These documents will be numbered from 1238 to 1249. the number 1233, which isinteresting from the organic character, and the juridical potential of the German organization. I shall quote a few sentences of this document which is in the report of the Chief of the Administrative General Staff on the service made during the reprisal action in September 1941. They suggested that in the future the execution of hostages shall be void, and of their being replaced by death sentences, and pronounced by the war tribunal. I shall skip the following few lines, and I continue: "The reprisal will consist in the fact thatin cases in which they were normally pronounced penalties, the imprisonment only, or acquittal, they will pronounce a capital punishment, and they should carry it out. With this influence exercised over the decision of the judge, considering the fixation penalty for crimes and acts of sabotage, they will take account of the spirit of the French point of view which is very strongly attached to the juridical form." tion. I should like to submit a documentary proof considering the criminal action which has not as yet been explained to the Tribunal, and which involves the personal responsibility of certain of the defendants who are present here. I must remind, or recall to your minds the criminal actions of the Nazis which is to come in divers forms, and they would carry it out through a long period of time, and I have already discussed this at length with the Tribunal. The form which was especially original was this, which consisted in those crimes to be committed by persons who were organized as common law criminals, and associations, and under such conditions as appeared committed by assembled bandits; or even imputed to resistance organizations, and which had responded to dishonor. sometimes difficult to detect because of the precautions which were taken to camouflage them, to truly show the responsibility for these crimes.
Even up to the limits the Nazis stated so. Now this proof was discovered in a suit carried out in Denmark, and for all information was given by the report of Dannecker, which wasgiven very recently.
I shall explain very briefly the existing situation. It was a series of murders which were committed in Denmark, which received the title of "Murders by compensation, or by 'clearing'" (Counsel for defense steps up to the rostrum). This definition was explained by counsel fordefense who points out that there is an error in translation in the last document which I read. It is document No. 1243 and he said is a word which I translated incorrectly, and as I am ignorant of the German language, it is quite possible that the error exists, and this word was used in case of error.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document?
M. FAURE: My assistant informs me of the fact thatan error exists. I hope the Tribunal will excuse me for it, because I have considerable work. This is document 1243, that is line 14 which I read where they "Normally pronounced penalties, the imprisonment only, or acquittal." According to counsel for the defense, that they normally pronounced a prison sentence only, or pardon. The word seems tell to be constructive, even though the use of the word is explained an error in translation. I think it is sufficient to note that the inflexion given to the pronouncing of "capital sentence" instead of "I pronounce prison sentence", would seem to be normally justified.
Now I come back to the subject I was discussing. I should like to read and explain the situation, and the definition which was given by the Dannecker report. It is found on page 19 of the supplementary memorandum, of the Dannecker report. This document has been submitted, under No. 901. Itsee it isnot set out in the Document Book, but I would like to point out the passages which I cite and I found in my brief.
last pagination. I quote page 19 of the Danish report:
"Beginning with the New Year 1944, it has occurred that a great number of persons, at intervals which were shorter and shorter, and the names of persons who were well known, were murdered. For instance, they rang the door bell and one or two men asked to speak to them. When they appeared at the door . . . ."
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't got it. It is in this dossier of the administrative and juridical organization of the criminal action, is it? Under which document is it?
M. FAURE: It isn't in the document book. It is in the dossier of the brief. It is the last part of the dossier. The numbers run to 76 and then again with number 1. If the Tribunal goes to page 76, then a new pagination begins, page 1.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have it.
M. FAURE: I read from page 19 of the report, page 3 of the brief, last paragraph:
"Beginning with the New Year 1944, it occurred with a great number of persons, at intervals shorter and shorter, and most of them well-known persons, were murdered. For instance, they rang the doorbell and one or two men asked to speck to them. When they appeared at the door, those unknown persons killed them with revolver shots. Or for example, a person pretending to be ill, went to a physician during the hours when he met his patients and when the physician entered, this unknown person killed him with a revolver. Other times, it happened at night, men who were unknown, forcibly entered a house and killed the person who lived in the house, before the eyes of his wife and his children or even a man was ambushed in the street by civilians and killed with a revolver," I do not need to read the following paragraph.
I resume the reading of the past paragraph on page 19:
"As the number of victims increased on the Danish side, they were forced to recognize with stopor, with astonishment that there was given a certain political motive as a basis of all these murders; that they realized that in one way or in another the Germans were the instigators.
"After the capitulation of Germany in Denmark, according to the investigations of the Danish police, it has been established that all these murders, which amounts to hundreds, were really committed at direct orders of the supreme authorities and with the active corroboration of German high officials in Denmark. " Here I end the quotation and I shall summarize what follows:
The danish authorities were able to discover all the criminal murders, which amounted to 267, which was analyzed in the official Danish report. Those acts consisted of crimes and other criminal acts, and notably explosions. It was determined that all these acts were committed by bands of Germans and some Danes, who constituted two groups of bandits, as I should prove subsequently, who acted according to orders from a very high place. tigation which was made on the first of these crimes, of which the victim was the great Danish poet, Kaj Munk, who was also the pastor of a parish. Those who carried out the design confessed.
I summarize hare the documents in order not to be too long. The pastor, who was sought out in his home and forcibly taken to a vehicle, was killed on the highway. His body was found the following day with a sign pinned upon him, where it was written "Cochon, you worked for Germany just the same." conditions now. A first fact was that they discovered the members of the group, the bandit groups who committed these different crimes, that they received a letter of personal congratulations from Himmler. The text of this letter, which was found on one of the murderers, constitutes appendage 14 of the Danish report and on the other hand, we have here the photostatic copy with the signature of Himmler, but these crimes are extraordinary crimes and entail in an unbelievable way and involve other responsibilities than that of Himmler himself. The Danish police was able to arrest Pancke, who exercised his functions of the police in Denmark from the 1st of November 1943. the document book and which concerns the interrogation of Guenther Pancke, of the 23d of August, 1945.
document, which involved several of the defendants.
THE PRESIDENT: You are going to read some new document, aren't you? You are going to read some fresh document, aren't you?
M. FAURE: It is the same document, Mr. President. It is the official Danish report, which includes all the documents, notably the original, of the Tribunal at Copenhagen. As I pointed out just now, this large Danish report was handed to you the other day under the document 901 and I did not ask that it be handed over to you again. We have a limited number.
THE PRESIDENT: You were referring just now to a letter of Himmler expressing thanks to these murderers. That is on page 11, isn't it?
M. FAURE: This appendage 14 of the Danish report was recopied in my brief under page 11, in fact.
THE PRESIDENT: What are you going to offer after that?
M. FAURE: I submit the appendage 7 of the Danish report which was the interrogation of Guenther Pancke. The extract which I would like to submit is copied and found on page 12. The Danish document, although it is offered in evidence in its entirety, these are parts of the document which was already submitted.
THE PRESIDENT: I follow, yes.
M. FAURE: I quote: "The 30th December, 1943. "Best was present at a meeting of the General Staff of the Fuehrer; Herr Hitler, Himmler, Kaltenbrunner General von Hannecken, Keitel, Jodl, and Schmundt were present, amongst others. This corresponds with the diary of Best, of the 30th of December, 1933, of which there exists a copy. There was also there a representative of the Foreign Office in Germany, but Pancke does not remember his name nor whether the person in question pronounced the speech. In the course of the first part of the meeting, Hitler was in very bad humor and everything led one to believe that the information that he obtained concerning the situation in Denmark was a bit exaggerated." come to page 14 of my brief. In the passage which I don't read, the witness reports that he, Dr. Best, advised that sabotage be fought in a legal way.
He also points out on page 14 that Hitler points himself strongly against the proposal of Pancke and Best, declaring there was no question of judging saboteurs before a Tribunal, and then he said that such methods would end and they would consider the condemned as heroes.
I resume the quotation on page 15:
"With the saboteurs, there was only one way of acting; to wit, to kill them and preferably at the time when they were carrying out the action, if not at the time of their arrest. And they both received from Hitler in person the severe order that compensatory murders should be initiated. To this, Pancke replied that, nevertheless, it was Very difficult and also dangerous to shoot people at the time of their arrest, if they could not know with certainty at the time of the arrest if the person who was arrested was really a saboteur, Hitler demanded compensatory murders in the proportion of five to one at least; that is to say, for each German, five Danes should be killed."
The rest of the document shows that General Hannecken made a report concerning the military situation.
I read the sentence on page 16 of my brief:
"Moreover, General Keitel took part in the conversation, limiting himself nevertheless to propose the reduction of food rations in Denmark to the same level as rations in Germany. This proposal was rejected by all of the Danish representatives, all three of the Danish representatives. The result was, the meeting ended by the express order of Hitler for Pancke to initiate these compensatory murders and counter sabotage. After this meeting, Pancke had a conversation alone with Himmler, who told him that he, Pancke, had learned now from the Furhrer himself how he should act and that he thought that he could count on Pancke to execute the order which he had received. It seemed up to now, he had executed that of Himmler. Pancke knows that Best, after the meeting had a conversation with Ribbentrop, but he doesn't remember the result." but not in the proportion of five to one but in the proportion of one for one. It shows that he sent a report to Berlin for these compensatory murders.
I read on page 18 of my brief, second paragraph:
"Pancke explained that in his opinion these murders were decreed with full premeditation by the supreme jurisdiction in Germany, which consider them necessary for the protection of Germans who were stationed in Denmark, and for the Danes who were working for Germany; thus, Pancke had to obey the order. Bovensiepen gave an account of these facts when on a question of important subjects, he made proposals, Pancke does not know if, in all cases, Bovensiepen selected the subjects himself or whether in certain cases the subjects were selected by his subalterns but he said, too, that he underwent a strong pressure from the military side on the part of General Hannecken, although General von Hannecken was opposed to reprisals through terror and later, still more, Colonel General Lindemann, when soldiers were killed or damage was caused to military objectives, he immediately inquired of Pancke, he asked him what measures he had taken, and from the military side they could report to the major staff, that is to say, Hitler. Pancke was to give a satisfactory reply and also he was to act." I end the quotation here, "General Pancke then explains that was the organization of the terroristic groups."
Dr. Best, the German Plenipotentiary. Among his papers they found the diary of Dr. Best. This diary has one leaf of the 30th of December, 1943, which agrees with the information of a preceding testimony, as to the meeting held the 30th of December, 1943 at the house of the Fuehrer, page 21.
"Noon. In the teahouse of the Fuehrer. Lunch with Adolph Hitler, Himmler, Reichsfuehrer, Dr. Kaltenbrunner, SS Obergruppenfuehrer, M. Pancke, SS Gruppenfuehrer, Fieldmarshal Keitel, General Jodl, General von Hannecken, Lt. General Schmudt, Brigade Lieutenant Scherff. Discussions pertaining to Danish questions lasted from 1400 hours until 1630 hours." Dr. Best was naturally interrogated concerning the subject. of my document, Dr. Best first made the note on the calendar of the 30th of December which I have just cited; that is, to follow the fundamental part of the questions concerned. Here is what Dr. Best states, at the bottom of page 23.
"Pancke does not remember whether it was Hitler that spoke aboutit. I only mentioned concerning compensatory murders that it should be practiced in the proportion of five to one. Himmler and Kaltenbrunner said to Hitler without the other persons present and Best gives the same enumerations as Pancke, who did not express their opinion."
Page 23: "The Minister of Foreign Affairs was not represented, so that von Hannecken did not participate in this conference. After this conference, Best had a conversation with Ribbentrop, in which he explained what had taken place. Ribbentrop shared his opinion, that it was necessary to pretest against such methods but there was really nothing to do about it. It then is proven that the Defendants Kaltenbrunner, Keitel, and Jodl were present at a meeting of different departments, where it was decided that murders, pure and simple murders would be organized in Denmark. Undoubtedly, the witnesses do not say that Keitel and Jodl manifested any enthusiasm at this proposal but it is established that they were there, and they were there in the exercising of their functions as well as their subordinate, the military commander of Denmark. Here it concerns the responsibility for several hundred murders which were abominable but undoubtedly that is only a small part of the crimes which caused so many millions of victims. Nevertheless, I think that is important to learn that the major leaders of the army and diplomacy knew and accepted the systematic organization of these acts of banditry and of murders committed by professional killers who fled after their crimes.
have proposed to present to the Tribunal. I will now make a mere general commentary. I think that there was in these numerous Nazi crimes so much monotony and so much variety that the human mind with difficulty contemplates the extent of them, and each of these crimes bears in itself the identity of this common horror and hides the infernal valor of the doctrine which commanded then. If it is exact, at least has any point whatsoever, if there is surrounded within us anything else as "sound and fury" such a doctrine must be condemned with the men who incarnated it and who directed it.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you tell us what is proposed for tomorrow?
M. FAURE: Tomorrow, M. Gerthofer will, if it suits the Tribunal, give a statement of the artistic spoiliation. This is a question, when this brief was to have been done, previously it was renounced; they thought that it would be this sense.
On the other hand, one of the magistrates for the French delegation, M. Mounier, proposes to present a brief which
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Tribunal would hope that the expose
M. FAURE: That is why I propose and ask the Tribunal to know if it considered it; but at any rate, if the Tribunal considers that
DR. THOMA (Attorney for Rosenberg): If I understood the artistic spoliation of France would be covered.
I would like to up again.
Then, I, as representing Rosenberg, and my colleague, Dr. Stahmer, as representing Goering, decided not to bring witnesses that we had planned to bring.
If, however, the French Prosecution to get hold of these witnesses once more and summon them.
Therefore,
THE PRESIDENT: I think Defendant's Counsel must be wrong in thinking that the U.S. Counsel said anything which meant that the French Prosecution couldn't produce evidence with reference to the spoliation of objects of art.
I can't think the United States had Was that not so?
M. FAURE: That is quite true, Mr. President. Your inter
THE PRESIDENT: I think the Tribunal would wish that the
M. FAURE: Thank you.
(Whereupon, at 17.25 hours the Hearing of the Tribunal adjourned to reconvene at 10.
00 hours on Wednesday, February 6, 1946.)
M. FAURE: If it please the Tribunal, M. Gerthoffer will now present the brief concerning the pillage of art works.
M. GERTHOFFER: The Economic Section of the French Delegation prepared an exposition or a statement concerning the pillage of works of art in the occupied countries of Western Europe. In order to cut short, in this presentation -- we had thought that we would not present this, in the session of the 22nd of January, but we were holding ourselves at the disposal of the Tribunal if they considered it necessary for this to be presented at a later date. However, since on the 31st of January, the American Prosecution informed us that the Defendant Rosenberg intended to maintain that the artistic treasures were only collected in order to be protected, we consider, from the documents which we have at the disposal of the Court, that there is no possible interpretation of mere protection, that this was true spoliation. I am at the Tribunal's disposal to prove this, in the brief, which I will cut short as much as possible, and in submitting the documents which we have collected.
Mr. President and gentlemen. The pillage of art works presents a cultural aspect, which I will not go over again since it was brought out by Colonel Storey On the 18th of December, 1945. I shall simply regard the subject from the economic point of viewin order not to take up the general pillage of the works of art in Western Europe. seized principally, in a systematic way, works of art belonging to private citizens, most often under the pretext that these citizens were Israelites. Thus, they procured for themselves a very exact means of exchange. In Belgium, in Holland, in Luxembourg, and in France, from art galleries, public collections as well as private collections, old furniture, porcelain and jewelry were stolen.
which one finds in all wars, and as we still find examples; this campaign of spoliation was carried out in a systematic and disciplined manner. The methods used were diverse. The whim or the personal act of individuals could be carried out only in the measure in which it seconded the execution of the plan prepared by the National Socialistleaders, even before the month of June 1940. The official organization for pillaging was principally the Special General Staff of Minister Rosenberg for the Occupied Territories of Western Europe and of the Netherlands. If this organization was not the only agent, it was the most important. criminal attitude. The will or the desire of seizing works of art, as well as material wealth, was the foundation of the policy of National Socialist expansion. The attitude in Poland of the Defendant Frank has already given sufficient proof. this valuable booty appears. In their haste and their desire to seize as much as they could, several parallel authorities carried out confiscations; the military authorities first, either indirectly as in Holland, with the special services of the Devisenschutzkommando, or directly, as was the case in France, with the service called Artistic Protection. The civil authorities then, paralleling this, were entrusted with the same mission, whether it concerned the German Embassy in Paris or in the low countries, or the Office of Enemy Property in Holland, depending upon the Reich Commissar. This plurality of jurisdiction, moreover, survived the establishment of the Rosenberg General Staff.
This is the first phase of the pillage of art works. According to the official correspondence, as well as the statements of Otto Abetz, the initiative may be imputed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and this initiative thus comes from the Defendant Ribbentrop.
countries of western Europe until the month of October 1940. The second phase began with the appearance of the Special General Staff of Rosenberg. It enters on the scene under the patronage of the Defendant Goering, and henceforth this latter must be considered culpable of the pillage operations. General Staff. The principal culprit is the Defendant Alfred Rosenberg, the activities of the Special General Staff did not stop in Europe until the liberation. On the one hand, the archives of the Rosenberg Department fell into the hands of the French Army. On the other hand, another part, which had withdrawn to Fuessen, was seized by the American Army, which also collected the archives of the accused Rosenberg. Tribunal. into Holland, Belgium and France. In Paris, beginning with the month of June, there was a service of the Embassy directed by von Kunsberg and Dr. Dirksen, parallel to a technical service of the Military Governor directed by Count Wolff Metternich. The order of seizure envisaged, thus flouting the Hague Convention, not only public property, but private property as well. von Bokelberg, Military Governor of Paris. I submit a copy of this order under the number 1301. Here it is:
"The Fuehrer has, according to the report of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, given the order for seizing, along with art objects, those objects of historical value in the possession of the French State, and also to seize the art works and objects of historical interest in private possession, especially in the possession of the Jews. This must not be considered an expropriation, but a transfer under our guard as a guarantee for the peace negotiations." Luxembourg.
THE PRESIDENT: That was 1301, was it not?
M. GERTHOFFER: Yes, the first document was 1301.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
M. GERTHOFFER: The document 1302, which was discovered by the American Army and which was registered under the number 137-PS, concerns the accused Keitel, dated the 5th of July, 1940:
"Reichsleiter Rosenberg suggested to the Fuehrer the following:
"1. State libraries and archives must be searched to find documents of value for Germany.
"2. The Chancellery, the high authorities of the Church, and the Masonic Orders will be searched to find the proof of the political maneuvers directed against us, and the material in question will be seized.
"The Fuehrer ordered that this suggestion be followed up, that the Gestapo, aided by the Archive Specialists of Reichsleiter Rosenberg, be in charge of the search.
"The Chief of the Security Police SS, SS Gruppenfuehrer Heydrich, has been informed. He will get in touch with the competent military commander to carry out this order. Belgium, Luxembourg, and the part of France which we occupy.
"Chief of the High Command," signed "Keitel". concerns Holland and is expressed in about the same terms. an analogous order for Belgium. carry out Keitel's orders, this decree concerning the protection of works of art was issued in the occupied territories. This decree appeared in the German official bulletin Vobif, number 3, at pages 49 and following. I submit a copy of this decree under the number 1305, and I request the permission of the Tribunal to quote the two following paragraphs.
The first paragraph:
"Art objects which can be moved will not be removed from the place where they are at present, nor modified in any way whatsoever without the written authorization of a superior commander of the Militaerverwaltung."
Subparagraph 3:
"Moveable works of art of which the value exceeds a hundred thousand francs must be declared by their owners, or those who have them in custody, in writing, up to August 15, 1940. They must make this declaration to the Feldkommandatur who is competent, or to another authority appointed by the latter." give it two weeks ago, they will remember that for private property, currency and other wealth, the Germans had, at the same time, issued decrees which resembled blockade or immobilization. occupied territories -- it isn't concerned yet with placing in a safe place or confiscation, but merely immobilization and a statement of their existence, preparatory measures for the future spoliation and indications of the bad faith, which we should remember. French-Jewish art collections, seizures made under such conditions that they provoked numerous protests to the Armistice Commission at Wiesbaden. French Secretary for Finance of the 18th of December 1941, containing one of these protests. In order not to take up the time of the Tribunal I will not quote, but I will merely offer in evidence the document. civil authorities and military authorities. There were conflicts and rivalries. However, beginning with the month of March 1941, the Rosenberg Special General Staff took the lead in these operations. It is possible to say that it enjoyed, from 1940 to 1944, a true monopoly as far as the confiscation of works of art was concerned, not only in Luxembourg, but in Belgium, in Holland, and in France. Foreign Policy of the Party. Hence, the first function, in theory, of the Special General Staff consisted in gathering political material which might be exploited in the struggle against the Jewry and the Free Masonry by the Hohe Schule, the Advance School, whose purpose Hitler defined in his order of January 29, 1940.
This is found in the American documentation under the number 136-PS, and I offer it in evidence under the number 1308, in the form of a copy.
This document is very short, and I shall read it to the Tribunal:
"The School of Higher Education" -
THE PRESIDENT: We Can't hear you Would you repeat, please?
M. GERTHOFFER: This is number 136-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: And your number is 1308?
M. GERTHOFFER: Yes.
"The Higher School -- Hohe Schule -- one day is to become the very center for doctrinal research and National Socialist education. Its creation will take place after the war. Thus, to hasten the execution or the carrying out of the work which has begun, I order that Reichsleiter Alfred Rosenberg continue to direct these preparatory works, in the fist place, in the domain of research and the establishment of a library. Party organizations and state organizations are required to give their aid in this task.
"Berlin, 29 January", signed "Hitler," occupied countries, the Special Staff of Rosenberg was not satisfied to pillage the private collections, but its activity applied to the seizure of many trusts, notably in bank safes. This is clear from a passage of a document which I submit under the number 1307, and from which I mil read a passage, if the Tribunal permits. This is at page 2 of the translation, and it is also found in the brief:
"26 February, 1941.
"Mr. Braumuller, acting in behalf of Mr, Rosenberg, seized two chests filled with art objects which had been inventoried and placed in the agency of the General Society at Arcachon and which was held in custody for Mr. Phillipe de Rothschild, who had not yet regained his French nationality of which he had been deprived."
limited to the pillage of Jewish property or the property of Masons. It rapidly seized everything which had to do with the artistic patrimony of the occupied countries, patrimony which the Special General Staff appropriated by means which ware always illegal, without distinguishing between public property and private property.
the Defendant Goering. Army and filed under the number 141-PS. It is an order of the Defendant Goering, dated Paris, 5 November 1940, which extended the activity of the Special General Staff.
"To insure the preservation of works of art possessed by Jews, works of art which had been put in custody in the Louvre, the following measures are envisaged:
"1. Those among the works of art which the Fuehrer has taken as his own right to dispose of as far as further assignment is concerned.
"2. The art objects which may serve to complete the collection of the Marshal of the Empire.
"3. The art objects or collections which may be utilized by the universities in the general plan of Reichsleiter Rosenberg."
THE PRESIDENT: I think this document has already been read, M. Gerthoffer. I think this document was read by Colonel Storey.
M. GERTHOFFER: It is possible, Mr. President. under the number 1310, which is filed in the American documents as 138-PS. Here is the principal passage:
"Complementing the order of the Fuehrer transmitted to Reichsleiter Rosenberg, Masonic Orders must be searched, as well as libraries and the archives of occupied countries, for objects of value to Germany, and these objects must be safeguarded by means of the Gestapo. In order to do this the Fuehrer has decided:
"Reichsleiter Rosenberg, or his representative Reichshauptstellenleiter Ebert, has received from the Fuehrer personally exact instructions concerning the right of confiscation. He is authorized to transport into Germany objects which seem of value to him, and to place them in security. The Fuehrer has kept for himself the decision of their future use. You are requested to inform the competent services."