
If the Tribunal will kindly recall the explanation which I had
the honor of presenting 2 weeks ago, it will remember that the
Germans had, at the same time, issued similar decrees for freezing
or immobilizing private property, currency, and other wealth.
In this decree, intended to be known by the population of the
occupied territories, the question of safekeeping and confiscation
had not yet arisen; the decree merely dealt with immobilization and
declaration-preparatory measures, these, to future spoliation, and
an indication of bad faith to be remembered.
Beginning with that period, seizures of the most famous French-
Jewish art collections were carried out; seizures made under such
conditions that they provoked numerous protests which were sub-
mitted to the Armistice Commission at Wiesbaden. I submit in the
document book, as Document Number RF-1306, a letter of the
French Secretary for Finance of 18 December 1941 containing one
of these protests. So as not to waste the time of the Tribunal I shall
not quote the document but shall merely offer it in evidence.
No dividing line was drawn between the activities or powers of
civil authorities and those of military authorities. There were con-
flicts and rivalries but as from March 1941 Staff Rosenberg occupied
the foreground; and it is possible to say that from 1940 to 1944 it







6 Feb. 46


enjoyed a monopoly in the confiscation of works of art in Luxem-
bourg, Belgium, Holland, and -France. Staff Rosenberg originated
in the Office of Foreign Affairs of the Party. Hence the first func-
tion, in theory, of Staff Rosenberg, consisted in gathering political
material which could and might be exploited in the struggle against
Jewry and Free Masonry by the Hohe Schule. This is the Advance
School, whose purpose Hitler defined in his order of 29 January
1940 to be found in the American documentation under Number
136-PS, a copy of which I submit in evidence as Exhibit Number
RF-1308. The document is very brief and I shall read it to the
Tribunal:
"The Hohe Schule is some day to become the center for
National Socialist doctrinal research and education. It will
be established after the war. However, in order to expedite
the preparatory work already initiated, I order that Reichs-
leiter Alfred Rosenberg continue this preparatory work,
especially in the field of research and the establishment of
a library. The offices of the Party and the State organizations
are required to support his work in every way.
"Berlin 29 January 1940, (signed) Adolf Hitler."
SEntrusted with the finding and seizing of Jewish collections
which had been left "ownerless" in the occupied territories, Staff
Rosenberg did not content itself with looting private houses; its
activities also applied to the seizure of many trusts, especially of
those deposited in strong boxes in banks. This is evident from the
passage of the document that I submit as Document Number RF-1307
from which, the Tribunal permitting, I shall read a passage. This
is on Page 2 of the translation and is also to be found in the brief:
"On 26 September 1941 M. Braumiiller, acting on Rosenberg's
behalf, removed two cases filled with objects of art, which are
listed and deposited with the agency of the Soci6t6 G6n6rale
at Arcachon under the name of the depositor, M. Philippe
de Rothschild, who has not yet regained his French national-
ity."
As a matter of fact, the field of activity of Staff Rosenberg was
not confined to the pillage of Jewish or Masonic property. It rapidly
absorbed all it could of the artistic heritage of the occupied coun-
tries, a heritage which Staff Rosenberg appropriated by invariably
illegal means without distinguishing between private property and
public property.
This action of Staff Rosenberg was inspired by the orders of the
Defendant Goring himself. It is thus that I submit as Exhibit Num-
ber RF-1309, a document, discovered by the Army of the United
States and filed under Document Number 141-PS, which consists of








6 Feb. 46


an order of the Defendant G6ring, Paris, dated 5 November 1940
and which extends the activities of Staff Rosenberg. Here is the
order:
"To carry out the present measures for safeguarding Jewish
property taken over by the Chief of the Military Administra-
tion in Paris and by Einsatzstab Rosenberg, the following
procedure will be observed in connection with the art treas-
ures deposited at the Louvre:
"1. Those art objects regarding which the Ffihrer has reserved
to himself the right of further disposal,
"2. those art objects which could serve to complete the collec-
tion of the Reich Marshal,
"3. those art objects and libraries which appear suitable for
equipping the Hohe Schule within Reichsleiter Rosenberg's
sphere of duty."
THE PRESIDENT: I think this document has already been read,
M. Gerthoffer. I think this document was read by Colonel Storey.
M. GERTHOFFER: I shall omit the quotation, Mr. President.
I now come to an order, issued by the Defendant Keitel, of
17 September 1940, a copy of which I submit as Exhibit Number
RF-1310, filed in the American documents as Document Number
138-PS. Here is the principal passage:
"Implementing the order of the Fiihrer transmitted to Reichs-
leiter Rosenberg and made known to you at the time, to the
effect that the premises of Masonic lodges, together with
libraries and archives in the occupied countries, must be
searched for material of value to Germany and that this
material must be safeguarded by the Gestapo, the Fiihrer has
made the following decision:
"Reichsleiter Rosenberg, or his representative Reichshaupt-
stellenleiter Ebert, has received from the Fiihrer, personally,
unequivocal instructions concerning the right of confiscation.
He is authorized to transport to Germany such objects which
appear to him of value and to place them here in security.
You are requested to inform the competent military com-
manders or offices."
The activities of Staff Rosenberg were multiple. Thus, for
instance, on 18 December 1941, Rosenberg suggested to Hitler the
seizure of Jewish furniture in the occupied territories of the West
to serve for the establishments of Party organizations in the regions
of the East.
Here is a copy of the document which was discovered by the
Army of the United States, which bears the Document Number







6 Feb. 46


001-PS, a copy of which I include in the document book under
Exhibit Number RF-1311.
"Everywhere in the East the administration found terrible
housing conditions, and the possibilities of getting supplies
are so limited that it is practically impossible to obtain any-
thing. That is why I request the Fiihrer to concede that the
furniture belonging to Jews who have fled, or those who are
leaving Paris or any of the occupied territories of the West,
be confiscated in order to supplement, as far as possible, the
furniture for the establishments of the eastern administra-
tion."
I have reached the bottom of Page 15.
Moreover, the Germans concealed their intentions. This is evident
from the letter, dated 28 February 1942, addressed to the German
Armistice Commission by the German Military Commander in
France, of which I offer a photograph as Document Number RF-1312,
Page 16. Here are a few extracts from this letter:
"Taking into consideration the special mission entrusted to
Staff Rosenberg for seizing art objects of Jewish ownership,
protests by the French Government against the activities of
Staff Rosenberg have always been forwarded by us to the
OKH while the reply was sent to the French Government that
the protest has been forwarded to the office in charge in
Berlin for investigation and decision."
Further on, in the same letter, we read:
"The mission of Staff Rosenberg must, as in the past, be kept
secret from the French authorities."
A letter addressed to the Section Chief of the Military Adminis-
tration in Paris of 7 April 1942, which I offer in evidence as Docu-
ment Number RF-1313, contains the same directives. Here is the
passage:
"Furniture belonging to Jews of English or American nation-
ality will not be confiscated for the time being but only the
furniture of Jews who are nationals of the Reich or of a
country partially or totally occupied by the Reich or of Jews
who are stateless. The confiscated objects become the prop-
erty of the Reich. No receipt will be given. The right of
third parties, especially those of lessors or of owners of store
houses, is to be considered as cancelled."
Further on in the same instructions, Page 17 of the brief:
"6. The operations must be carried out as discreetly as pos-
sible. As to general questions, inquiries by the local French
authorities concerning the operations must be answered ver-
bally to the effect that these are punitive measures ordered








6 Feb. 46


by a higher authority. Further arguments are to be avoided.
Individual complaints are to be forwarded to the Einsatzstab."
And further on:
"Discussions by the press concerning the utilization of vacant
Jewish premises are undesirable for the time being."
I turn to Page 19 in the brief to quote a very short passage of
a letter dated 18 June 1942, signed by Rosenberg and addressed to
the Defendant G6ring. I offer in evidence a copy of this letter as
Document Number RF-1314. Here is the passage which I shall
read to the Tribunal. Page 20 of the brief, Page 2 of the document
book:
"Some time ago I explicitly approved the instructions given
by the Chief of my Einsatzstab, Stabsfiihrer Party member
Utikal, that Party member Dr. Lohse of the Bildende Kunst
Office be put at your disposal for any purpose you may
desire."
I now come to a few explanations, Gentlemen, on the seizure
operations, Page 22 of my written report:
"Since the first confiscations were made by the military
authorities, the Devisenschutzkommando, and the German
Embassy, Staff Rosenberg did not appear on the scene until
the time when the great collective seizures had already been
completed.
"The greater part of the Rothschild, Kahn, Weil-Picard, and
Wildenstein collections had been confiscated and they repre-
sented three-quarters of the total booty of Staff Rosenberg."
As far as the methods which were used to seize these works of
art are concerned, I submit to the Tribunal a document which is a
letter of the Secretary of French Finance, dated 25 October 1941.
I offer it in evidence as Document Number RF-1315; and so as not
to waste the Tribunal's time I shall merely deposit this document
since it is quite probable that my colleague will allude to it in his
turn. Page 24 of the written report...
THE PRESIDENT: How do you prove that the greater part of
the Rothschild, Kahn, Weil-Picard, and Wildenstein collections was
confiscated in the middle of November 1940? What is the evidence
of it?
M. GERTHOFFER: General information furnished by the Fine
Arts Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you put in a report of a government
committee which states that?
M. GERTHOFFER: No, Mr. President, I have not got the report
in my dossier. I did not believe it was necessary to present it in







6 Feb. 46


evidence, because I thought that it was admitted that nearly all the
Rothschild collections were seized at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think we can take judicial notice of
it in the absence of some government report and simply upon the
statement.
M. GERTHOFFER: I think the question is not of great interest.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal cannot take any notice of
statements which are not supported by evidence; therefore we shall
disregard that statement. We must have the evidence first.
M. GERTHOFFER: I consider that the question is not of interest,
since the Tribunal will soon see the enormous quantities of works
of art which were removed by the Germans and I thought it would
be useless to mention the individual owners by name.
THE PRESIDENT: I see that in the Document Number 1015-PS,
which is in your second document book, the facts are stated. I do
not know whether you are going to make use of that Exhibit Num-
ber RF-1323.
M. GERTHOFFER: Number RF-1323 (Document Number 1015-
PS(b)) is the report of Dr. Scholz on the activities of Staff Rosenberg.
This report contains details of quantities of works of art which were
seized. I will quote this document later on.
THE PRESIDENT: And it includes the dates October 1940 to
July 1944, and includes the Rothschild collection. I do not know
whether it refers also to the other collections which are mentioned
in your expose.
M. GERTHOFFER: I shall cite this document a little later on.
The report in question was also quoted on 18 December by Colonel
Storey.
THE PRESIDENT: I intervened only for the purpose of saying
that we cannot take any notice of statements of facts unless there
is some evidence to support them.
M. GERTHOFFER: After the seizures had been effected (Page 44
of the expose) the Germans carried out the work of listing, cata-
loging, and preparing for the presentation of the objects confiscated.
This was a very great task indeed, rendered excessively long and
complicated by lack of order and method. Objects of art were
brought to the museum of the Jeu de Paume and to the Louvre;
they arrived mostly in one sole lot and from extremely varied
sources, hence the impossibility of drawing up an inventory of the
objects seized. The vast quantity of material was classified as
"Unknown" insofar as its origin was concerned. Nevertheless, in
a report of Staff Rosenberg of 15 April 1943, discovered by the Army







6 Feb. 46


of the United States and registered under Document Number 172-PS,
a copy of which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-1316, we find the
following passage:
"By this detailed study of the material confiscated, an
absolutely reliable basis has been afforded for a final and
summary account of the entire operation of seizure. The
preliminary studies were made in such a way that after
formulation of the final report the latter has to be considered,
in every respect, as an incontestable document of a histori-
cally significant seizure of works of art unique in its kind."
I come to Page 26 of my brief., Certain of these works of art
were considered by the Germans as degenerate, and their admittance
into National Socialist territory was forbidden. Theoretically speak-
ing they should have been destroyed; but within the scope of total
war economy these pictures, although condemned, were none the
less of commercial value and as a means of barter their value was
both definite and high. So these pictures, carefully selected from
among the great public collections and from private collections, were
confiscated; and as already provided for in Section 5 of the decree
of 5 November 1940, placed on the French and German art markets.
In addition to these condemned pictures, others were set aside as
being of lesser interest in the official collections. They formed the
object of numerous fraudulent transactions.
We now come to the traffic in works of art. We are not, in this
case, dealing with secret and unlawful operations, the personal acts
of such-and-such a member of the Rosenberg Service; we are dealing
with official operations. Two kinds of operations were currently
carried out by the Einsatzstab, that is, exchanges and sales.
Exchanges. On this subject we have, by way of an example, the
evidence of M. Gustav Rochlitz, received by the examining judge,
M. FrapiM, in Paris on 6 January 1946. I submit the- evidence as
Document Number RF-1317 and shall read a passage to the Tribunal.
"During the years 1941 and 1942 I exchanged various old
pictures for 80 modern ones, delivered by Lohse, who always
told me that these exchanges were carried out on Gbring's
order, and that the pictures received had been intended for
Gbring. I have since learned that all the pictures given in
exchange are contained in the Gbring collection. I delivered
in exchange about 35 pictures, possibly more."
These facts are confirmed by the Defendant Rosenberg himself
in the last lines of his report of 15 April 1943, filed under Document
Number 172-PS already quoted, of which I have entered a copy
under Exhibit Number RF-1316. Here is an interesting passage of
the report.







6 Feb. 46


"By order of the Reich Marshal a certain number of these
works of modern and degenerate French art were favorably
bartered with French art dealers for pictures of a recognized
artistic value. In this way, 87 works of old Italian, Dutch, and
German masters of high and recognized value were acquired
on very favorable conditions."
Numerous works of art, books, and especially pictures, were sold
by representatives of Staff Rosenberg. Some were sold in France,
others in Germany or Switzerland. The fact that this was a cal-
culated procedure is evident if we consider that the value of these
pictures, confiscated under the legally fallacious pretext of keeping
them in safe custody, could be realized if they were sold on neutral
markets and paid for in foreign currency.
I now consider that I should give you some brief explanations
of the justifications offered by the Germans concerning their confis-
cations. Primarily these justifications are mere quibbles relating to
the nature of the seizures. The seizures were only temporary and
preservative measures for the safekeeping of the art treasures.
Count Metternich, Chief of the Department for the Protection of
Works of Art in France from July 1940 to 1942, made this point
quite clear in a report, a copy of which has been discovered in
France and which I submit as Document Number RF-1318. Here
are some brief excerpts from this report, at the bottom of Page 29
of the expos:
"Shortly after arriving in France, I realized that various
departments which did not belong to the Military Adminis-
tration were interested in removable objects of art."
And further on, in the same paragraph:
"It has been said that there was no intention of expropriation
but that these objects were to be considered as pawns, to
be used in future peace negotiations. No detailed instructions
were given as to how the operations should be carried out;
and in particular, no interpretation was given of the term
'custody'."
The vague expression "in custody" has been subjected to every
variety of interpretation. According to some the seizure was only
a temporary measure, although the question of definite appro-
priation nevertheless remained unclarified. For the Defendant
Rosenberg the solution was simple; he expresses it in a letter,
previously quoted, of 18 June 1942 addressed to G6ring, which I
have just submitted under Document Number RF-1314. This is the
relevant passage:
"I therefore believe you will be in agreement with me on
this point, namely, that art objects of Jewish ownership taken
into custody should be considered as seized for the benefit of








6 Feb. 46


the NSDAP. With regard to material for research work, the
Fiihrer has already decided that these objects, now in the
custody of the Einsatzstab, shall become the property of the
Hohe Schule. It would be only just and fair that the great
art treasures now in custody should one day become the
property of the NSDAP. Needless to say, the decision of this
question rests with the Ffihrer, However, since the NSDAP
has financed a war of 20 years' standing against Jewry, such
a decision would appear permissible."
And we are justified in saying that these confiscations are now
no longer measures of preservation or requisition, but a species of
booty which perforce must fall into the hands of a German people
triumphing over the Jewish race whom they have outlawed.
In a report justifying their action, demanded by the Army Com-
mander and drawn up on the order of the Defendant Rosenberg by
the Chief of the Einsatzstab, Utikal, in November 1941, the latter
went so far as to state-I submit this report as Documents RF-1319,
RF-1320, and RF-1321; and I quote a brief passage from the attached
supplement Number RF-1321, Page 31:
"The German measures of reprisal against the Jews are like-
wise justified by international law. It is a recognized prin-
ciple of international law that, in war, reprisals may be taken
by resorting to the same procedures and the same concepts
as primarily used by the enemy. Since time immemorial the
Jews have, in their Jewish laws codified in the Talmud and
the Schulchan Aruch, applied the principle that all non-Jews
are to be considered as so much cattle, as outlaws; and the
property of non-Jews should be dealt with as a thing which
has been abandoned, that is to say, as derelict property."
Thus, Gentlemen, the confiscations of the Einsatzstab were
sheltered by this strange interpretation of law. It seems useless to
discuss the value of this argument before the Tribunal. The Belgian,
Dutch, and French authorities made frequent protests, based on the
most elementary principles of international law, but always met
with refusals.
It would at any rate be suitable to define the extent of these
seizures. It is difficult to give a total estimate, although Rosenberg,
himself, on several occasions made an estimate of his booty, especi-
ally in a letter to the Treasurer of the Party, Schwarz, 14 November
1940, a document discovered by the Army of the United States and
bearing the Document Number 1736-PS, a copy of which I offer in
evidence as Exhibit Number RF-1322. At that date Rosenberg
already considered that the booty amounted to 500,000,000 Reichs-
mark.








6 Feb. 46


The documents of the Einsatzstab are sufficiently numerous and
precise to allow us to establish certain quantitative data. First, the
seizures by the General Staff for Art Treasures. The fundamental
document is a report of Dr. Scholz, dated 14 July 1944, which we
have just mentioned. This is Document Number 1015-PS, which was
presented in part to the Court by Colonel Storey and which I offer
in evidence as Exhibit Number RF-1323. From this report I shall
extract only some very brief indications concerning the quantities
of art objects carried off.
According to this report, 21,903 objects taken from 203 private
collections, were removed, notably from the Rothschild, Alphons
Kahn, David Weil, L6vy de Benzion, and the Seligmann brothers
collections. According to the same report there were "all told,
29 transports, 137 trucks, and 4,174 cases."
I shall not quote any further from this report, because I think
that my colleague, also entrusted with making the charges, will
allude to it.
THE PRESIDENT: Would that be a convenient time to break off?

[A recess was taken.]

M. GERTHOFFER: Staff Rosenberg was not only interested in
paintings and objects of art, but in books as well. Thus it appears,
in a document discovered by the United States Army and regis-
tered under Document Number 171-PS, of which I submit a copy
as Exhibit Number RF-1324, that 550,000 volumes were seized in
France.
Holland also provided a heavy contribution in books. Libraries
rich in early prints, books, and manuscripts were pillaged. It
appears from Document Number 176-PS, discovered by the United
States Army, a copy of which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-1325,
that the value of the books amounted to about thirty or forty million
Reichsmark.
It must also be noted, as proved by Documents 178-PS and
171-PS, which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-1326, that archives
of the Rothschild Bank were taken away in the month of Feb-
ruary 1941.
Staff Rosenberg likewise pillaged furniture. This is quite evident
from a note addressed by the Defendant Rosenberg to the Fihrer,
dated 3 October 1942, submitted under Document Number RF-1327.
I read the following passage:
"For carrying out action 'M' the Dienststelle Westen was
created in Paris with special branches (Einsatzleitungen) in
Belgium, France, and the Netherlands. This service has to








6 Feb. 46

date sent about 40,000 tons of furniture to the Reich, utilizing
all available transport, ship, and railroad facilities. Since it
was recognized that the needs of bombed-out people of the
Reich should be given preference over the needs of those in
the East, the Reich Ministry has placed a considerable part of
this furniture (over 19,500 tons) at the disposal of bombed-out
people in the Reich...."
A copy of a Rosenberg report, dated 4 November 1943, Document
Number 1737-PS(b), a copy of which I submit as Exhibit Number
RF-1328, tells us:
"52,828 Jewish lodgings were seized and sealed in favor
of the bombed-out victims. Including special orders, furni-
ture has been removed from 47,569 dwellings for shipment to
the bombed cities."
Document Number L-188, found by the American 7th Army, is
a report issued by the offices of the Defendant Rosenberg, Item
8 of which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-1329, shows that over
69,619 Jewish lodgings were looted, that the furniture occupied
over 1 million cubic meters, and that it took 26,984 freight cars, that
is, 674 trains, to remove it.
In the same file there is a document which I submit, Document
Number RF-1330, which indicates that in Paris alone 38,000 Jewish
lodgings were emptied of their contents.
Document Number 1772-PS, already submitted under Exhibit
Number RF-1325, indicates that in Holland, from March 1942 to
July 1943 inclusive, 22,623 lodgings were emptied of their contents
and that it took 586 barges and 178 freight cars to move this furni-
ture. These few figures undeniably suffice to support the accusation
of economic pillage levied against Staff Rosenberg on behalf of the
western European countries.
As has already been stated, although the material elements of
the breach of the law remain unaltered, there can be no comparison
between the pillaging typical of the history of this or that con-
queror and practiced throughout the centuries, and the pillaging as
understood by the defendants.
What prevents any comparison between the past pillaging and
the looting practiced by Staff Rosenberg or the National Socialist
chiefs, is the difference in purpose, however difficult and delicate
a matter it may be to analyze it. The looting in the past of works
of art may primarily be traced to the vanity of the conqueror, in
which his egoism, his taste, and his love of glory played the deter-
mining part in the pillaging. It is of course possible to identify the
same feeling as underlying the criminal activities of one or the
other of the defendants. But-and here we find the fundamental







6 Feb. 46


difference-the National Socialist leaders, when estimating the
value of this and that' painting or of this or that work of art,
wittingly took into account both the standard of aesthetic wealth,
that is the value of the object to the individual, and the standard
of material wealth, that is its exchange value, an exchange value in
which it is a matter of retaining a pledge, if not to facilitate, at
least to bring pressure to bear when negotiating future peace trea-
ties, as is evident from the documents submitted to the Tribunal.
Whatsoever the pretexts or excuses submitted by the National
Socialist leaders when seizing the artistic heritage of western
Europe, whether by theft, by so-called preservative confiscations, or
by direct purchase from the owners or the markets for the sale of
objects of art, the criminal intention is always the same.
The German motive was undeniably the establishment of a
reserve of securities, if not for the satisfaction of the individual
desire, then for the satisfaction of a collective need in conformity
with the myth of the "Greater Germany."
This reserve of securities would have a triple advantage: A cul-
tural advantage, that is, the advantage of the Hohe Schule. Secondly,
an economic advantage, a basis for financial speculation and a
reserve of securities easily negotiable in the markets of the world;
above all, a reserve of fixed value entirely unaffected by the fluc-
tuations in the cost of raw materials and unaffected either by the
lowering or the manipulation of the currency. And, lastly, reserves
of securities of political importance in the hands of those nego-
tiating the peace treaties.
The Defense will perhaps object that exchanges and purchases
on free markets cannot be held against the defendants, because they
are in the nature of contracts, and there were agreements, and
because equivalents existed. But the facts presented to the Tri-
bunal render it possible to declare that these operations have merely
an appearance of regularity, if we remember the conditions under
which the contracts were drawn up, that the operations were made
under duress, or if we consider the rights over the equivalents
supplied, equivalents of exchange represented by stolen objects or
works of art, by sales paid for in national currencies coming from
contributions of a more or less regular nature, and especially by
occupational indemnities or clearing operations.
Most of these particulars, from the point of view of the general
principles of criminal law, are doubly tainted: On the one hand they
were paid in stolen currency, since the work of art forming the
object of the sale could never legitimately have become the heritage
of the purchaser. On the other hand, fraud and deceit tainted a con-
siderable share of the negotiations, as proved by numerous state-
ments, such as the extract from the minutes of M. Rochlitz's statement








6 Feb. 46


of 8 January 1946, which I have just read to the Tribunal under
Document Number RF-1317 and which the Tribunal will allow me
to recall to its notice by a brief reading of a few more passages.
Rochlitz, picture dealer in Paris, states:
"Lohse came to see me in February 1941. He told me that
he was looking for pictures for different highly placed per-
sons, chiefly for G6ring. I showed to him a painting by
Wennix of which I was the owner and a "Portrait of a Man,"
by Titian, of which two-thirds belonged to Birchentski and
one-third to me. Lohse bought them. Then 8 or 10 days later
he offered me some paintings in exchange, instead of money.
Incidentally he considered that I had sold the paintings at too
high a price. The price was about 2,000,000. He added that
Gbring had seen the paintings, that he did not want to pay
for them at the price agreed, but that he had given an order
to exchange them for modern paintings brought from Ger-
many. He showed me a certain number of paintings and
offered me 11 of them in exchange for the 2 paintings. He
prevented me from looking at the backs of the paintings."
Further on, the same witness states:
"I thought at that time that the paintings came from Ger-
many., I found out shortly after that these paintings and
those subsequently exchanged with Lohse were paintings con-
fiscated from Jews. When I saw that these had been confiscated
I protested and Lohse answered, 'I am acting under Gbring's
orders, you have nothing to fear. These confiscations have
been anticipated by the Armistice Convention and the ex-
changes are regular.' As I still protested, he called me an
enemy of the people."
Never-and this is the last remark I shall make on the sub-
ject-has history furnished an example of wholesale pillaging
organized on so completely an administrative basis. The pillaging,-
together with the Einsatzstab, became a recognized institution in
the sphere of culture, just as it became a recognized institution in
the "Economic Detachments" of the ROGES, whose activities have
been exposed before the Tribunal.
The pillaging of works of art was organized by the highest
leaders of the Reich. My colleague of the Prosecution, who has been
entrusted with the individual accusations, will return to this matter.
I shall content myself with submitting a few more documents and
making a few more quotations on this point.
Alfred Rosenberg was the responsible Chief of the Einsatzstab.
The orders emanated from him, as is shown in the course of the
interrogatory; he was heard by Colonel Hinkel, and I submit a copy







6 Feb. 46


of the interrogatory of 28 September 1945 as Document Number
RF-1332.
The Defendant Gbring was the official protector of Staff Rosen-
berg. He himself wrote to Rosenberg on 21 November 1940, Docu-
ment Number 1651-PS, a copy of which I submit as Exhibit Number
RF-1335, as follows:
"I have promised to support energetically the work of your
staff and to make available to them what they could not obtain
so far, namely, means of transport and guard personnel. The
air force has received the order to render utmost assistance."
There was discovered, in France, a sheet of gilt-edged paper
containing, in an unknown writing, instructions issued by G6ring
in Paris-a date is written in by an unknown handwriting-on
11 February 1941. I submit the original document to the Tribunal,
as well as the translation, as Document Number RF-1333:
"All paintings marked 'H' are for the Fiihrer."
THE PRESIDENT: I think this has been read already by the
United States. Has this been read already?
M. GERTHOFFER: It has never as yet been read, Mr. President
THE PRESIDENT: Then please proceed.
M. GERTHOFFER: ". .. one case marked 'AH' for me. Every-
thing that is marked 'G'..."
THE PRESIDENT: Is this identified as a captured document?
M. GERTHOFFER: It was seized by the French authorities who
transmitted it to us.
THE PRESIDENT: Where is the identification to show this is
the document captured by the French authorities?
M. GERTHOFFER: This document was transmitted to me as it
is, with a series of other documents, of which I have only produced
a certain number. If the Tribunal wish I can let them have a spe-
cial authentication for this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I suppose there is probably a report
of the French authorities which sufficiently refers to this document.
M. GERTHOFFER: The document was sent to me with a series
of other documents; since they were extremely numerous, we took
those that seemed to be the most important in order to present them
to the Tribunal, but if the Tribunal wish, I can obtain an affidavit
indicating under what conditions the documents were discovered
by the French authorities.
THE PRESIDENT: You see, the document hasn't anything on it
to indicate that the French Government really found it, nor that








6 Feb. 46


they have ever seen it; and therefore the Tribunal does not consider
that it is properly proved by mere introductions of the document,
without anything on the document. Perhaps you can furnish some
supplementary proof.
M. GERTHOFFER: I can bring an affidavit to the Tribunal in
order to have it authenticated.
THE PRESIDENT: In what way have the other documents been
certified?
M. GERTHOFFER: The other documents were certified as a
whole in the covering letter. They were not certified individually.
This formality can be carried out subsequently.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think we must wait until this is prop-
erly identified.
M. GERTHOFFER: I continue with the reading of my report and
I would point out to the Tribunal that in all the occupied countries
the Defendant Gdring employed a whole group of buyers, the best
known of whom were Dr. Lohse, who was a member of the Einsatz-
stab, and Hofer. Hofer and Lohse (Page 52) acted for the defendant
most often, however, under their own names. The personal collec-
tion of the Defendant G6ring flourished considerably. In this regard
I submit a document under Number RF-1332 to which my colleague,
in charge of personal and individual accusations, will soon refer.
Among the principal leaders of the Reich connected with the
Einsatzstab (Page 55) Rosenberg had, as his superior in the hierarchy,
Ribbentrop in his capacity as Minister for Foreign Affairs (Page 56).
It was Von Ribbentrop who was responsible for the Fiihrer's order
of 30 June 1940, which I presented a short time ago under Docu-
ment Number RF-1301, and which I read to the Tribunal.
Ribbentrop's activities are likewise shown in a letter of 1 July
1940, addressed by Ambassador Abetz to the Military Commander
of Paris, a copy of which I submit under Document RF-1334 (Page 56).
I can read it to the Tribunal, if they wish. It shows Ribbentrop's
activities. Here is the letter:
"I beg you to be good enough to have transmitted by radio..."
THE PRESIDENT: What does this "COL" at the top of the
document mean?
M. GERTHOFFER: It is the seal of the office which seized the
letter.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the French Government in any way
certify this document? You see, we do not know what that stamp
on it may mean.
M. GERTHOFFER: This document was supplied by the General
Agency of Studies and Research. It is one of the supplementary
services which affixed this seal and registered it under Number 9724.







6 Feb. 46


THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I see what that is; but it does not of
itself show that it is a French document, does it? Is there any
French Government report, anything which could be considered to
be, within the meaning of the article of the Charter, an official
government document or report or an act or a document set up by
the government itself? Unless it comes within Article 21, we are
not at liberty to consider it as in evidence; unless there is an affidavit
which deals with it.,
M. GERTHOFFER: I do not insist on the presentation of this
document since the activities of Ribbentrop as Minister for Foreign
Affairs proceed from other PS documents which have never been
disputed. It is a superfluous piece of evidence. I therefore do not
insist on presenting it. It was merely a further piece of evidence,
that is all.
THE PRESIDENT: If you find that there is some government
report which identifies it, anything which proves that that stamp on
it shows that it is a government document within Article 21, then
of course, you may renew your application.
M. GERTHOFFER: I think that it is not necessary, Mr. President.
There are sufficient other documents. I do not insist. The activities
of the Defendant Keitel are also to be borne in mind.
THE PRESIDENT: One moment! You are passing over that docu-
ment then. Very well.
M. GERTHOFFER: Exhibit Number RF-1336 is composed of a
series of orders, of reports of the army and of the Einsatzstab. It
was Document Number 1015-PS(k), submitted by the Prosecutor of
the United States as Exhibit Number USA-385.
"The directives concerning the co-operation with the Armed
Forces will be issued by the Chief of the High Command of
the Armed Forces in agreement with Reichsleiter Rosenberg."
I shall not insist on the responsibility of the Defendant Keitel.
My colleague, who is charged with the individual indictments, will
lay special stress on the development of this point, and to expedite
the proceedings I shall merely mention the following: The Defendant
Seyss-Inquart bears a grave responsibility for the pillaging in Hol-
land of works of art and books.
I thus come to the conclusion of my presentation (Page 64).
Whatever the markets, whoever the purchasers where the traffic
in works of art is concerned, the motive is the same and the
methods are the same. It is difficult to conceive that identical acts
of pillaging, committed simultaneously in all the occupied countries
of western Europe, were not the result of one single will, a ruthless
will to dominate in every sphere, which expressed itself in a desire








6 Feb. 46


to invest the most irregular acquisitions with an appearance of
legality. This is proved by the numerous declarations of the defend-
ants, such as have been submitted to the Tribunal. A will to
dominate the cultural sphere was expressed by the intention to
extend the "action" of confiscation to ever fresh fields. A will to
despoil the occupied countries manifested itself right up to the very
last hours of the occupation. And this will be my last reading to
the Tribunal, Document Number 160-PS, entered in the document
book under Exhibit Number RF-1346. Here is the text. It is
extremely brief:
"14 August 1944 Mission.
"The Chiefs of Special Missions (Haupteinsatzfiihrer), Dr. Lohse
and Dr. Borchers, of my Einsatzstab for the occupied terri-
tories, are charged with the immediate removal, from the
Jeu de Paume Museum and the Louvre depot, of works of
art taken into safe custody by order of the Fiihrer and still
stored in Paris, by all means of transport still available.
"The Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich has recently,
by a personal directive of 13 August 1944, placed the two
above-named persons at the disposal of the Einsatzstab until
the completion of this operation. It is requested that every pos-
sible assistance be rendered to these Chiefs of Special Mis-
sions."
Whatever the reasons of a juridical nature submitted by the
Germans to justify the seizures of Jewish property (Page 65), this
property has never lost the character of private property; and it
has, for this reason, always remained guaranteed by the clauses of
the Hague Convention and especially by Article 46. The seizure of
this property cannot, in particular, be explained as a measure of
protection rendered necessary by circumstances, since, for France
at least, the French Administration of Domains was in a position
to take all the measures desired. As for the fate reserved for the
seizures by the National Socialist leaders, the documents produced
have sufficiently shown their intentions and their plans.
The Defense will undoubtedly object that important treasures of
national works of art from the occupied territories were not taken
to Germany. If such an argument were presented, I should answer:
1. For various reasons the occupying authorities did not have
the possibility to do so since they barely had time to centralize, to
catalog, and to transport the numerous objects of art of which the
occupied countries had been dispossessed. 2. It is obvious that the
occupational authorities seized by priority the private works of art
which are, generally speaking, easily negotiable even in neutral
countries, whereas national works of art are, in a certain sense,







6 Feb. 46


outside the commercial sphere and are in any case difficult to
negotiate in foreign countries.
It may perhaps be claimed that, a great number of works of art
having been recovered, the accusation of removing them no longer
applies.
You will consider, Gentlemen, that if many works of art have
been recovered by the Allied armies, usually in hiding places, the
reprehensible fact held against the defendants nevertheless remains.
As a matter of fact these works of art have been recovered against
their will and thanks to the victory of the Allied armies. The
crime had, therefore, been entirely consummated at the time of
their discovery. It is clear from the declaration that it is chiefly
works of art belonging to private individuals of Belgian, Dutch,
and French nationality, mostly qualified as Jews by the occupying
power, which were looted-looted with the obvious intention of
gratifying their personal vanity and of obtaining valuable property,
viewed from an economic standpoint, contrary to the principles of
international law.
These acts of pillage were often accompanied by aggravating
circumstances, not the least of which was the constant menace of
violence threatening the population of the occupied countries. The
looting of works of art, therefore, appears as a form of general
economic pillaging and the defendants must answer for this before
your high jurisdiction.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you tell me what Document FA-20,
21, and so forth, refers to? There is an inscription which is on
these various documents. If you look at Document RF-1333 or RF-1334,
you will see that on the copies that are before us there is an
inscription "International Military Tribunal" and then the "French
Delegation, the Public Ministry, Economic Section" and then "LVR,
Document FA-21" and "Document FA-20." Now, where is Document
FA-21, and where is Document FA-20?
M. GERTHOFFER: It is a serial number referring to the docu-
ment sent to us. It is 1334 which was rejected by the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but what is Document FA-20 or Docu-
ment FA-21, what does it mean?
M. GERTHOFFER: FA-20 is the serial number which had been
given to this document in the series of documents which we received.
It is of no importance.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean that it is only a number given
by you or that it is a number given by the Economic Section of
the...?







6 Feb. 46


M. GERTHOFFER: It is a number given to it by the Economic
Section.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then if that is so, if it is the number
given to this document by the Economic Section, it does identify the
document as a document of a public nature.
M. GERTHOFFER: We had likewise given to the document which
I quoted a short time ago, a number which was 1333 for Document
FA-21.
THE PRESIDENT: Document FA-21, 1333.
M. GERTHOFFER: We likewise gave it a number.
THE PRESIDENT: I see, the Economic Section is merely a
section of the French Prosecution.
M. GERTHOFFER: Yes, it is a section of the French Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Mounier.
M. PIERRE MOUNIER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French
Republic): Mr. President, your Honors, Gentlemen of the High Inter-
national Military Tribunal, we have the honor of appearing before
your high jurisdiction in order to submit the conclusions of the French
Prosecution in connection with the responsibilities individually
incurred by the defendants brought before this bar of justice. In
pursuance of the allotment of the various tasks incumbent on each
of the four nations, resulting both from the Indictment presented
in compliance with the Charter of 8 August 1945 and the agreements
reached between the four Delegations, the French Prosecution, in
its presentation, has particularly applied itself to the study of the
war crimes under the third Count of the Indictment, that is, the
crimes committed by the defendants in France and in the countries
of western Europe during hostilities and during the German
occupation. It arises quite naturally that, in the explanations about
to follow, the case of some of the defendants will be set aside,
although their responsibility will already have been established by
the other delegations who are, if I may say so, more interested in
the crimes committed by the defendants and which correspond to
the first, second, and fourth Counts of the Indictment. The French
Prosecution, nevertheless, intends to join in the accusations raised
by the other delegations against such of the defendants as concern
them directly, especially against the Defendants Von Neurath and
Von Ribbentrop. The French Delegation associates itself with the
statement presented against them by Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe. The
same holds good as far as the Defendants Hess, Kaltenbrunner,
Frank, Bormann, Funk, Schacht, Von Papen, Baldur von Schirach,
Streicher, Raeder, Dbnitz, and Fritzsche are concerned.
On the other hand, Mr. President, your Honors, we should like,
in this brief presentation, slightly to deviate from the order of







6 Feb. 46


priority in which the defendants appear, both in the Indictment and
in the dock, so as to elucidate matters. As a matter of fact it would
appear desirable, when presenting some of the chiefs of the National
Socialist conspiracy, as viewed from the angle of crimes committed
in the West, to show how they materialized their philosophical,
political, economic, diplomatic, and finally their military conceptions.
Consequently, this order will determine the order in which we shall
present the case of these defendants.
On the other hand the defendants, in pursuance of the rule
adopted by the Tribunal for governing the proceedings which it
intends to follow in this Trial, have not yet given their oral ex-
planations before the Court; and the hearing of the majority of the
witnesses, or at least of the more important witnesses, has not yet
taken place.
That is why the French Prosecution, with the permission of the
Tribunal, reserves the right of completing at a later date its
statement regarding the defendants taken individually on the one
hand, and the groups accused-according to the expression used
by my eminent friend, Prosecutor Boissarie-of "international
indignity," on the other hand.
Needless to say, the final impeachment would be carried out
with the utmost sobriety, since the French Delegation is anxious
to avoid, as far as possible, any unnecessary prolongation of the
proceedings.
An imposing number of documents has been submitted to the
Tribunal. Their reading, presented in the first instance for the
information of the Tribunal, then for the information of the Defense,
and finally, be it said, for that of universal public opinion, has
already taken up a very considerable time. That is why, with
the permission of the Tribunal, we shall abstain, as far as possible,
from presenting the Tribunal with still more copious documents.
Sufficient written evidence has already been furnished by the
American, British, and French Prosecutions which, when added to
those still to be submitted by the Prosecution of the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics, will assure the Tribunal of the defend-
ants' guilt.
We shall therefore content ourselves, in general, with quoting
documents already produced, in order to correlate the facts which
we shall bring forward with the evidence already supplied. I
should like, however, Mr. President, before approaching the case
of the defendants whom I wish to accuse individually, to make
a statement of a very general nature. It would be idle to pretend
that a certain part of this public opinion-and not the least
enlightened part at that-in the Old as well as in the New
World, has evinced surprise in seeing this Indictment, which is







6 Feb. 46


the foundation of the present proceedings, collectively denounce
the criminal character of certain organizations of the Reichs-
regierung, the Leadership Corps of the National Socialist 'Party,
the SS including the SD, the Gestapo, the SA, the General Staff,
and the High Command.
In this connection the Tribunal has been good enough to invite
the various prosecutions to present written memoranda in order
to establish the validity of the imputations contained in the Indict-
ment. But may I be allowed, before a more complete memorandum
is handed to your high jurisdiction, to present to the Tribunal
a few ideas which appear to me necessary to be recalled., It appears,
as a matter of fact, that this concept of a collective responsibility
of the various groups goes hand in hand with the concept of
conspiracy constituting the other governing ideas of the Indictment.
There is no doubt, as far as this idea of a conspiracy is concerned
as featured in the Indictment, that one finds, in the first instance,
in the acts of the defendants that mystery which generally
accompanies any conspiracy, whatever its nature, and that the
various documents already supplied to the Tribunal are sufficient
to confirm the existence of all the elements which render it possible
for me to state that the defendants, their co-authors, and their
accomplices had, in fact, conceived and realized the fraudulent
agreement which was to enable them to make an attempt on the
peace of the world by means contrary to the laws of war, to
international law, and to international morality.
There is no doubt that the Nazi leaders had invested all their
meetings with a guise of secrecy, whether these meetings were
regular and administrative in nature or whether they were of a
casual or of an informal variety. This fact in itself would be
normal if one could isolate it from all the others; but added to all
the other elements in the case, it clearly shows the guilty intent
of the conspirators, for this absolute secrecy alone could imply the
use of the criminal means which we shall have to emphasize.
I shall moreover remind the Tribunal that very often, where
the orders transmitted were concerned, very often it happened that
certain paragraphs had been erased so that no traces could remain.
The Defendant Hermann Gdring admitted this in the course of the
interrogations. Consequently this fact proves the intent not only
to act in the greatest secrecy, but also the intent of doing away
with every trace of what had happened.
-If I were permitted to transpose an expression used during the
War of 1914-18, an expression applied to the sinking of certain
ships of friendly or allied nations, I should say, where this partic-
ular paragraph is concerned, that it was a case of "spurlos
versenkt," that is, sunk without trace.







6 Feb. 46


On the other hand, the proof of this fraudulent agreement is
evident from the eminently and evidently criminal nature of the
decisions taken in these secret councils for incorporation.
THE PRESIDENT: It is just one, now, would it be convenient
for Counsel to break off at this time?
M. MOUNIER: I am at the disposal of the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

[A recess was taken until 1400 hours.]








6 Feb. 46


Afternoon Session

THE PRESIDENT: M. Mounier, owing to technical difficulties
we will not be able to continue the sitting this afternoon because
the technical difficulties, we are advised, cannot be remedied for
some hours; and under those circumstances, the Tribunal thinks it
better to adjourn now. But the Tribunal hopes that you will be
able tomorrow to conclude the case on behalf of the French
Prosecution, and that the case against the Defendant Hess will be
presented on behalf of the British Prosecution.
M. MOUNIER: I understand, Mr. President, and I shall get in
touch with my British colleague as requested by the Tribunal.
STHE PRESIDENT: Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, do you wish to say
anything?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for
the United Kingdom): No, My Lord, we are ready to go on with
the presentation against the Defendant Hess, and we think that it
should take two and a half hours, approximately.

IThe Tribunal adjourned until 7 February 1946 at 1000 hours.]









FIFTY-THIRD DAY

Thursday, 7 February 1946



Morning Session

M. MOUNIER: Mr. President, Your Honors, before the adjourn-
ment yesterday I had begun to explain to you very briefly the
relation which, in our opinion, exists between two of the main
themes in the Indictment, to wit, the accusation of conspiracy
brought against certain groups designated in the Indictment and
which I enumerated yesterday, on the one hand; and, on the other
hand, the various acts which enable us to form our conclusions as
to the criminal character of the activity of the National Socialist
conspirators.
I told you, to begin with, that what appeared to us to be at the
bottom of this criminal activity was the profound mystery, the abso-
lute mystery surrounding their meetings, both official and unofficial,
a fact which is corroborated by statements made by certain of the
defendants in their interrogatories from which it frequently emerged
that some of the orders emanating from high places were to be
suppressed and annulled, so as to leave no trace.
We consider, likewise, that proof of the fraudulent collaboration
which existed among the conspirators is afforded by the criminal
character of the decisions made at these secret councils, which aimed
at the conquest of neighboring countries through wars of aggression.
Finally, proof of this fraudulent collaboration is afforded, in our
opinion, by the way in which these criminal plans were carried out
by the employment of all sorts of means condemned both by inter-
national morality and by the letter of the law; for example, in
international and diplomatic spheres the most cynical plots, the use
in foreign countries of what is known as the "Fifth Column," finan-
cial camouflage, the exertion of improper pressure backed-by demon-
strations of violence, and finally-when these methods no longer
proved effective-the waging of a war of aggression.
As for those individuals who regularly and of their own free
will took part in meetings of groups and organizations, such as those
denounced in the Indictment as internationally odious, their volun-
tary membership in these groups or the active and deliberate part
which they took in their activities suffice to show that they had
every intention of giving their active co-operation to these groups
in a way which admits of no possible doubt. In view of the aims







7 Feb. 46


pursued and the means adopted, this intention could only be a
guilty one.
In the opinion of the Prosecution, engaged in seeking the ele-
ments constituting the crime, it would appear that this suffices to
prove what we call the consilium fraudis and to enable us to verify
the causal link between this will to evil, on the one hand, and the
criminal deed, on the other, and to make it possible to retain the
criminal character of the understanding between the conspirators,
which is also the criminal character of their individual acts.
Could the chief of the Four Year Plan, when he ordered the
Plenipotentiary for Labor Allocation to recruit 1 million foreign
workers for the Reich, forget that this act was contrary to inter-
national conventions and leave out of consideration the tragic conse-
quences which the execution of this murderous action would entail,
and has in fact entailed, for these people and for their families?
Could the Minister for Armaments and War Production who set
up, in agreement with or by order of the Chief of the Air Force,
underground aircraft factories in the internment camps-could he,
I say, fail to be aware that under such conditions to use prisoners
who were already exhausted was equivalent to causing their prema-
ture death?
Could the diplomat who, on various pretexts, treated diplomatic
instruments intended to assure the stability and the peace of the
world as scraps of paper-could he lose sight of the fact that these
acts would plunge the civilized world into catastrophe?
Whether their conscience was at that moment disturbed by the
feeling, more or less obscure, that they were infringing human and
divine laws is a question which need not be asked on the juridical
plane on which you will be working. But even assuming that we
should consider it our duty to put this question to ourselves on the
psychological plane as a result of scruples, we should then have to
remember two essential concepts. The first is that the German, as
a French writer puts it, at times combines in himself the identity
of contraries. Consequently, it is possible that in certain cases he
may consciously do evil while- remaining convinced that his act is
irreproachable from the moral point of view. The second concept
is that, according to the law of National Socialist ethics sometimes
put into words by certain National Socialist leaders, that which
promotes the interests of the Party is good; that which does not
promote the interests is evil.
And yet,. our personal impression on the occasion of the masterly
speech given by M. Frangois de Menthon was that some of his
words, striking in their accent of deep humanity, had stirred some
consciences. Even today, after so many accumulated proofs, we
may wonder whether the defendants admit their responsibility as







7 Feb. 46


chiefs, as men, as representatives of the incriminated organizations.
This will perhaps be revealed in the course of the proceedings.
Mr. President, Your Honors, with the permission of the Tribunal
we shall now take up the question of the Defendant Alfred Rosenberg.
Gentlemen, the young French student who in 1910 had the joy
of spending his vacation in Bavaria, then one of the happiest of the
German provinces, could hardly suspect that thirty-five years later
he would be called upon to apply international law against the
masters of that country. When, after stopping at the Bratwurst-
glbcklein, he climbed up to the ramparts to look at the sunset from
the heights of the Burg, while the lines of a ballad by Uhland rang
in his memory, he did not think that evil masters and false prophets
would twice in a quarter of a century unchain the lightning
over Europe and the rest of the world, and that through them so
many treasures of art and beauty would be destroyed, so many
human lives sacrificed, so much suffering piled up. Indeed, when
one studies the genesis of this unheard-of drama there can be no
question of romanticism; what we have to deal with rather is a
perverted romanticism, a morbid perversion of the sense of great-
ness, and the mind is baffled by the true significance of the ideas
of National Socialism-ideas which I shall touch upon only in
passing to show how they led the Defendant Rosenberg, since it is
he of whom I am speaking, and his codefendants to commit the
crimes which are held against them:
The concept of race, to begin with, which we see arising in a
country which in other respects resembles any other but where the
intermingling of ethnic types of every variety took place through
the centuries on a gigantic scale; this anti-scientific confusion which
mixes the physiological features of man with the concept of nations;
this neo-paganism which aims at abolishing the moral code, the
justice, and security which 20 centuries of Christianity have brought
to the world; this myth of blood which attempts to justify racial
discrimination and its consequences: slavery, massacre, looting, and
the mutilation of living beings!
I shall not dwell, Mr. President, on what we consider a jumble
of nonsense which claims to be philosophy and in which may be
found to be the most heterogeneous fragments of all kinds taken
from every source, from the megalomaniac concepts of Mussolini,
Hindu legends, and the Japan of the samurai, the cradle of fascism,
which swept over the world like a tidal wave. The previous presen-
tations have already adequately dealt with these conceptions. I shall
simply stress today that these pseudo-philosophic conceptions tended
solely to set back humanity thousands of years by reviving the clan
conception, which assumes the law of might as the supreme law-
the Faustrecht already formulated by the Iron Chancellor, the right








7 Feb. 46


to cheat others, the right to take the property of others, the right
to reduce man to slavery, the right to kill, the right to torture.
But homo sapiens refuses to return to the state of homo lupus.
International law is not morality without obligation or sanction.
The Charter of 8 August has recalled and specified the obligation;
it is for you, Gentlemen, to apply the sanction.
One of the consequences of these theories of the superiority of
the race or of the so-called "Germanic Race" was to lead certain
of the conspirators, particularly the Defendant Rosenberg, of whom
we are speaking, to become plunderers; and it is this aspect of the
activities of the Defendant Rosenberg which I should like very
briefly to stress, for it concerns France and the occupied countries
of the West and had deeply harmful consequences for their artistic,
intellectual, or merely utilitarian heritage.
I wish to speak of all the measures decreed or applied by Rosen-
berg with the aim of removing from France and the western coun-
tries cultural treasures, works of art, and property belonging to
groups or individuals, and transferring to Germany all these riches.
Gentlemen, owing to the limited time which we have at our
disposal, I shall limit myself today to recalling how certain organ-
isms were made to collaborate in this pillaging through orders from
higher quarters. I shall indicate, first of all, the part played by the
Gestapo, which was ordained by a decree issued by the Defendant
Keitel, dated 5 July 1940, which bears the Document Number 137-PS
and which was submitted by the American Delegation, under Ex-
hibit Number USA-379, on 18 December 1945 (Exhibit Number
RF-1400). I refer likewise to a second order dated 30 October 1940,
which reinforced and detailed the orders given in regard to pil-
laging by what was known as the Einsatzstab Rosenberg. This is
Exhibit Number RF-1304 (Document Number 140-PS), which was
quoted by the Economic Section of the French Prosecution.
Thus, Keitel and Rosenberg went back to the conception of a
booty exacted by the triumphant German people from the Jewish
people with regard to whom it was not bound by the conditions of
the Compiegne Armistice. This intervention by the chief of the
army, as indicated by the orders to which I have just referred,
suffices in my opinion to prove the important part played by the
German Army in this looting; and the Tribunal will not fail to
remember that when it makes its decisions as to the guilt of the
Defendant Keitel and the Defendant Gbring.
If I mention the Defendant Gbring, it is because a third docu-
ment proves that this defendant gave the operation his full support,
inviting all the organizations of the Party, the State, and the Army
to afford the fullest possible support and assistance to Reichsleiter
Rosenberg and his collaborator Utikal, whom Rosenberg himself






7 Feb. 46


had appointed Chief of the Einsatzstab on 1 April 1941. This is
the order of 1 May 1941, which we produced under our Exhibit
Number RF-1406 (Document Number 1614-PS). If we examine the
text.of this decree carefully we cannot fail to be struck by the first
paragraph. The Tribunal will surely allow me to reread it rapidly:
"The struggle against the Jews, the Freemasons, and other
ideologically opposed forces allied to them, is a most urgent
task of National Socialism during the war."
Thus, it was enough for one to have a philosophy of life dif-
ferent from that described as the Nazi .Weltanschauung, to be
exposed to the danger of seeing one's cultural property seized and
transferred to Germany. But the Tribunal will surely remember
from the documents already presented to it, that not only cultural
property was involved, but that anything with any kind of value
was taken away.
The Defendant Rosenberg tried, in the course of an interrogation
carried out by the superior officers in charge of the preliminary
investigations to claim, without much conviction, it seems to me,
that the cultural property in question was intended solely to adorn
the collections of the National Socialist Hohen Schulen. We shall
see presently, in presenting the text of this interrogation, how we
may judge this. But it is a fact which I wish to present now that,
from the documents which we possess, at least, it does not seem
that the Defendant Rosenberg appropriated works of art, precious
stones, or other objects of value for himself. Consequently, in the
light of the proceedings as conducted thus far, no accusation of this
kind can be brought against him. We shall not say as much for the
Defendant Hermann G6ring, of whom we shall speak a little later
and who, according to the documents that we possess, may be con-
victed of having appropriated to his own use part of the objects of
art taken from the countries of the East and the West.
I shall not dwell on the discussion which might arise about
these misappropriations. I shall go straight on to the interrogatory
of the Defendant Rosenberg. This is the document that was intro-
duced yesterday by the Economic Section of the French Prosecution,
which bears the Exhibit Number RF-1331, and which we use today
as Document Number ECH-25.
I think that the Tribunal will easily be able to refer to' this
interrogatory, but meanwhile I should like very briefly to sum-
marize the essential points which I think should be brought up.
Colonel Hinkel, questioning the Defendant Rosenberg, asked him
on what legal grounds such looting could be justified. The Defend-
ant Rosenberg first answered that these seizures were justified by
the hostility which certain groups had manifested toward the








7 Feb. 46


National Socialist ideology. But a little further on, on Page 4, the
Defendant Rosenberg made the following verbatim statement:
"I considered them"-he is referring to the measures which
he himself had taken-":a necessity caused by the war and by
the reasons which caused the war."
4 few moments later, pressed by Colonel Hinkel, the Defendant
Rosenberg invoked the necessity of putting into safekeeping prop-
erty thus seized, a necessity which will certainly constitute one of
the main points of his defense. But Colonel Hinkel replied to the
Defendant Rosenberg:
"And so if your idea was to safeguard art objects, it sounds
rather strange, doesn't it, that you were going to safeguard
only some art objects and not others?
"On the other hand, with regard to the maintenance of the
objects, there were objects at least equal .in value to those
which had been removed, but to which no one paid any atten-
tion."
Finally, the Defendant Rosenberg admitted that he had very
often given no receipt to those concerned, which in itself precluded
any idea of eventually returning the property to the legitimate
owners.
The truth of the matter is that these were treasures of very
considerable value, and the Defendant Rosenberg in the end admit-
ted that he regarded these acquisitions as an accomplished fact. We
consider that the fact of having thus removed works of art and
objects of value is purely and simply what is known in civil law
as misappropriation. These misappropriations were made on a vast
scale with the grandiose means which the Third Reich had at its
disposal, means which were further facilitated by the intervention
of the Army and the Luftwaffe. But it is nonetheless true that the
criminal character of these misappropriations remains; and we urge
the Tribunal, when it delivers judgment, to declare that it was by
fraudulent seizure that the Defendant Rosenberg and his codefend-
ants robbed France and the western countries of all the objects of
value and all the art treasures and cultural treasures.
As to what the objects themselves consisted of, Mr. President
and Your Honors, I would respectfully refer the Tribunal to the
report submitted by the Economic Section yesterday, which was
made by Dr. Scholz, the associate of the Einsatzstab Rosenberg.
This report was submitted by the Economic Section under Exhibit
Number RF-1323 (Document Number 1015-PS), and in it the Tri-
bunal will find enumerated everything that the Einsatzstab took out
of France. In this connection I shall make an incidental remark in
answer to the question that the President asked my colleague
yesterday about the Rothschild collections. The President asked my






7 Feb. 46


colleague, "Have you proof that certain collections and objects of
value were taken from the Rothschild collections?"
I should like, Mr. President, to point out that there are two
proofs of this. The first is the immediate result of the Rosenberg
interrogation of 23 September 1945. I have just spoken to the Tri-
bunal of the all-important questions put to the Defendant Rosen-
berg as to the legitimacy and legal basis of these removals. I beg
the Tribunal to refer to Page 5 of these minutes. I read from the
text the question asked by the American officer in charge of the
interrogation, my eminent friend, Colonel Hinkel:
"Question: 'How do you justify the confiscation of art treas-
ures belonging to the Rothschild family?' "-A very precise
question. It concerned the art treasures taken from the Roth-
schild family by Rosenberg's organization.
"Answer: 'Still from the same general point of view' "
That means that the Defendant Rosenberg claimed to justify the
confiscations made to the detriment of the Rothschilds by the
reasons which I had the honor of analyzing to the Tribunal a few
moments ago.
A second consequence: The Defendant Rosenberg thus admitted
with his own lips that the Rothschild family was among those
despoiled. That confession, Mr. President, Your Honors, can be con-
sidered as one of the proofs, one of the main proofs. This is the
first answer, then, to the question that the President asked yesterday.
The second proof which I wish to present to the Tribunal is the
following: I beg the Tribunal to refer to the report by Dr. Scholz
mentioned above and produced yesterday in the document book of
the Economic Section. This is Exhibit Number RF-1323 (Document
Number 1015-PS).
If the Tribunal will kindly refer to it, that is to say, the report
by Dr. Scholz, the second paragraph of Page 1, it will find the fol-
lowing statement, "The special staff not only seized a very con-
siderable part of the collection .."
THE PRESIDENT: [Interposing.] As I said the other day, we
cannot keep all the books before us; but it seems to me that, as
you have shown that the Defendant Rosenberg agreed that this col-
lection had been taken, that is quite sufficient.
M. MOUNIER: Mr. President, I understand perfectly your point
of view. I should like respectfully to point out to you that I was
to speak immediately after my colleague, and if I had done so you
would have had this document book before you. We had a delay
of one day, and I apologize for not having thought of asking you
to bring this document again this morning.








7 Feb. 46


However, I respectfully ask the Tribunal to be good enough to
note this reference which it will easily find. It is a very short pas-
sage, which I should like to read to the Tribunal. It will not take
very much time.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly.
M. MOUNIER: This declaration is simply the following:
"The special staff"-that is to say, the Einsatzstab Rosen-
berg-"not only seized a very considerable portion of the
collection which the Rothschilds had left behind in their
Paris mansion..."
I shall not read the rest.
Here then, Gentlemen, is an official report which cannot be
disputed and which demonstrates, like the previous proof, that the
Rothschild collection was among those pillaged.
I do not insist on these facts, which are known to you. It seems
to me that the two points on which I have just cast a ray of light
suffice to make it clear that illegal seizures-fraudulent seizures-
were really operated by the Defendant Rosenberg to the detriment
of France and to the detriment, likewise, of the western countries.
As for their importance, I do not want to abuse the patience of the
Tribunal by quoting statistics. I respectfully ask the Tribunal to
refer to the Scholz report which I have twice mentioned in the
course of my previous statements.
I should not, however, wish to leave the case of Rosenberg, for
the time being, without quoting to the Tribunal a passage from an
article by the French writer Francois Mauriac, of the French Acad-
emy. Francois Mauriac was present on 7 November 1945 at the
inaugural session of the National Constituent Assembly at the Palais,
Bourbon. On this occasion Francois Mauriac invoked a memory
which was recalled in Le Figaro of 6 November 1945 in the fol-
lowing terms:
"Almost five years ago to a day, from the height of this
rostrum, the most illustrious in Europe, a man spoke to other
men dressed in field grey. His name was Alfred Rosenberg.
I can testify to the exact date. It was 25 November 1940.
"Rosenberg leaned his elbows on this rostrum, where the
voices of Jaur&s and of Albert De Mun were once heard and
where, on 11 November 1918, Clemenceau nearly died of joy.
Here are his words:
"'In one gigantic revolutionary burst'-he said-'the Ger-
man nation has reaped such a harvest as never before in its
history. The French will admit one day, if they are honest,
that Germany has freed them from the parasites of which
they could not rid themselves unaided.'







7 Feb. 46


"And the Nazi philosopher"-continues Mauriac-"then pro-
claimed the victory of blood. He meant"-writes Mauriac-
"the victory of race; but it happens that a man may utter
prophetic words unwittingly and without realizing the full
import of the words which God places upon his lips. As
Rosenberg predicted at the Palais Bourbon on 25 November
1940, it was indeed blood that won the victory. It was the
blood of the martyrs which in the end choked the execu-
tioners."
M. President, with the approval of the Court, and with the same
brevity as heretofore-and I hope the Tribunal will appreciate the
care I am taking not to abuse its patience-I should like to say a
few words on the individual charge against the Defendant Fritz
Sauckel.
Your Honors, the Tribunal is already acquainted with the really
remarkable work, the genuinely positive work, presented to it some
time ago by my colleague and friend, M. Jacques Bernard Herzog.
This is why, with your permission, I shall pass over the facts
themselves, which are known to you, and limit myself to the part
beginning on Page 3 of my brief; and we shall examine together,
if it please the Tribunal, the grounds for the pleas advanced up to
now by the Defendant Fritz Sauckel.
One question must be asked first of all: Was Fritz Sauckel acting
under orders when he carried out this recruiting-so-called voluntary
in part but compulsory in most cases-this recruiting of laborers
destined to supply the needs of the German Reich?
According to Sauckel, when he was appointed Plenipotentiary
for the Allocation of Labor on 27 March 1942, his initial program
did not include the conscription of foreign workers; and it is sup-
posed to have been Hitler who intervened then. For it is striking,
Your Honors, when you read the minutes of the interrogations and
also, I am sure, when the defendants speak before the Tribunal,
you will see that most of them take refuge behind two great
shadows; the shadow of the former Fiihrer and the shadow of his
accursed second, Himmler. Here we can see Hitler intervening to
tell Sauckel, according to the latter, that the use of foreign workers
in the occupied territories is not contrary to the Hague Convention
for two reasons; firstly, the countries involved surrendered un-
conditionally and consequently we can impose any kind of labor
conditions on them, and secondly because Russia has not signed this
convention. If, therefore, we use Russian workers on compulsory
labor and make them work to death, we are not violating the Hague
Convention.
This, Your Honors, is the reasoning of the Defendant Sauckel on
this point, without the addition of a single word. Hitler is supposed







7 Feb. 46


to have ordered him to recruit workers, at first using persuasion
and then all the means of compulsion which you already know;
suppression of ration cards, for instance, which compelled men, who
saw their wives and children starving, to volunteer for work which
would be used against their own fellow citizens and against the
soldiers of the Allied armies with whom all their sympathies lay.
The Tribunal will know how to deal with such an excuse for, in
the first place, Sauckel, by virtue of the powers conferred upon him
by his office, enjoyed full authority in regard to everything to do
with the labor necessary for the execution of the Four Year Plan.
On the other hand, on taking up his appointment as Plenipotentiary
for Labor Allocation, Sauckel knew that he would be unable to
carry out his mission without resorting sooner or later to means of
coercion. In any case, Sauckel, as well as most of the defendants
who are before you, enjoyed the most extensive .powers, indeed
autonomous powers. Consequently, he cannot shelter behind orders
received.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Mounier, you must forgive me if I inter-
rupt you; but as I pointed out yesterday, I think, we have already
had an opening statement which contained argument from the
United States, from Great Britain, and from M. De Menthon on
behalf of France, and we have, in the past, confined other counsel...
Do you hear me? I was saying that after having heard the
opening statement from the United States, from Great Britain, and
from France, we have in the past, confined the counsel who have
followed them to a presentation of evidence and have not permitted
them to go into an argument.
I am not sure that that rule has been strictly carried out in all cases
because it is, perhaps, somewhat difficult to confine the matter; but
we have, on several occasions, pointed out to counsel who have
followed the counsel who made the leading statement that they
ought to confine themselves to a presentation of the evidence. I think
the Tribunal would wish you, if possible, to adhere to that rule and,
therefore, not to argue the case but to present the evidence, that is
to say, to refer us to the evidence insofar as it has already been put
in evidence; to refer us to it by its number, possibly stating what
the substance of the evidence is; and, in reference to any document
which has not yet been put in. evidence, to read such parts of that
document as you think necessary.
M. MOUNIER: Very well, Mr. President, to meet the wishes of
the Tribunal, I shall limit myself, as concerns the Defendant
Sauckel, to referring to figures which, it seems to me, do not admit
of argument, since they are the figures given by the Defendant
Sauckel himself under interrogation. This does not seem to me to







7 Feb. 46


infringe upon the rule which the President has just drawn to my
attention.
The figures stated are the following: In 1942 there were already
a million foreign workers in Germany. In one year Sauckel incorpo-
rated into the economy of the Reich some 1,600,000 war prisoners
to meet the needs of war economy.
I beg to refer the Tribunal to Exhibit Number RF-1411 in my
document book. This is an interrogation of the Defendant Speer
under the date of 18 October 1945, which has already been submitted
by the United States Prosecution on 12 December 1945, under
Exhibit Number USA-220 (Document Number 3720-PS). In this
interrogation the Defendant Speer states that 40 percent of all
prisoners of war were employed in the production of arms and
munitions and in related industries.
I likewise offer under Exhibit Number RF-1412 (Document
Number 1292-PS) of 13 December 1945, a memorandum signed by
Lammers, Secretary of the Reich Chancellery, giving an account
of the discussion which occurred at a conference held on 4 Jan-
uary 1944. On that date, 4 January 1944, in the course of a con-
ference, at which, in addition to the Defendant Sauckel, the Fiihrer
himself, Himmler, Speer, Keitel, Field Marshal Milch, and others
were present, the number of new workers to be furnished by
Sauckel was fixed at four million.
I must mention in this connection that in the course of this
meeting, Sauckel expressed doubts as to the possibility of furnishing
this number of workers unless he were given sufficient police forces.
Himmler replied that he would try to help Sauckel to achieve this
objective by means of increased pressure.
Consequently, when the Defendant Sauckel claims, as he probably
will do, that he had absolutely nothing to do with the institution
now spurned by everyone, known as the Gestapo, we may answer
him by official German documents showing that for the recruitment
of labor he really did employ the police with all the more or less
condemned means already pointed out to you.
As for France alone, the demand for workers at the beginning
of 1944 amounted to one million; and this figure was over and above
the number of men and women workers already sent to Germany,
who in June 1944 numbered one million to one and a half million.
The Defendant Sauckel, therefore, committed the offenses already.
known to the Court. We have an old adage, an old slogan we may
say, according to which "The court is the law"; and it is proper to
present only the facts. I shall, therefore, abstain from reading the
passage on Page 9 of my presentation dealing with those articles of
the law under which the activities of the accused, Sauckel, are
punishable.








7 Feb. 46


Mr. President, Your Honors, I should like now to summarize the
activity of the Defendant Speer, for as regards France and the
western countries the Defendant Speer incurs responsibilities of the
same nature as those of the Defendant Sauckel. Like the defendant
of whom I have just spoken, he permitted violations of the laws of
war, violations of the laws of humanity, in working towards the
drafting and carrying out of a vast program of forced .deportation
and enslavement of the occupied countries.
Speer, Mr. President, first took part in working out the program
of forced labor and collaborated in its adoption. In the course of his
interrogatory, he stated under oath: First, that he took part in the
discussion at which the decision to use forced labor was made;
second, that he collaborated in the execution of this plan; third, that
the basis of this program was the removal to Germany by force of
foreign workers on the authority of Sauckel, Plenipotentiary for
Allocation of Labor under the Four Year Plan. The Tribunal will
kindly refer to Document Number 3720-PS, submitted by the United
States Delegation on 12 December 1945, which I quote under Exhibit
Number RF-1411 of our documentation.
As regards France, in particular, Hitler and the Defendant Speer
held a conference on 4 January 1943 in the course of which it was
decided that more severe measures would be taken to expedite the
recruiting of French civilian workers without discrimination between
skilled and unskilled workers. This is made clear by a note to which
I would ask the Tribunal to refer. That is a note signed by Fritz
Sauckel, himself. It has already been presented by the American
Prosecution under Document Number 556-PS (Exhibit Number RF-67).
The Defendant Speer knew that the levies for forced labor in
the occupied territories were obtained by violence and terror. He
approved the continuation of these methods from September 1942
onward. He knew, for instance, that workers were deported by
force from the Ukraine to work in the Reich. He knew, likewise,
that the great majority of workers in the occupied regions of the
West were sent to Germany against their will. He even declared
before the American magistrate who was questioning him that he
considered these methods regular and legal.
The Defendant Speer, knowing that the foreign workers were
recruited and deported for forced labor in Germany, made specific
demands for foreign workers and provided for their employment in
the various branches of activity placed under his direction.
The preceding paragraphs summarize all the declarations made
by the defendant in the course of the interrogation already men-
tioned and to which I have just referred.
I beg to remind you that Speer, in addition, was a member of the
Central Committee of the Four Year Plan. On account of this, and in







7 Feb. 46


common with Field Marshal Milch, only Hitler and G6ring were
superior to him as far as demands for labor were concerned. He
likewise took part, in this capacity, in discussions which took place
with Hitler to settle the numbers of foreign workers required. He
knew that most of these forces were obtained by means of de-
portation, through coercion and enslavement of the occupied coun-
tries. Proof of this is furnished by various passages of the minutes
of the Central Committee of the Plan and from Speer's conferences
with Hitler. I refer to Document Numbers R-123 and R-124 which
have been submitted under Exhibit Number USA-179, on 12 De-
cember 1945 (Exhibit Number RF-1414).
Speer did not hesitate to resort to methods of terrorism and
brutality as a means of achieving a peak output from the forced
workers. He found justification for the action of the SS and of the
police and for the use of concentration camps to subdue recalcitrants.
I beg to recall to the Tribunal the document relating to the
minutes of the 21st meeting of the Central Committee of the Four
Year Plan, 30 October 1942, Page 1059, already quoted. This is the
document which I quoted previously, Exhibit Number USA-179,
Document Numbers R-123 and R-124 on 12 December 1945 (Exhibit
Number RF-1414).
The Defendant Speer likewise bears responsibility for the use of
prisoners of'war in military operations directed against their coun-
tries; for in his capacity as chief of the Todt Organization, he forced
citizens of the Allied nations to work for this organization, par-
ticularly, in the building of fortifications and, among other things,
the famous West Wall. He likewise forced Frenchmen, Belgians,
Luxembourgers, Dutchmen, Norwegians, and Danes to manufacture
arms to be utilized against the allies of the countries to which they
themselves belonged.
Finally-and this is a very important question regarding the
responsibility of the Defendant Speer-he participated directly in
the use of internees from the concentration camps. He proposed the
use of internees from the concentration camps in the armament
factories. Now, in view of the wretched physical condition of the
prisoners, no profit but only the extermination of the prisoners could
be expected from this measure. The use of internees from the con-
centration camps in the factories had the effect of increasing the
demand for this type of labor; and this demand was satisfied in part,
at least, by sending to the concentration camps persons who, in
ordinary times, would never have been sent there.
Speer went so far as to establish, near the factories, concentration
camps which served solely to feed them with labor.
He knew the Mauthausen Camp. The Spanish witness, Boix,
whom the Tribunal heard a few days ago, attested under oath that








7 Feb. 46


he had seen, with his own eyes, the Defendant Speer visit the camp
at Mauthausen and congratulate the directors of this camp. He even
declared that he had worked on the preparation of photographs of
this scene. Consequently this visit to the camp must be considered,
absolutely beyond doubt. He therefore saw for himself the barbarous
conditions in which the prisoners lived. Nevertheless, he persisted
in utilizing labor from the Camp of Mauthausen in the factories
under his authority.
I have concluded the case against Speer.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now for 10 minutes.

IA recess was taken.]

M. MOUNIER: Mr. President, Your Honors, considering the
strictly limited time at my disposal, I shall be compelled, in dealing
with the Defendant GSring, of whom I shall have the honor to speak
to you, to skip Pages 1, 2, and 3 of this presentation. I ask the Court
now to turn to Page 3 of my statement.
I should like to present to the Tribunal the question of the
responsibility of the Defendant Gbring for the measures taken
against the commandos and against Allied airmen who fell into the
hands of the Germans during their missions.
During the Trial we have on several occasions mentioned an
order given by Hitler on 18 October 1942, which was first submitted
by the American Delegation on 2 January 1946 under the Document
Number 498-PS (Exhibit Number RF-1417). It is an order detailing
the measures to be taken against commandos in operations in Europe
and Africa. They were to be exterminated to the last man, even if
they were in military uniform, and no matter what their mode of
transport might be: boat, plane, or parachute. An order was given
to take no prisoners. In the occupied territories isolated members
of commandos who might fall into the hands of the German forces
were to be handed over immediately to the Sicherheitsdienst, RSHA
branch. This order did not apply to enemy soldiers who were
captured or who surrendered in open battle and within the scope
of combat operations.
Among those notified was the Oberkommando of the Luftwaffe.
Consequently, the Defendant G8ring knew of this order; and in his
capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force, as well as in his
capacity as Commander-in-Chief of one of the three military
services, he has joint responsibility with the leaders of the other
services.
We know, also, that on the same date, 18 October 1942, Hitler had a
memorandum distributed annotating the previous instructions and







7 Feb. 46


announcing that if one or two prisoners were spared for the time
being, so that information might be obtained from them, they were
to be put to death as soon as they had been interrogated.
I refer to Exhibit Number RF-1418 (Document Number 503-PS)
of 9 January 1946. The American Prosecution which produced this
document has also submitted to the Tribunal-and I shall not come
back to this fact-a certain number of cases proving that this order
was frequently carried out.
On the other hand, the Tribunal already knows that numerous
Allied airmen, who found themselves in German territory after
losing their planes, were maltreated and lynched by the Germans
with the connivance of the authorities. As evidence we present only
the order of 10 August 1943 by which Himmler forbade the police
to take part in these lynchings and forbade them equally to oppose
them. I refer to Document Number R-110, presented 19 December
1945 as Exhibit RF-1419.
Goebbels, in an article in the V6lkischer Beobachter, intervened
in the same way. Bormann, in a memorandum of 30 May 1944,
confirmed these instructions and stipulated that they should be
passed on to the administrative authorities, not in writing but by
word of mouth only. I refer to Document Number 057-PS (Exhibit
Number RF-1420), cited on 17 December 1945 by the American
Delegation.
These instructions were carried out to the letter, to such an
extent that the American forces have brought to trial, since the
capitulation, a considerable number of German civilians who had
murdered unarmed Allied airmen.
But the Defendant Goring was not satisfied simply to let these
things happen. At a conference which took place on 15 and 16 May
1944 he stated that he would suggest to the Fiihrer that not only
parachutists but also American or English crews who attacked,
indiscriminately, cities and civilian trains in motion should be put
to death on the spot forthwith. This is Exhibit Number RF-1421
(Document Number L-166), cited by the French Prosecution, 31 Jan-
uary 1946, under Exhibit Number RF-377.
In fact, Goring saw Hitler between 20 and 22 May 1944. The Air
Force General, Korten, sent the Defendant Keitel a memorandum
pointing out that Hitler had decided that enemy airmen who were
shot down should be put to death without trial if they had par-
ticipated in acts described as terroristic. This is Document Number
731-PS (Exhibit Number RF-1407), which we submit to the Court in
the form of a photostatic copy. I ask the Tribunal's permission not
to read this document. I think the Tribunal will prefer to read it
for themselves. However, I am at their disposal if they wish me to
read it.








7 Feb. 46

THE PRESIDENT: No; it has already been put in, has it not?
M. MOUNIER: Yes, Mr. President.
In consequence, an agreement was made with the OKW that
Himmler, G6ring, and Ribbentrop should be consulted on the
measures to be taken in this matter. Ribbentrop proposed that any
attack upon German cities should be considered as an act of ter-
rorism. General Warlimont also, in the name of the OKW, proposed
two means: Lynching and what he called Sonderbehandlung or
special treatment, which consisted in delivering the parties concerned
to the Sicherheitsdienst where they were subjected to diverse treat-
ments, one of the most notorious being the well known Kugel action,
of which the Tribunal has already heard and which was simply a
way of doing away with those in question. Document Number 735-PS
(Exhibit Number RF-1452) was submitted to this effect on
9 January 1946.
On 17 June 1944 Keitel wrote to Gdring to ask him to approve
the definition of acts of terrorism drawn up by Warlimont. On
19 June 1944 Gdring replied through his aide-de-camp that the
population should be forbidden to act as it had done against enemy
airmen and that these enemy airmen should be brought to trial,
since the Allied Governments had forbidden their airmen to commit
acts of terrorism. I refer here to Document Number 732-PS, which
I submit to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-1405.
Consequently, I draw the Tribunal's attention to this document,
dated 26 June 1944, where Reich Marshal Gbring declared that he
would support the taking of judicial action against these airmen.
Remember this date, 19 June 1944, because it is important.
But on 26 June 1944 the Defendant Gbring's aide-de-camp tele-
phoned to the OKW headquarters staff, who had insisted upon a
definite reply, and notified them that his chief, Reich Marshal
G6ring, was in agreement with their definition of acts of terrorism
and the procedure proposed which, as I recall it, included two alter-
natives: The handing over of those in question for Sonderbehandlung
or their immediate execution. I refer to Document Numbers 733-PS
and 740-PS, cited on 30 January 1946 by the French Prosecution,
under the Exhibit Numbers RF-374 and RF-375 (Exhibit Numbers
RF-1423 and RF-1424).
In a memorandum dated 4 July 1944 Hitler made it known that
since the British and the Americans had bombed small towns of no
military importance as a reprisal for V-1, he was asking the German
radio and press to announce that all enemy airmen shot down in an
attack of that kind would be put to death as soon as they were
caught. Such are the facts found in these absolutely irrefutable
documents, and if I cited in detail the reply made on 19 June 1944
by the Defendant G6ring, or to be more exact, by his aide-de-camp,







? Feb. 46

it is because I am anxious to introduce into the proceedings the
documents concerning this question in their entirety.
But I see that in spite of the existence of the order of 19 June
1944 I am obliged to infer the full responsibility of the Defendant
Hermann Gdring.
In fact, the Defendant Hermann GSring states that he never
agreed to these measures, and that Captain Breuer, who telephoned
to the General Staff of the OKW, acted-according to the Defendant
G6ring-without having previously consulted him. G6ring added, in
the statements which he made, that he could not be held responsible
for all the absurd or insignificant actions carried out by his subordi-
nates.
But, Gentlemen, without even reference to the famous Leader-
ship Principle-for I see no reason to apply German law to the
accused in any way-the Defendant G6ring is in any case responsible
in his capacity as leader. Responsibility begins with authority.
Moreover, what did he do to stop the massacre of airmen by people
whom he had ordered to do the opposite, according to orders which
it was forbidden to formulate in writing?
Even if we consider the position which he takes up in the order
dated 19 June 1944, to which I have referred as establishing ac-
curately his views at that date on the massacre of airmen and
parachutists, we are compelled to see that at that date, 19 June 1944,
even in Germany, the most shortsighted knew that the German
forces would soon succumb to the weight of the Allied Armies.
Allied aviators were put to death in Germany throughout the
war. Moreover, if the Defendant Hermann Gbring maintains that
the letter of 19 June 1944 was written by his aide-de-camp, he is
obliged to admit that the letter of 26 June 1944, also written by the
aide-de-camp, can be imputed to him, although signed by one of his
subordinates. We consider, then, that this document signed by an
aide-de-camp involves G6ring as much as if he had signed it himself.
Mr. President and Gentlemen, I shall not enlarge upon the re-
sponsibility of the Defendant GBring for compulsory labor, but I
respectfully beg the Court to refer in due course to certain rays of
illumination that I have tried to indicate in this brief in order to
clarify the position of the defendant in this matter.
I shall make no further mention of the employment of prisoners
of war and internees from concentration camps, which I detailed on
Page 10 of my brief. I should like simply to say a word concerning
economic pillaging and the pillaging of art treasures. These questions
are dealt with at the bottom of Page 11 of my brief.
Concerning economic pillage, Gentlemen, I shall not stress the
considerable part played by the Defendant GSring as leader of the
Four Year Plan in all the measures which contributed to strip









7 Feb. 46

literally all the western countries of their substance. I shall simply
point out one fact which, I believe, has not yet been brought to your
knowledge but which is found in the next to the last subheading on
Page 12. This fact is the following: After the Armistice in 1940, the
Defendant G5ring had brought about through Roechling, the official
sequestrator, the cession to the Hermann Gdring Werke of all the
factories of Lorraine belonging to the family of Wendel.
This is connected with all the operations of economic pillaging
about which the Economic Section of the French Prosecution have
already informed the Court. With regard to this, the Court will not
fail to realize that the Defendant Gbring shares jointly with the
Defendants Rosenberg, Ribbentrop, and Seyss-Inquart-for the
Netherlands-the responsibility for this spoliation.
With regard to the pillaging of works of art, Gentlemen, we have
documents which permit us to draw our conclusions with regard to
this matter which is obviously an unpleasant one for a man who has
occupied the position of the Defendant G6ring, namely, that a part
of the works of art and objects of value which were pillaged from
the western countries were reserved for him without any kind of
compensation. I shall not discuss the exact meaning of this act in
municipal law; I leave it to the Tribunal to apply the proper legal
terms for this matter, when it delivers its judgment. But what I
should like to say today is that the appropriation of works of art by
the Defendant Hermann GSring for his private purposes is proved
in documents which cannot be contested and which have already
been submitted to the Tribunal. I refer particularly to Exhibit
Number USA-368 (Document Number 141-PS) submitted on 18 De-
cember 1945. This document was submitted by the Economic Section
of the French Prosecution under the Exhibit Number RF-1309.
I may rapidly recall that this document prescribes that works of
art brought to the Louvre are to be classified in a certain way:
"Firstly, those works of art of which the Fiihrer reserved the
right to dispose of himself. Secondly, those works of art
destined to complete the collection of the Reich Marshal"-
et cetera.
I won't read the rest of the document.
What followed these levies or these privative appropriations?
Did the Defendant Gbring pay anything for these? The opposite
seems to be the case; for in the interrogation of the Defendant Ro-
senberg, which was given under the Exhibit Number RF-1332 and
to which I referred in the course of the hearing, it is pointed out
that the Defendant Gbring made his selection from the works of
art assembled by Rosenberg's staff and made no corresponding pay-
ment to the Reich treasury.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs