Following that is the heading of "Anti-Jewish Institute," and, finally, "Obligatory Grouping of the Jews."
Next is "Tuesday Conferences." I shall read Paragraph 2:
"Since the middle of 1941, every week there is a Tuesday conference"-this is page 5 of the document--"in which are represented the following services: One, Military Command, administrative staff, administration section. Two, Administrative Staff, Police Group. Three, Administrative Staff, Economic Section. Four, Embassy of Germany and Paris. Five, Einsatztab West of the Reichsleiter Rosenberg.
"The conference had as a result, except of course for very rare exceptions, which occurred in isolated cases, that an absolute aligning of the Jewish policy was able to be carried out in the occupied territory."
THE PRESIDENT: We will break off now.
(A recess was taken from 1535 hours to 1545 hours.)
M. FAURE: Gentlemen, in order not to prolong the discussion too greatly I would like, if it pleases the Tribunal, to submit as a document all the documents which are found in this book, but to read in making an analysis only some which are the most important.
I will then pass over Document 1211, 1212, 1213, and 1214. I should like to read 1215, which is a telegram of the 13th of May 1942. I should like to mention to the Tribunal at the end of the text which has been mimeographed in French, that there was on the document the letter "K", which indicated the word "Keitel." I would like to mention that this word is not found in the document. I should like to read this document, which is very short:
"Secret Telegram - 13 May 1942. To the Chief of Bezirka.
"According to the instruction of the Commanding General of the Army we must not, in publications relative to the forced driving back of inhabitants, to use the words 'sending towards the East,' in order to avoid reference to the occupied regions of the East.
"The same is true for the expression "deportation," this word reminding too closely the expulsions of inhabitants into Siberia at the time of the Czars. In all the publications and in all correspondence we must use the words "sending for forced labor." Each of quote.
Dannecker, of the 10th of March 1942. The purpose of this memorandum is thus entitled. "Deportation from France of 5,000 Jews." the document. Dannecker alludes to a meeting of the Jewish charge d'affaires, a meeting which took place in Berlin in the RSHA, the 4th of March 1942, during which it was decided that parley would be undertaken for the deportation of several thousands of Jews from France. The memorandum specifies Paragraph 4, second sentence:
"Jews of French nationality must be deprived of their nationality before the deportation, or at the latest, the very day of that deportation." deportation must be paid by the French Jews. As far as imminent deportations is concerned of considerable Jewish masses from Czechoslovakia, it was provided that the Slovakian Government should pay a sum of 500 Rentenmark for each Jew who was deported, and, moreover, would pay for the expenses of deportation. of June, 1942, entitled "Other transports of Jews coming from France." This continues the same operations, but I believe it is interesting to offer this in evidence without reading it, because this document shows the complete functioning and the normal functioning of this administration, of which the purpose was to arrest and to deport innocent people. 11th of June 1942, at which were present, besides Dannecker, those who were responsible for the Jewish Department of Brussels and of the Hague. sentence of the paragraph: "Ten per cent of Jews who are not able to work will be included in these convoys." This sentence shows that this deportation did not have for its purpose merely the procurement of labor. one sentence: "It was agreed that coming from Holland 15,000, from Belgium 10,000, and from France, including non-occupied territory, total sum 100,000 Jews who should be deported." The last part of the memorandum relates to the technical execution.
It alludes first to the negotiation with the service of transportation in order to obtain necessary trains. It alludes then to the necessity of obtaining from the de facto French Government the deprivation of nationality of all Jews who dwell beyond the frontier. Its result was that Jews who were deported would no longer be considered as French citizens; and we must note, last of all, that the French State should pay the expenses of transportation and divers expenses of the deportation. 1942, entitled "The Transportation of Jews outside of France" concerning the order of the SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann to the SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dannecker of June 11, 1942. The three first paragraphs of this memorandum show that difficulties existed for the transportation of deportees, because of the fact that a great number of railway material is necessary for the preparation of the Eastern campaign. I should like to read the two last paragraphs of this letter:
"We now carry out a great reorganization of the German transportation system in France, consisting essentially in the taking over by the Reichsminister of transportation under his responsibility and numerous organizations which existed until today. This reorganization, which was ordered in a rather hasty manner quite recently, will be completed only in a few days. It is impossible to make known approximately before that date whether the transportation of Jews can be carried out in the near future or at a remote date on this anticipated scale, or even partially." responsibility of the Reich cabinet. Such an important undertaking as the deportation of so many Jews required the intervention of many different administrative services, and we see here that the success of this enterprise depends on the reorganization of transportation under the responsibility of the Reichsminister of transportation. It is then certain that such a ministerial department, which is the technical department, the best one, must intervene in order to carry out that general enterprise of deportation. of Doctor Knochen. This memorandum is entitled "Technical Execution of Convoys of Jews Outside of France." I shall only read, in order not to be too long, the first paragraph of this memorandum.
"To avoid any conflict with the operation which is being carried out concerning French workmen for Germany, we will only speak of Jewish transfers. This version is confirmed by the fact that the convoys may include entire families, as a result of which we envisage the possibility of sending later for the children less than sixteen years old who were left behind." painful from an ethical point of view, continues to treat in a large measure the question of the deportation of the Jews as if it were a question of simple merchandise as if these human beings were mere merchandise.
in Paris, Doctor Zeitschel, of June 27, 1942. I should like to read this letter, which is thus expressed:
"As a result of my conversation with the Hauptsturmfuehrer Dannecker of 27 June, during which he pointed out that he needed as soon as possible 50,000 Jews in the free zone, to be deported toward the East and he agreed, on the other hand, to aid the operation Darquier, the General Commissar on Jewish questions, I immediately informed Ambassador Abetz and Councilor Rahn of this matter. The Councilor Rahn would meet this afternoon President Laval, and promised to discuss with him immediately the handing over of these 50,000 Jews, as well as the question of giving plenary powers to Darquier de Pellepoix, in conformity with the laws already promulgated, and to grant him immediately the credits which he requested. Unfortunately, having been absent from Paris for eight days, and seeing the urgency of the question, I should like the Hauptsturmfuehrer Dannecker on Monday, the 29th, or Tuesday, the 30th, the latest to get in touch with Councilor Rahn, to become acquainted with the reply of Laval." of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and of Ribbentrop in this abominable matter of the handing over of 50,000 Jews which was required. It is quite evident that such a step cannot be by a mere councilor of an embassy unknown to his minister, and if the latter is not informed he must have been informed and he must have consented to this matter.
I now submit Document 1221. It is a memorandum dated 26 June, 1942, of which I shall only give the title "Directives for the Deportation of Jews." A meeting of Specialists Concerning Jewish Questions. The Commando of the Security Police of Section IV-G, 30 June, 1942. Deportation of Jews coming from occupied territory to Auschwitz." In this memorandum Dannecker alludes to the conference which took place of the RSHA, according to which 50,000 Jews should be transferred. There follows a list of the trains, the stations in which they should meet, and so forth, and it asked for a report.
I now submit Document 1223. It is a memorandum dated 1 July 1942. It is the conference of Dannecker and Eichmann, who, as we already know, was in Berlin and who had to come to Paris on that occasion. Purpose: Departmental conference concerning the imminent evacuation from France with the SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dannecker. It still concerns the preparation of the great operation which was envisaged. date, July 4, 1942 "Directive for a major round-up of Jews in Paris." July, 1942, of Dannecker. Purpose: Deportation of Jews from France. It concerns a conference held with representatives of French authorities. We see in the document the expression "Judenmaterial," which was translated in an indirect way by the words "Jewish livestock."
I now submit Document 1226. I should like to read, if the Tribunal pleases, the first paragraph of this document, which is very revealing, concerning both the collaboration with the transportation services and the frightful mentality of the Nazi authorities. The memorandum is a result of a telephonic conversation between the signatory Roethke and the Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann at Berlin.
"The SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann at Berlin telephoned the 14th of July 1942 about 1900 hours. He wished to know why the train which had been provided for the transportation of 15th of July 1942 had been annulled. I replied that in the beginning those who were stars would be arrested also in the provinces, but that in conformity with a recent agreement with the French Government only Jews who had lost their nationality should be arrested.
"The train of 15th of July 1942 then was annulled, according to the information of the S.D. Kommando at Bordeaux; 150 Jews without nationality were found in Bordeaux, given time, and Ersatz in Jews could not be found. SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann replied that it was a question of prestige. They had to carry out the Reichsminister of Transportation's long negotiations concerning trains, negotiations which were crowned by success, and now Paris cancels the train. Such a thing had never happened to him up to now. The matter wag very compromising.
He did not wish to inform subsequently the SS Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, for the blame would fall on his own shoulders. He wondered if in a general way it was not necessary to let France drop as a country of deportation was concerned." indicating that they evacuated up to the 2nd of September 1942, 27,069 Jews, and they might reach the figure at the end of October of a total of 52,069 Jews. They were concerned to accelerate the pace and to reach also the Jews of the non-occupied zone in France, I now submit Document 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 1228, "On the occasion of the congress which took place on the 28th of August 1942 at Berlin, it was observed that most of the European countries are closer and much closer to a permanent solution of the Jewish problem than France.
In truth, these countries began much earlier. We then must catch up in many matters between now and the 31st of October 1942."
I now submit Document 1229 without reading it. It is a memorandum of the 31st of December 1942 of Dr. Knochen on the same subject of deportation. 1943 concerning the present situation of the Jewish question in France. In the first part of this document they indicate that the deportations reached the number of 49,000 Jews up to the date of the 6th of March 1943. Then the information follows of the nationalities, which are quite varied -- rather a certain number of Jews who were deported in addition to French Jews. Paragraph 3 of this list bears the title position of the Italians in the Jewish question. I shall only read the first lines and the last lines of this long paragraph.
"The situation in the departments occupied by the Italians in France must be changed if we wish to solve the Jewish problem. A few cases are very urgent. These terrible cases were Italians in the zone in which they were opposed to the arrest of the Jews."
"A.A. was informed by the R.S.H.A. Eichmann concerning the acts of the Italians."
A.A. appears to be the initial of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which the following sentence confirms. I continue the quotations:
"The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Ribbentrop, wished to discuss at the time of an audience with the Duce the position of the Italians concerning the Jewish question. We do not know the results of these parleys."
I shall not submit documents numbered 1231 nor 1232. I pass then to the last document which I should like to present to the Tribunal. This document relates more specifically to the deportation of children. the 21st of July 1942. I shall read paragraph 2.
"The question of deportation of children has been examined with the SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann. He decided immediately that the German Government would do all that was possible for the children. SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Nowak promised to do all that was possible at the end of August until September; about six convoys towards the general government, including Jews of all kinds, including those who were unable to work and elderly Jews."
Now I offer in evidence Document 1234. It is a memorandum of August 15, 1942, signed "Roethke." Before pointing out the interest of this document I remind the Tribunal that I have already submitted a document No. 18 and in that document there was a formula which I recall and which well envisaged the possibility of seeking out later the children of deportees who were left behind. The Nazis wished to give the impression that they deported the families together; that, at any rate, they didn't deport trainloads composed exclusively of children to give this impression. They thought up something which you could only believe if you read it; to mingle in definite proportions groups of children and groups of adults. I read paragraph 4 of this document 1234.
"The Jews coming from the non-occupied zone at Drancy will be mingled with Jewish children who are present at Pithiviers and Beaune La Rolande, so that out of 700 there will be at least 500 Jewish adults, 300 to 500 Jewish children. In fact, in conformity with the instructions of the R.S.H.A., trains containing only Jewish children must not leave France."
I also will read the following sentence:
"It was said at Leguay that in September thirteen trainloads of Jews were also to leave Drancy and that they could deliver Jewish children coming from the non-occupied zone."
I now submit these documents with a series relative to the Jewish question.
Document 1235 is one which I shall read so it will tell what was in it, "Received:
6 April 1944, Lyon. Object: The Institution of Jewish Children at Izieu, Ain Province.
This morning this institution of children, or child colony, at d'Izieu (Ain) was dissolved, and a total of forty-one children from three to thirteen were arrested.
Moreover, cessful, among which there were five women.
They were not able to secure much money.
The convoy which was destined for Drancy started on 7 April 1944."
discussed in the presence of Dr. V.B. and the Haupsturmfuehrer Brunner. Dr. V.B. stated that in cases of this kind special measures were provided considering the lodging of the children by the SS Obersturmfuehrer Roethke. The SS Haupsturmfuehrer Brunner stated that he knew of no such instructions or of any such plan. That theory did not prove of such special measures in this case, which was also received in conformity with the customary habit of deportation, and hence, from that time on is to take no decision as to the principle in this respect. I believe that law shows that there was something even more certain and more horrible than the concrete facts of the removing of these children, and in an administrative characteristic that account shows the hierarchic voice in a conference of different officials discussed in a matter relative to the normal method of their departments. were put in the movement on such occasions, and for such purposes. At first there is an illustration of the words which were made in the report of Drancy: "la maniere froids. The cold manner" tinuation of the chapter which includes certain number of documents which were gathered in order to show in conformity with our general line of presentation the perpetual interference of the German administrative service, and as I find myself late in my schedule, I shall simply point out the numbers of these documents, which I should like to offer in evidence, and which I shall not at this time give account of.
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.