dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
M.PIERRE MOUNIER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French Republic): As a matter of fact it would appear desirable, when presenting some of the chiefs of the National Socialist conspiracy, as viewed from the angle of crimes committed in the West, to show how they materialized their philosophical, political, economic, diplomatic, and finally their military conceptions. Consequently, this order will determine the order in which we shall present the case of these defendants. On the other hand the defendants, in pursuance of the rule adopted by the Tribunal for governing the proceedings which it intends to follow in this Trial, have not yet given their oral explanations before the Court; and the hearing of the majority of the witnesses, or at least of the more important witnesses, has not yet taken place. That is why the French Prosecution, with the permission of the Tribunal, reserves the right of completing at a later date its statement regarding the defendants taken individually on the one hand, and the groups accused-according to the expression used by my eminent friend, Prosecutor Boissarie-of "international indignity," on the other hand. Needless to say, the final impeachment would be carried out with the utmost sobriety, since the French Delegation is anxious to avoid, as far as possible, any unnecessary prolongation of the proceedings. An imposing number of documents has been submitted to the Tribunal. Their reading, presented in the first instance for the information of the Tribunal, then for the information of the Defense, and finally, be it said, for that of universal public opinion, has already taken up a very considerable time. That is why, with the permission of the Tribunal, we shall abstain, as far as possible, from presenting the Tribunal with still more copious documents. Sufficient written evidence has already been furnished by the American, British, and French Prosecutions which, when added to those still to be submitted by the Prosecution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, will assure the Tribunal of the defendants' guilt.
M.PIERRE MOUNIER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French Republic): We shall therefore content ourselves, in general, with quoting documents already produced, in order to correlate the facts which we shall bring forward with the evidence already supplied. I should like, however, Mr. President, before approaching the case of the defendants whom I wish to accuse individually, to make a statement of a very general nature. It would be idle to pretend that a certain part of this public opinion-and not the least enlightened part at that-in the Old as well as in the New World, has evinced surprise in seeing this Indictment, which is the foundation of the present proceedings, collectively denounce the criminal character of certain organizations of the Reichsregierung, the Leadership Corps of the National Socialist Party, the SS including the SD, the Gestapo, the SA, the General Staff, and the High Command. In this connection the Tribunal has been good enough to invite the various prosecutions to present written memoranda in order to establish the validity of the imputations contained in the Indictment . But may I be allowed, before a more complete memorandum is handed to your high jurisdiction, to present to the Tribunal a few ideas which appear to me necessary to be recalled., It appears, as a matter of fact, that this concept of a collective responsibility of the various groups goes hand in hand with the concept of conspiracy constituting the other governing ideas of the Indictment .
M.PIERRE MOUNIER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French Republic): There is no doubt, as far as this idea of a conspiracy is concerned as featured in the Indictment , that one finds, in the first instance, in the acts of the defendants that mystery which generally accompanies any conspiracy, whatever its nature, and that the various documents already supplied to the Tribunal are sufficient to confirm the existence of all the elements which render it possible for me to state that the defendants, their co-authors, and their accomplices had, in fact, conceived and realized the fraudulent agreement which vitas to enable them to make an attempt on the peace of the world by means contrary to the laws of war, to international law, and to international morality. There is no doubt that the Nazi leaders had invested all their meetings with a guise of secrecy, whether these meetings were regular and administrative in nature or whether they were of a casual or of an informal variety. This fact in itself would be normal if one could isolate it from all the others; but added to all the other elements in the case, it clearly shows the guilty intent of the conspirators, for this absolute secrecy alone could imply the use of the criminal means which we shall have to emphasize. I shall moreover remind the Tribunal that very often, where the orders transmitted were concerned, very often it happened that certain paragraphs had been erased so that no traces could remain. The Defendant Hermann Goering admitted this in the course of the interrogations. Consequently this fact proves the' intent not only to act in the greatest secrecy, but also the intent of doing away with every trace of what had happened. If I were permitted to transpose an expression used during the War of 1914-18, an expression applied to the sinking of certain ships of friendly or allied nations, I should say, where this particular paragraph is concerned, that it was a case of "spurlos versenkt," that is, sunk without trace.
M.PIERRE MOUNIER (Assistant Prosecutor for the French Republic): On the other hand, the proof of this fraudulent agreement is evident from the eminently and evidently criminal nature of the decisions taken in these secret councils for incorporation.
THE PRESIDENT: It is just one now, would it be convenient for Counsel to break off at this time ?
M. MOUNIER: I am at the disposal of the court.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. [A recess was taken until 14:00 Hours] Afternoon Session
THE PRESIDENT: M. Mounier, owing to technical difficulties we will not be able to continue the sitting this afternoon because the technical difficulties, we are advised, cannot be remedied for some hours; and under those circumstances, the Tribunal thinks it better to adjourn now. But the Tribunal hopes that you wit be able tomorrow to conclude the case on behalf of the French Prosecution, and that the case against the Defendant Hess will be presented on behalf of the British Prosecution.
M.MOUNIER: I understand, Mr. President, and I shall get in touch with my British colleague as requested by the TribunaL
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, do you wish to say anything?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the United Kingdom): No, My Lord, we are ready to go on with the presentation against the Defendant Hess, and we think that-it should take two and a half hours, approximately. [The Tribunal adjourned until 7 February 1946 at 1000 hours.]
M. MOUNIER: Mr. President, Your Honors, before the adjournment yesterday I had begun to explain to you very briefly the relation which, in our opinion, exists between two of the main themes in the Indictment , to wit, the accusation of conspiracy brought against certain groups designated in the Indictment and which I enumerated yesterday, on the one hand; and, on the other hand, the various acts which enable us to form our conclusions as to the criminal character of the activity of the National Socialist conspirators. I told you, to begin with, that what appeared thus to be at the bottom of this criminal activity was the profound mystery, the absolute mystery surrounding their meetings, both official and unofficial, a fact which is corroborated by statements made by certain of the defendants in their interrogatories from which it frequently emerged that some of the orders emanating from high places were to be suppressed and annulled, so as to leave no trace. We consider, likewise, that proof of the fraudulent collaboration which existed among the conspirators is afforded by the criminal character of the decisions made at these secret councils, which aimed at the conquest of neighboring countries through wars of aggression. Finally, proof of this fraudulent collaboration is afforded, in our opinion, by the way in which these criminal plans were carried out by the employment of all sorts of means condemned both by international morality and by the letter of the law; for example, in international and diplomatic spheres the most cynical plots, the use in foreign countries of what is known as the "Fifth Column," financial camouflage, the exertion of improper pressure backed by demonstrations of violence, and finally-when these methods no longer proved effective-the waging of a war of aggression.
M. MOUNIER: As for those individuals who regularly and of their own free will took part in meetings of groups and organizations, such as those denounced in the Indictment as internationally odious, their voluntary membership in these groups or the active and deliberate part which they took in their activities suffice to show that they had every intention of giving their active co-operation to these groups in a way which admits of no possible doubt. 1b view of the aims pursued and the means adopted, this intention could only be a guilty one. In the opinion of the Prosecution, engaged in seeking the elements constituting the crime, it would appear that this suffices to prove what we call the consilium fraudis and to enable us to verify the causal link between this will to evil, on the one hand, and the criminal deed, on the other, and to make it possible to retain the criminal character of the understanding between the conspirators, which is also the criminal character of their individual acts. Could the chief of the Four Year Plan, when he ordered the Plenipotentiary for Labor Allocation to recruit 1 million foreign workers for the Reich, forget that this act was contrary to international conventions and leave out of consideration the tragic consequences which the execution of this murderous action would entail, and has in fact entailed, for these people and for their families? Could the Minister for Armaments and War Production who set up, in agreement with or by order of the Chief of the Air Force, underground aircraft factories in the internment camps-could he, I say, fail to be aware that under such conditions to use prisoners who were already exhausted was equivalent to causing their premature death? Could the diplomat who, on various pretexts, treated diplomatic instruments intended to assure the stability and the peace of the world as scraps of paper-could he lose sight of the fact that these acts would plunge the civilized world into catastrophe?
M. MOUNIER: Whether their conscience was at that moment disturbed by the feeling, more or less obscure, that they were infringing human and divine laws is a question which need not be asked on the juridical plane on which you will be working. But even assuming that we should consider it our duty to put this question to ourselves on the psychological plane as a result of scruples, we should then have to remember two essential concepts. The first is that the German, as a French writer puts it, at times combines in himself the identity Or contraries. Consequently, it is possible that in certain cases he may consciously do evil while remaining convinced that his act is irreproachable from the moral point of view. The second concept is that, according to the law of National Socialist ethics sometimes put into words by certain National Socialist leaders, that which promotes the interests of the Party is good; that which does not promote the interests is evil. And yet, our personal impression on the occasion of the masterly speech given by M. Francois de Menthon was that some of his words, striking in their accent of deep humanity, had stirred some consciences. Even today, after so many accumulated proofs, we may wonder whether the defendants admit their responsibility as chiefs, as men, as representatives of the incriminated organizations. This will perhaps be revealed in the course of the proceedings. Mr. President, Your Honors, with the permission of the Tribunal we shall now take up the question of the Defendant Alfred Rosenberg. Gentlemen, the young French student who in 1910 had the joy of spending his vacation in Bavaria, then one of the happiest of the German provinces, could hardly suspect that thirty-five years later he would be called upon to apply international law against the masters of that country.
M. MOUNIER: When, after stopping at the Bratwurstglocklein, he climbed up to the ramparts to look at the sunset from the heights of the Burg, while the lines of a ballad by Uhland rang in his memory, he did not think that evil masters and false prophets would twice in a quarter of a century unchain the lightning over Europe and the rest of the world, and that through them so many treasures of art and beauty would be destroyed, so many human lives sacrificed, so much suffering piled up. Indeed, when one studies the genesis of this unheard-of drama there can be no question of romanticism; what we have to deal with rather is a perverted romanticism, a morbid perversion of the sense of greatness, and the mind is baffled by the true significance of the ideas. of National Socialism-ideas which I shall touch upon only in passing to show how they led the Defendant Rosenberg, since it is he of whom I am speaking, and his codefendants to commit the crimes which are held against them: The concept of race, to begin with, which we see arising in a country which in other respects resembles any Other but where the intermingling of ethnic types of every variety took place through the centuries on a gigantic scale; this anti-scientific confusion which mixes the physiological features of man with the concept of nations; this neo-paganism which aims at abolishing the moral code, the justice, and security which 20 centuries of Christianity have brought to the world; this myth of blood which attempts to justify racial discrimination and its consequences: slavery, massacre, looting, and the mutilation of living beings! I shall not dwell, Mr. President, on what we consider a jumble of nonsense which claims to be philosophy and in which may be found to be the most heterogeneous fragments of all kinds taken from every source, from the megalomaniac concepts of Mussolini, Hindu legends`, and the Japan of the samurai, the cradle of fascism, which swept over the world like a tidal wave. The previous presentations have already adequately dealt with these conceptions.
M. MOUNIER: Ishai1 simply stress today that these pseudo-philosophic conceptions tended solely to set back humanity thousands of years by reviving the clan conception, which assumes the law of might as the supreme law- the Faustrecht already formulated by the Iron Chancellor, the right to cheat others, the right to take the property of others, the right to reduce man to slavery, the right to kill, the right to torture; But home sapiens refuses to return to the state of homo lupus. International law is not morality without obligation or sanction. The Charter of 8 August has recalled and specified the obligation; it is for you, Gentlemen, to apply the sanction. One of the consequences of these theories of the superiority of the race or of the so-called "Germanic Race" was to lead certain of the conspirators, particularly the Defendant Rosenberg, of whom we are speaking, to become plunderers; and it is this aspect of the activities of the Defendant Rosenberg which I should like very briefly to stress, for it concerns France and the occupied countries of the West and had deeply harmful consequences for their artistic, intellectual, or merely utilitarian heritage. I wish to speak of all the measures decreed or applied by Rosenberg with the aim of removing from France and the western countries cultural treasures, works of art, and property belonging to groups or individuals, and transferring to Germany all these riches. Gentlemen, owing to the limited time which we have at our Disposal, I shall limit myself today to recalling how certain organisms were made to collaborate in this pillaging through orders from higher quarters. I shall indicate, first of all, the part played by the Gestapo, which was ordained by a decree issued by the Defendant Keitel, dated 5 July 1940, which bears the Document Number 137-PS and which was submitted by the American Delegation, under Exhibit Number USA-379, on 18 December 1945 (Exhibit Number RF-1400).
M. MOUNIER: I refer likewise to a second order dated 30 October 1940, which reinforced and detailed the orders given in regard to pillaging by what was known as the Einsatzstab Rosenberg. This is Exhibit Number RF-1304 (Document Number 140-PS), which was quoted by the Economic Section of the French Prosecution. Thus, Keitel and Rosenberg went back to the conception of a booty exacted by the triumphant German people from the Jewish people with regard to whom it was not bound by the conditions of the Compiegne Armistice. This intervention by the chief of the army, as indicated by the orders to which I have just referred, suffices in my opinion to prove the important part played by the German Army in this looting; and the Tribunal will not fail to remember that when it makes its decisions as to the guilt of the Defendant Keitel and the Defendant Goering. If I mention the Defendant Goering, it is because a third document proves that this defendant gave the operation his full support, inviting all the organizations of the Party, the State, and the Army to afford the fullest possible support and assistance to Reichsleiter Rosenberg and his collaborator Utikal, whom Rosenberg himself had appointed Chief of the Einsatzstab on 1 April 1941. This is the order of 1 May 1941, which we produced under our Exhibit Number RF-1406 (Document Number 1614-PS). If we examine the text of this decree carefully we cannot fail to be struck by the first paragraph. The Tribunal will surely allow me to reread it rapidly: '`The struggle against the Jews, the Freemasons, and other ideologically opposed forces allied to them, is a most urgent task of National Socialism during the war." Thus, it was enough for one to have a philosophy of life different from that described as the Nazi Weltanschauung, to be exposed to the danger of seeing one's cultural property seized and transferred to Germany. But the Tribunal will surely remember from the documents already presented to it, that not only cultural property was involved, but that anything with any kind of value was taken away.
M. MOUNIER: The Defendant Rosenberg tried, in the course of an interrogation carried out by the superior officers in charge of the preliminary investigations to claim, without much conviction, it seems to me, that the cultural property in question was intended solely to adorn the collections of the National Socialist Hohen Schulen. We shall see presently, in presenting the text of this interrogation, how we may judge this. But it is a fact which I wish to present now that, from the documents which we possess, at least, it does not seem that the Defendant Rosenberg appropriated works of art, precious stones, or other objects of value for himself. Consequently, in the light of the proceedings as conducted thus far, no accusation of this kind can be brought against him. We shall not say as much for the Defendant Hermann Goering, of whom we shall speak a little later and who, according to the documents that we possess, may be convicted of having appropriated to his own use part of the objects of art taken from the countries of the East and the West. I shall not dwell on the discussion which might arise about these misappropriations. I shall go straight on to the interrogatory of the Defendant Rosenberg. This is the document that was introduced yesterday by the Economic Section of the French Prosecution, which bears the Exhibit Number RF-1331, and which we use today as Document Number ECH-25. I think that the Tribunal will easily be able to refer to this interrogatory, but meanwhile I should like very briefly to summarize the essential points which I think should be brought up. Colonel Hinkel, questioning the Defendant Rosenberg, asked him on what legal grounds such looting could be justified. The Defendant Rosenberg first answered that these seizures were justified by the hostility which certain groups had manifested toward the National Socialist ideology.
M. MOUNIER: But a little further on, on Page 4, the Defendant Rosenberg made the following verbatim statement: "I considered them"-he is referring to the measures which he himself had taken-"a necessity caused by the war and by the reasons which caused the war." A few moments later, pressed by Colonel Hinkel, the Defendant Rosenberg invoked the necessity of putting into safekeeping property thus seized, a necessity which will certainly constitute one of the main points of his defense. But Colonel Einkel replied to the Defendant Rosenberg: "And so if your idea was to safeguard art objects, it sounds rather strange, doesn't it, that you were going to safeguard only some art objects and not others? "On the other hand, with regard to the maintenance of the objects, there were objects at least equal in value to those which had been removed, but to which no one paid any attention." Finally, the Defendant Rosenberg admitted that he had very often given no receipt to those concerned, which in itself precluded any idea of eventually returning the property to the legitimate owners. The truth of the matter is that these were treasures of very considerable value, and the Defendant Rosenberg in the end admitted that he regarded these acquisitions as an accomplished fact. We consider that the fact of having thus removed works of art and objects of value is purely and simply what is known in civil law as misappropriation. These misappropriations were made on a vast scale with the grandiose means which the Third Reich had at its disposal, means which were further facilitated by the intervention of the Army and the Luftwaffe. But it is nonetheless true that the criminal character of these misappropriations remains; and we urge the Tribunal, when it delivers judgment, to declare that it was by fraudulent seizure that the Defendant Rosenberg and his codefendants robbed France and the western countries of all the objects. of value and all the art treasures and cultural treasures. As to what the objects themselves consisted of, Mr.