The Nuremberg Trial

The Evening Star (January 14, 1946)

Doenitz order forbade U-boats to rescue victims, court told

NUERNBERG (AP) – An explicit directive of the German Navy forbidding any attempts to rescue or aid survivors of torpedoed ships was read into the record of the International War Crimes Tribunal today in the prosecution of Grand Adm. Karl Doenitz.

“No attempt of any kind must be made at rescuing members of ships sunk, and this includes picking up persons in the water and putting them in lifeboats, righting capsized lifeboats, and handing over food and water,” read the order issued to all submarine commanders under Doenitz’s command on September 17, 1942.

“Rescue runs counter to the rudimentary demands of warfare for the destruction of enemy ships and crews.”

Doenitz is first on the list of 10 defendants whose individual cases Britain and the United States hope to conclude this week, clearing the way for French and Russian prosecutors to start their cases next week.

The case against Doenitz was closely linked with that against his predecessor as commander in chief of the German Navy – Erich Raeder – which is to follow.

Hitler order disclosed

Earlier evidence was introduced which disclosed that Adolf Hitler, in an effort to render American shipping construction useless by creating a shortage of seamen, directed German U-boats early in 1942 to kill or capture crews of torpedoed vessels.

British prosecutors produced also a secret wireless message to one U-boat commander who reported giving aid to women and children who survived a sinking. The message informed him that this action was “wrong” and bluntly reminded him his vessel was not sent to rescue “English and Poles.”

The Fuehrer’s orders were disclosed in notes on a conversation between Hitler and Japanese Ambassador Hiroshi Oshima in the presence of Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop January 3, 1942. The notes were submitted to the international tribunal.

U-boats recalled

The memorandum said Hitler told the Japanese ambassador he had recalled the entire Atlantic submarine fleet for reorganization, after which it would be posted outside U.S. ports. Later, he continued, they would congregate off Freetown, on the western bulge of America, and Capetown, South Africa.

“The Fuehrer pointed out that however many ships the United States built, one of their main problems would be the lack of personnel,” the memorandum continued. “For that reason even merchant ships would be sunk without warning, with the intention of killing as many of the crew as possible.

“Once it gets around that most of the seamen are lost in the sinkings, the Americans would soon have difficulties in enlisting new people.”

Lifeboats to be sunk

Hitler told Oshima the German attitude could not be governed by “any humane feelings” and he therefore gave his order that “in case foreign seamen could not be taken prisoner, which is not always possible in the open sea, U-boats were to surface after torpedoing and shoot up the lifeboats.

“Oshima heartily agreed with the Fuehrer’s comments and said the Japanese, too, are forced to follow these methods,” the notes concluded.

Prosecution plans sought

The International Military Tribunal, pondering requests by thousands of Germans desiring to testify, called on Allied prosecutors today to define specifically their plans and objectives against six Nazi groups accused as criminal organizations.

The tribunal suggested it might defer the trial of the six groups, which include the German high command and general staff as well as the SA and SS, whose membership runs into hundreds of thousands of persons, until present hearings against 22 top-ranking Nazi leaders are completed.

Lord Justice Geoffrey Lawrence, president of the tribunal, announced that “many thousands of applications” have been received from members of the indicated organizations expressing a desire to present defense testimony.

Four points listed

The tribunal, he said, “is having difficulty in determining the manner in which representatives of the named organizations will be given an opportunity to appear.”

He said the court desired to hear arguments from the prosecution and the defense on the following points:

  • “The exact tests of criminality which must be applied” and the nature of the evidence to be admitted since the charter creating the tribunal “does not define a criminal organization,” and the question “of whether such evidence might better be received at subsequent trials. Many assert they were conscripted into these organizations or were unaware of their criminal nature or are innocent of unlawful acts,” the presiding judge explained.

  • “The question of the exact time each organization was criminal is vital to the decision of the tribunal. The tribunal desires to know of the prosecution whether it intends to adhere to the limits of time in the indictment.”

U.S. case recalled

  • The question “of whether any class of persons should be excluded from the scope” of a declaratory judgment sought against the six Nazi organizations. Lord Justice Lawrence recalled that American prosecutors in the case against Nazi leadership corps indicated they might seek to exempt some of the party’s small fry office holders from the criminal category.

  • A summary of “the elements which justify the charge of being a criminal organization” in each instance and the question of what acts of individual defendants would justify declaring entire organizations to be criminal. With this point Lord Justice Lawrence asked the prosecution to submit proposed findings of fact.

Arguments on all of the points will be heard at the conclusion of the prosecution’s entire case which is expected in about one month.

It was learned that approximately 37,000 applications have been received from members of indicted organizations who desire to be heard by the tribunal.

Most of these come from members of the SA – Hitler’s original Brown Shirts, who dropped into relative obscurity as the SS rose steadily in influence. Sixty-five applications were received from former Gestapo men.

In addition to the SS and SA, the two largest groups, and the military clique, represented by the German high command and the general staff, the indicted organizations are the Leadership Corps, the Gestapo and the Reich Cabinet.

Jackson plans to return to court here in spring

NUERNBERG (AP) – Justice Robert H. Jackson, chief United States prosecutor at the German war crimes trial, said today he expects to leave the case and rejoin the Supreme Court “at some time during the latter part of the spring sessions.”

Mr. Jackson’s statement followed the departure for the United States yesterday of Col. Robert S. Storey of Dallas, Texas, chief of the documentation division; Col. Leonard Wheeler of Cambridge, Massachusetts, who presented the case on church persecution to the International Military Tribunal, and Lt. Col. Thomas Hinkel of Washington, executive officer of the interrogation division.

Ralph G. Albrecht, New York attorney in charge of cases against individual defendants, is expected to leave at the end of this week.

nuremberg.tribunal

Day 34

The Pittsburgh Press (January 15, 1946)

Humane U-boat men scored for rescues, trial hears

Witness says Doenitz hit saving sailors off U.S. coast as ‘particularly regretful’

NUERNBERG (UP) – German U-boat commanders who rescued torpedoed merchant ship crews on the American coast instead of shooting them were criticized sharply by the German Naval High Command, a witness told the war crimes trial today.

Lt. Cmdr. Karl-Heinz Moehle, a briefing officer at the Kiel submarine base, said Grand Adm. Karl Doenitz had ordered all Allied survivors shot in the sea. He said Doenitz called rescue of seamen in the shallow waters off the United States “particularly regretful.”

Doenitz scowled at Moehle from the defendants’ box.

Moehle reaffirmed testimony given yesterday that U-boats carried specific orders to kill survivors. He said one submarine commander was denounced for failing to shoot five Allied airmen he sighted on a raft in the Bay of Biscay.

Moehle called the Doenitz order a “very ticklish mater,” but he said he knew of no commander who ever refused to carry it out because it conflicted with his conscience.

Under cross-examination by Doenitz’s attorney, Moehle said the admiral’s orders were issued after an Allied air attack in 1942 on a submarine attempting to rescue survivors.

Moehle claimed he sank 20 ships while commanding a U-boat before he took a shore job in 1944. He said he never had rescued any survivors.

“Many of my sinkings were out of convoys or on the high seas, and rescue was impossible,” he said.

The Evening Star (January 15, 1946)

Doenitz confesses lie in charge that British sank Athenia in 1939

Affidavit declares liner was sunk by U-30 on day Britain entered war

NUERNBERG (A.P.) – An affidavit by Grand Adm. Karl Doenitz introduced before the International Military Tribunal today exploded the German myth that the British liner Athenia was sunk by the British themselves in 1939 in a plot to push the United States into the war.

Great Britain demanded the conviction of Doenitz, successor to Hitler as Fuehrer of Germany, as a “murderer” for U-boat attacks on helpless sailors in lifeboats and for ordering the ruthless shooting of Commandos.

Col. H. J. Phillimore, a British prosecutor, told the tribunal trying Doenitz and 21 other top Nazis as war criminals that Doenitz was “no plain sailor” and was a key cog behind Nazi preparations for aggressive war.

Tried to blame Churchill

The affidavit, signed by Doenitz November 17, 1945, said the Athenia was sunk by the German submarine U-30 on the day Britain entered the war. On board were 1,500 passengers. Thirty Americans were among the 113 persons who perished. German propaganda at the time tried to lay the blame on Winston Churchill.

Bolstering the cast against Doenitz, Lt. Cmdr. Karl-Heinz Moehle, a German submarine commander who sank 20 Allied ships, testified against the admiral, asserting that he did not want to be blamed for his former chief’s order to shoot up lifeboats.

As the prosecution denounced Doenitz, the cold, aloof admiral dropped his pose of indifference for the first time and cursed and defended himself in mutterings with other defendants in the dock.

Navy caught short

The British, also prosecuting Grand Adm. Erich Raeder, predecessor of Doenitz as commander of the German Navy, introduced a captured Nazi document in which Raeder asserted that Hitler’s ideal year for attacking England was 1944 and that the German Navy, which took his word for everything, was caught short by the outbreak of the war in 1939.

Doenitz’s affidavit said the German high command ordered the sinking of the Athenia “to be kept a total secret.” The German idea was that the loss of American lives might excite the United States as did the sinking of the Lusitania in the World War. It was the German scheme to turn American ire on the British and away from Germany.

nuremberg.tribunal

Day 35

The Pittsburgh Press (January 16, 1946)

Nazi persecution of Christians told

Case against Bormann present to court

NUERNBERG (UP) – The phantom Martin Bormann was accused before the war crimes court today of conspiring with his fellow Nazi leaders to “insure the elimination of Christianity.”

Bormann, missing and likely dead but nevertheless being tried in absentia, as the target of today’s evidence in the prosecution of individual defendants.

Naval Lt. (jg.) Thomas F. Lambert Jr. of Detroit opened the prosecution of Bormann deputy of the Nazi Party and right-hand man of Adolf Hitler after the flight of Rudolf Hess to Britain.

“He was one of the principal architects of the Nazi conspiracy,” Lt. Lambert charged.

Started reign of terror

He said Bormann instituted Germany’s reign of terror in 1935 with an order to all party agencies to report to the Gestapo all persons who criticized the Nazis.

Accusing Bormann of evincing an ultimate aim of eliminating Christianity, Lt. Lambert introduced the Nazi leader’s letters and orders demanding the exclusion from the party of scientists who were Christians, as well as Christian clergymen and theological students.

Reich Labor Service members were forbidden to take part in religious celebrations. Christian literature was to be replaced in schools with Nazi mottoes and rituals. Theological schools were to be closed, Christian property confiscated, church subsidies suspended, and church literature kept out of the hands of the Army, according to the Bormann orders.

Objection overruled

A defense objection that the exclusion of church members from the Nazi Party was not a war crime was overruled by the court. It held that Bormann’s hatred of churches had been proved.

Bormann was charged with personally taking a leading role in the execution of Adolf Hitler’s orders for the “liquidation of the Jewish problem.” He was described as a prime mover in the program of starvation, degradation and extermination of the Jews.

The Evening Star (January 16, 1946)

Reich of 250,000,000 was Hitler’s dream; Nuernberg court told

NUERNBERG (AP) – The International Military Tribunal heard today that Hitler dreamed of creating a nation of 250,000,000 German-speaking people within 100 years and ordered 500,000 young female domestics brought from the Ukraine as a step toward that goal.

The court, trying 22 top Nazis as war criminals, received this evidence in the record of a secret meeting of Fritz Sauckel with officials of the Ministry for Occupied Eastern Territories and the Nazi Labor Front September 4, 1942.

Sauckel, who was in charge of foreign labor, was in the prisoners’ box as the report was read in prosecution of Martin Bormann, Hitler’s aide who is being tried in absentia although many believed he died in the Battle of Berlin.

The record showed that Hitler wanted the imported women to be from 15 to 35 years old and of appearances suitable for their assimilation by the Germans.

Seyss-Inquart accused

To further the scheme, Hitler ordered the suspension of a decree forbidding the “illegal bringing of female housekeepers into the Reich by members of the armed forces.”

Lt. Henry V. Atherton of Boston, an American prosecutor, accused another defendant, bespectacled Arthur Seyss-Inquart, former commissioner for Austria and later for the Netherlands, of deporting at least 117,000 Jews from Holland, most of them to Nazi murder camps. He was accused, moreover, of sending 431,500 Dutch to slave labor in Germany.

Describing Seyss-Inquart as one of the “most detested” defendants, the prosecutor swiftly introduced evidence that Seyss-Inquart possessed absolute power and therefore could not escape blame for his deeds. He called Seyss-Inquart the first of Hitler’s Quislings.

The prosecutor quoted one of Seyss-Inquart’s speeches in The Hague in 1943: “We remain human because we do not torture our opponents. We have to remain tough because we have to annihilate them.”

Schirach case completed

The prosecution completed its case against Baldur von Schirach, who was leader of the Hitler Youth movement and gauleiter of Vienna, blaming him for the deportation to Poland of 60,000 Vienna Jews, many destined for Nazi murder mills.

American Assistant Prosecutor Capt. Drexel A. Sprecher of Independence, Wisconsin, read to the court Von Schirach’s own declaration that as Nazi district leader of Vienna he had driven “tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of Jews into the ghetto of the east.”

Von Schirach also was linked with the confiscation of church properties in Vienna by documents showing that he even engaged in a dispute with other Nazi leaders over the disposition of the seized properties, insisting that he be permitted to keep the loot rather than turn it over to the Reich.

French finishing case

Meanwhile, French prosecutors put the finishing touches to their case and were ready to begin presentations of evidence against the 22 defendants tomorrow. American and British prosecutors hurried to complete testimony against Seyss-Inquart; Wilhelm Frick, former protector of Bohemia and Moravia, and Hans Fritzsche, former deputy propaganda minister.

Completion of those cases still would leave three other defendants – Rudolf Hess, Franz von Papen and Constantin von Neurath, former foreign minister – to be disposed of, but prosecutors decided these could be sandwiched in during the next four or five weeks, which the French and Russians estimate they will require.

Raeder reveals Reds aided Nazi sea war

NUERNBERG (AP) – A war diary kept by Grand Adm. Erich Raeder says Russia supported German naval warfare in the opening months of the war by authorizing German use of a special Arctic Circle base near Murmansk and Siberian sea lanes.

The diary was among papers of the former commander in chief of the German Navy, introduced in part at the war crimes trial yesterday.

“Valuable Russian assistance” was given in the return to Germany of the 51,731-ton liner Bremen, which found a haven at Murmansk in the first days of the war, according to a notation set down for December 12, 1939. She had been “somewhere at sea” en route home from New York when Germany invaded Poland.

Other entries, none read in court, included:

‘‘October 10, 1939 – Russia has offered a well-situated base near Murmansk. One auxiliary cruiser in Murmansk for outfitting…

‘‘October 17, 1939 – Preparations for ‘Base North’ are in progress…

“November 2, 1939 – Behavior of Russian naval command is generally cordial, cooperative…

“April 5, 1940 – Temporary limitations in use of ‘Base North’ and Molotov’s attitude of refusal in the question of the use of a Far Eastern base are to be traced back to the present Russian nervousness because of the future position of England and France toward Russia.”


Nuernberg trial reporting wins praise of Jackson

NUERNBERG (AP) – American chief prosecutor Robert H. Jackson today praised newspaper reporting of the Nuernberg trials as “exceptionally intelligent” as the American prosecution neared the end of its case.

The British acting chief prosecutor, Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, said he seconded Mr. Jackson’s tribute.

“All reports I get from the United States indicate the people have been given a pretty clear picture of what we have been trying to do,” Mr. Jackson said at a press conference. “Much more has been involved than the fate of the men in the dock. You have made a very obscure and difficult subject plainer.”

Mr. Jackson said the United States was not yet participating in any Allied preparations for a second trial after Nuernberg.

“Someone else will have to carry it on,” he said, since he plans to return to his place on the Supreme Court bench in Washington in the spring.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 9679
Amendment of Executive Order No. 9547 of May 2, 1945, Entitled ‘Providing for Representation of the United States in Preparing and Prosecuting Charges of Atrocities and War Crimes Against Leaders of the European Axis Powers and Their Principal Agents and Accessories’

By virtue of the authority vested in me as President and Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, under the Constitution and statutes of the United States, it is ordered as follows:

  1. In addition to the authority vested in the Representative of the United States and its Chief of Counsel by Paragraph 1 of Executive Order No. 9547 of May 2, 1945, to prepare and prosecute charges of atrocities and war crimes against such of the leaders of the European Axis powers and their accessories as the United States may agree with any of the United Nations to bring to trial before an international military tribunal, such Representative and Chief of Counsel shall have the authority to proceed before United States military or occupation tribunals, in proper cases, against other Axis adherents, including but not limited to cases against members of groups and organizations declared criminal by the said international military tribunal.

  2. The present Representative and Chief of Counsel is authorized to designate a Deputy Chief of Counsel, to whom he may assign responsibility for organizing and planning the prosecution of charges of atrocities and war crimes, other than those now being prosecuted as Case. No. 1 in the international military tribunal, and, as he may be directed by the Chief of Counsel, for conducting the prosecution of such charges of atrocities and war crimes.

  3. Upon vacation of office by the present Representative and Chief of Counsel, the functions, duties, and powers of the Representative of the United States and its Chief of Counsel, as specified in the said Executive Order No. 9574 of May 2, 1945, as amended by this order, shall be vested in a Chief of Counsel for War Crimes to be appointed by the United States Military Governor for Germany or by his successor.

  4. The said Executive Order No. 9574 of May 2, 1945, is amended accordingly.

HARRY S. TRUMAN
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 16, 1946

nuremberg.tribunal

Day 36

The Pittsburgh Press (January 17, 1946)

Murder of slaves by Nazis cited

35,000 survived out of 250,000 taken

NUERNBERG (UP) – French prosecutor Francois de Menthon told the war crimes court today that of 250,000 Frenchmen driven to Germany for slave labor, only 35,000 returned.

M. de Menthon, who himself experienced Nazi torture, told of the tortures used in questioning of prisoners – “beating, chaining for several days without a moment of rest, immersion in ice water, drowning, electrification of the most sensitive parts of the body, and tearing out fingernails.”

Deported many

He said the Nazis deported 131,000 Belgians, 135,000 French and 154,000 Dutch for slave labor in 1942.

M. de Menthon charged that the work of the Nazis was “nothing less than the perpetration, for political ends and in a systematic manner, of common law crimes such as theft, looting, ill treatment, enslavement, murder and assassination.”

Urges punishment

Since war was outlawed by international agreements, all acts stemming from it were illegal, M. de Menthon said, adding: “It would be futile to prohibit war if it were intended to inflict no chastisement on those who have recourse to it.”

He cited the conscription of foreign workers as an example of Nazi barbarity. Col. Gen. Alfred Jodl, one of the defendants, advocated “vigorous, resolute and unscrupulous measures” in Denmark, Holland, France and Belgium to enlist the services of potential manpower, he said.

The Evening Star (January 17, 1946)

French demand death for Nazi ringleaders in Nuernberg trial

NUERNBERG (AP) – France asked death today for the 22 ringleaders of the Nazi regime and for punishment of hundreds of thousands of members of German terror organizations.

Francois de Menthon, wounded war veteran who is the French prosecutor, denounced Hitlerism and all it stands for with a fervor that brought fear to the faces of Hermann Goering and other prisoners before the International Military Tribunal.

“Civilization requires from you after this unleashing of barbarism a verdict which will be a sort of supreme warning,” De Menthon said.

“Justice must strike those guilty of the enterprise of barbarism from which we have just escaped. The rein of justice is the most exact expression of great human hope. Your decision can mark a decisive state in its difficult pursuit.”

Foundation for uplift

The chief French prosecutor said that perhaps the punishment of hundreds of thousands of men who belonged to such terror organizations as the SS, the SD, the SA and Gestapo “awakens some objection,” but warned: “Without the existence of these organizations, without the spirit which animated them, one would not succeed in understanding how so many atrocities could have been perpetrated.”

Mr. De Menthon told the court that death sentences for the leaders and verdicts of guilty for the organizations “can serve as a foundation for the moral uplift of the German people and the first stage in their integration into a community of free countries.”

His accusation ran the gamut of German crimes. He said of 250,000 persons deported from France, only 35,000 returned.

“At Oswiecim concentration camp, the most beautiful women were set apart, artificially fertilized and then gassed,” he declared.

Firm justice necessary

One of the biggest crowds since the trials opened packed the courtroom as Mr. De Menthon declared that diplomatic maneuvering alone could not assure peace – that firm justice must be meted out by the tribunal.

Mr. De Menthon said his country was acting as spokesman for the martyred peace-loving peoples of Western Europe – Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

The Americans and British completed their cases yesterday, except for those against some individual defendants – including Rudolf Hess and Franz von Papen – which probably will be sandwiched in later. The French case is expected to take about three weeks, after which the Russian prosecutors will take over.

Jackson’s authority extended by Truman

President Truman today issued an executive order extending the scope of the authority of Justice Robert H. Jackson as chief American prosecutor of the major Axis war criminals.

The present case is being prosecuted before an international tribunal.

Under the order, Justice Jackson has authority to proceed before U.S. military or occupational tribunals in cases against other Axis adherents, including those who may be designated by the international tribunal.

He is authorized further to designate a deputy chief of counsel to carry on this secondary prosecution.

The order also provides for appointment of a successor to Justice Jackson whenever he has wound up his work in Germany, vesting this power in the U.S. Military Governor for Germany or his successor. Justice Jackson was designated by President Truman.

nuremberg.tribunal

Day 37

The Evening Star (January 18, 1946)

Forced labor plan in France, Belgium charged to Sauckel

NUERNBERG (AP) – Fritz Sauckel, chunky czar of Nazi slave labor, imposed compulsory labor enrollment in France and Belgium over the protests of the German military commander and planned to keep slave workers in the Reich in a program of “perpetual exploitation,” French war crimes prosecutors charged today.

Sauckel’s personal responsibility in forcing the compulsory labor plan on the western territories was detailed to the International Military Tribunal in the transcript of an interrogation of Nazi Gen. Baron Alexander von Falkenhausen.

‘Long dispute’ with Sauckel

Von Falkenhausen told French questioners November 27, 1945, that as commander in chief in France and Belgium in 1942 he had a “long dispute” with Sauckel and consented to issue the ordinance on compulsory labor only when forced to do so by written order. The dispute eventually forced the general to resign.

Also presented to the court was a copy of a speech in which Sauckel declared: “The great percentage of foreign workers will remain even after victory in our territory to complete what war has prevented them from finishing.”

Copy of speech produced

Taking up specific details of the French case, Assistant French Prosecutor Jacques Bernard Herzog told the tribunal that slave labor had been herded into Germany not only to bolster the Nazis’ industrial production but also with “the conscious desire to weaken the human potential of the occupied countries.”

He also produced a copy of a speech made to gauleiters at Posen in February 1943, in which Sauckel announced that 3,000,000 foreign laborers had been impressed for the Nazi war machine between April and December 1942.

That total included 400,000 Frenchmen for slavery under the Wehrmacht and 371,000 for German war supply service under the military commandant of Northern France; 300,000 Norwegians, 135,000 Dutchmen, and 572,000 Belgians.

Doctors find brain of Ley, Nazi suicide, diseased for years

By the Associated Press

The brain of the Nazi suicide, Dr. Robert Ley, whose word was law over all German workers, had been diseased “for years,” an Army post-mortem has disclosed.

Army Institute of Pathology Scientists, who examined the brain after it was flown here from Germany, revealed last night that they found a “long-standing degenerative process” that was “sufficient… to have impaired Dr. Ley’s mental and emotional faculties.”

They showed a reporter the brain that once directed the seizure of trade unions in the Reich and sought to indoctrinate all workers with the ideas of the Fuehrer.

And they pointed out that the disease process was most marked in the frontal lobes – the part that controls emotions and thinking.

Hanged self in October

“The degeneration could well account for his aberrations (unsoundness) in conduct and feeling,” they said in their report, based on whole and microscopic studies of the organ. “Normally the frontal lobes are requisite for complex types of thinking … and they exercise a restraint on emotional impulses.”

Rather than face trial as a war criminal, Ley hanged himself last October in his cell at Nuernberg, fashioning a noose from stripes o G.I. toweling.

Not caused by bacteria

Maj. Webb Haymaker, neuropathologist of the institute, said the disease process in the frontal lobes had been going on “for years,” and he added: “Ley’s brain is one that probably had not functioned normally. The part of the brain most affected is the part, really, that makes man civilized.

“It’s the seat of our inhibitions – the control center that keeps most people from committing acts of violence. It’s the part that enables us to have sympathy with our fellow man.”

The institute doctors said the cause of the degenerative process “remains obscure” but that “it was definitely not caused by bacteria.”

They said that while the gross appearance resembled that seen in brains affected by syphilis, there was no microscopic evidence of that disease. They added that the type of damage found could not be ascribed to an airplane accident in which Ley reportedly was involved during the World War.

Surgeon General Norman T. Kirk announced that the brain would be stored away “for future reference” by pathologists.

The Harlem News (January 18, 1946)

Trial of Nazis historic attempt to outlaw war

Defense attorneys cooperate to test validity of effort to prove aggression is illegal instrument of policy
By Baukhage, news analyst and commentator

NUERNBERG, Germany – Glancing back across the hours and days spent in this broken city at the tremendous effort which has gone into the presentation of the American case at the war criminal trials, one can see with aching clarity the pitiful shortcomings of human achievement in the spiritual field as compared to our material progress.

The very court house is a reminder of this strange inconsistency of civilization. The beautiful renascimento building stands in the midst of ruins which testify to the almost unbelievable power of the machines of destruction. Among the statues of the world’s great law-givers carved upon its walls is that of Hugo Grotius, the father of international law, who lived in Holland in the 17th century. It was he who laid down the principle that aggressive war was illegal by asserting that there was a difference between a just war (of self-defense) and an unjust war.

Until now, in the middle of the 20th century, no major effort has been made to enforce that principle. Indeed, the tendency veered sharply away from that concept and only today I heard comment within a short distance of the court room itself echoing sentiments expressed in American military circles to the effect that it was unwise to attempt to prosecute as criminals the German military leaders like Doenitz and Keitel and perhaps Raeder and Jodl. The argument which is set forth and which is the heart of the military leaders’ case in this trial was hinted at in the words of Jodl when he made his plea that “What I have done I had to do and I did it with a clear conscience before my people, my God and the world.” It was taken then that the military defense would be that the high officers merely carried out orders as the officers of any nation would.

Jackson faced that issue squarely at the very beginning and that is why he threw his full weight into the argument that these men, all of them, participated in a conspiracy to wage an aggressive war. And he proved it with charts showing the organization of the Nazi Party, how it interlocked with the state, and then how each step followed the preceding one toward a planned goal of aggression.

If the Americans win their case, it will be a great achievement and one long overdue, for it has taken nearly three centuries to produce a concerted effort to write into international law the concept that aggressive war is just what Grotius said it was – illegal and that the men responsible for planning and carrying it out were criminals.

There exists universal condemnation of all the separate acts of murder, pillage, destruction, enslavement which war produces. Jackson believes that this fact makes condemnation of the thing that produces them sound and logical.

It was very plain that when the German defense counsel heard Jackson’s speech and later when they, like the press, were almost buried under the avalanche of evidence in the documents produced, they did not have a definite plan of defense to meet the allegations, either general or specific.

Trial conducted with dignity

Shortly after Jackson’s address I learned to my surprise of a remark of one of the leading defense lawyers which he made to a close friend. He said that he considered Justice Jackson’s presentation a splendid contribution to international law if the court should accept it and that he believed that it represented a forward step of great importance of which he himself fully approved. I might say that so far throughout the proceedings both sides have shown a keen respect for each other and a number of the German lawyers who are professors in universities or accepted authorities on international law are expected to contribute toward the ultimate purpose of the outlawry of war insofar as they can do so without injuring their clients’ cases. It may be possible that attempts will be made to sabotage the trial by introducing testimony which might tend to stir up ill will among the Allies.

As we faced the German attorneys in the press room in the court house at one of the conferences which they requested, I could not help feeling that they were approaching their job in a businesslike manner and that they were not permitting the fact that it was victor versus vanquished to influence their attitude. I might add that some of the reporters’ questions were asked with ill-concealed emotional motives rather than a desire to obtain information. This always annoys trained newsmen. They have no objection when a reporter presses hard for an answer or makes charges in response to which he might expect an explanation, but baiting always brings a protest from the majority.

Finds Streicher out of place

It may prove to have been a mistake to include Streicher among the prisoners. As one lawyer here put it, “He’s in too fast company.” What he meant was that Streicher simply was not important enough in the Nazi set-up to make him responsible. He was perhaps chosen as a symbol of the particularly petty side of Nazi Jew-baiting. The other prisoners from the first have had little to do with him. His newspaper, which was devoted entirely to anti-Semitism, was an obscene sheet and it went out of existence when it was found that Streicher had diverted party funds. I saw his sheet when I was in Germany before and it was one of those miserable attempts at satire which is simply dirty and not at all funny.

This trial is concerned with more important matters than Streicher’s sordid affairs and it is regrettable that he was included with the others, who, evil though they may be, for the most part are criminals worthy of consideration by a respectable court of law.

As one of the members of the American delegation said to me, the real importance of the trial is that it satisfies the allied peoples. They must be assured that it is conducted fairly and they must see its significance. In Justice Jackson’s words:

“What makes this inquest significant is that these prisoners represent sinister influences that will lurk in the world long after their bodies have turned to dust. They are living symbols of … intrigue and war-making which have embroiled Europe generation after generation. … Civilization can afford no compromise with the social forces which would gain renewed strength if we deal ambiguously or indecisively with men in whom these forces now survive.”

When Justice Jackson spoke those words, I was looking at the prisoners. All were listening quietly. Suddenly Keitel began writing feverishly. I am sure that he felt that such “intrigue and war-making” as he had engaged in was perfectly legal and proper.

To eliminate that viewpoint is even more important than eliminating Keitel.

L’Aube (January 19, 1946)

francenuremberg
M. Jacques Herzog présente l’accusation contre le service du travail obligatoire

(PAR TÉLÉPHONE, DE NOTRE ENVOYÉ SPÉCIAL JEAN RICHARD)

Les voix de la France au procès de Nuremberg

Jacques-Bernard Herzog, né à Paris le 21 décembre 1914, magistrat délégué au ministère de la Justice, chargé de conférences à la faculté de droit de Paris, évadé de France en octobre 1943.

Rejoint Alger, où il est devenu attaché au cabinet de François de Menthon, du 1er mars 1944 au 1er juin 1945.

La France, de l’avis même de tous ses amis, a connu jeudi un juste et beau succès au procès des grands criminels de guerre. Hier matin encore les observateurs alliés, dont plusieurs membres de délégations étrangères, se plaisaient à reconnaitre la parfaite ordonnance du réquisitoire que prononça François de Menthon.

On prétendait même que cette accumulation de charges contre les accusés avait provoqué certains « mouvements divers » parmi les avocats de la défense.

Tenir le niveau auquel François de Menthon avait élevé les débats n’était pas aisé. M. Jacques-Bernard Herzog qui, après l’instruction de M. Edgar Faure, devait présenter le chapitre de l’accusation relative au service du travail obligatoire y parvint cependant avec un jeune talent tout plein d’avenir – Jacques Herzog est, en effet, à trente et un ans, le benjamin des magistrats de la Cour de justice internationale.

Évoquant la doctrine nationale-socialiste sur le travail humain, M. Herzog déclare : Le travail n’est pas pour elle l’une des formes de la manifestation de personnalités individuelles. C’est un service imposé par la communauté à ses membres.

En bref, le grand principe nazi, en la matière, était celui-ci : « Utilisation de toutes les forces des territoires occupés et extermination de toutes les forces mortes. »

Les difficultés de Sauckel

En France, l’institution du travail obligatoire ne va pas sans difficultés. A la présidence de la délégation française de la commission d’armistice, le général Doyen s’émeut du fait qu’on impose aux préfets l’institution des services de garde sur les points importants : ponts, tunnels, ouvrages d’art, etc. Une protestation en date du 1er mars 1941 restera d’ailleurs sans réponse satisfaisante.

Certes, il existait bien en France, aussi bien qu’en Hollande, en Belgique, au Danemark et au Luxembourg, le principe fragile du travail volontaire. Mais son rendement dérisoire incitait les occupants à prendre là-dessus des mesures d’extrême urgence.

Appel aux collaborateurs

Il faut donc, pour l’Allemagne nazie, en venir aux grands moyens et s’adresser directement au gouvernement français : « Au cours d’une discussion qui a duré cinq à six heures, dira Sauckel, j’ai arraché à M. Laval la concession que seraient menacés de la peine de mort les fonctionnaires qui essaieraient de s’opposer à l’enrôlement des travailleurs, et certaines autres mesures. »

Plus loin, le même Sauckel manifestera sa confiance entière envers les collaborateurs français, dans les termes suivants : « Je compte sur les nouveaux ministres français, en particulier Henriot, pour agir impitoyablement. Ils sont pleins de bonne volonté et me font ne impression, »

Ainsi se dévoilent, à Nuremberg, les sinistres collaborateurs et le rôle odieux de ces personnages.

M. Jacques Herzog évoque alors le fameux chantage à la relève :

Les premières actions de Sauckel, dit-il, ont été déclenchées au printemps 1942, aussitôt après la nomination de l’accusé comme commissaire à la main-d’œuvre. L’industrie d’armement allemande avait un très fort besoin d’ouvriers. Le service du travail avait décidé de recruter 150.000 spécialistes en France. Sauckel vint à Paris au mois de juin 1942. Il eut plusieurs entretiens avec le ministre français. Ils aboutirent au résultat suivant : devant la mauvaise volonté des autorités françaises à instituer le travail obligatoire, il serait décidé que le recrutement des 150.000 spécialistes s’opérerait par engagements pseudo-volontaires. Ce fut le départ de l’opération dite « la relève ».

Un plan largement déjoué

On sait que cette « relève » a donné surtout naissance à une courageuse catégorie de Français, qu’on appellera naturellement « réfractaires » et qui devaient constituer en partie notre armée du maquis.

Pas d’égards pour les Français

Une note du même Sauckel déclare que le ministre Speer, « suivant une décision du Führer, ne devait pas, à l’avenir, avoir des égards particuliers vis-à-vis des Français. On peut également, dans ledit pays, employer les mesures les plus sévères dans le but de se procurer de la main-d’œuvre ».

nuremberg.tribunal

Day 38