dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
VAN DER ESSEN: The Belgian troops were no longer there. They had been replaced by the British troops when the British had taken over the sector and at the time when the library was seen to be on fire. The first flames were seen in the night of the 16th to the 17th at 1:30 in the morning. The British troops had left. There remained only a few tanks which were operating a withdrawal movement. These fired an occasional shot to give the impression that the sector was still occupied by the British Army.
DR. EXNER: So there were still British troops in the town when the bombardment started?
VAN DER ESSEN: There were no longer any British troops; there were merely a few tanks on the hills outside Louvain in the direction of Brussels, a few tanks which, as I said, were carrying out necessary maneuvers for withdrawal. I would have liked to add a few words and to say to the very honorable Counsel for the Defense that, according to the testimony of persons who were in the library-the ushers and the janitors not a single British soldier ever set foot in the library buildings.
DR. EXNER: That is not surprising. At the time the German batteries were firing were there still British batteries or Belgian batteries firing?
VAN DER ESSEN: No.
DR. EXNER: So all was quiet in the town of Louvain; the troops had left; the enemy was not there yet, and the batteries didn't fire?
VAN DER ESSEN: That was the rather paradoxical situation in Louvain; there was a moment when the British had left and the Germans had not yet arrived; and there remained only the few ill persons, the few paralytics who could not be moved and who were left behind in cellars. A few other persons remained too: the Chief of the Fire Service and Monseigneur Van Wayenberg, the Rector of the University, who had brought the dead and the dying from Brussels to Louvain in the firemen's car and made the journey several times. There was also my colleague, Professor Kennog, a member of the Faculty of Medicine who had taken over the direction of the city.
DR. EXNER: Do you know where these German batteries were located?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, indeed. One was located at Corbek and the other at Lovengule, one on the west side and one on the north side. The only shell hits on the tower of the library were four hits from the east side and seven from the north side. If there had still been British or Belgian batteries, the shells would have come from the opposite side.
DR. EXNER: Can you tell me anything about the caliber of these batteries?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, we saved the shells and at present they are in the Library of Louvain, or rather in what serves as a library for the university. There are four shells and two or three fragments of shells.
DR. EXNER: And do you know the name of the peasant who was supposed to have been asked by a German officer whether that was really the University of Louvain? Do you know the peasant personally?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, indeed, his name is M. Vigneron.
DR. EXNER: Do you know the peasant yourself? Do you know him?
VAN DER ESSEN: I do not know him personally. It was the librarian of the university who had a conversation with him and who induced the War Crimes Commission to interrogate this peasant.
DR. EXNER: You are a member of that commission yourself?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, I am ready to declare that I took no direct part in the inquiry concerning the Library of Louvain, just as Monseigneur the Rector and the librarian took no active part in the inquiry concerning the Library of Louvain. It was made by an officer of the judicial delegation who acted alone and quite independently upon the order of the Prosecutor of Louvain, and we kept entirely out of the matter.
DR. EXNER: Have you seen the official files of this commission?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, certainly.
DR. EXNER: I am surprised they weren't brought here. Tell me, why did the director of the library or the person who was directly concerned not go, after the occupation of the town, to the mayor or to the commander of the town?
VAN DER ESSEN: I don't think I understand the question very well.
DR. EXNER: When the German Army came, a town commander was appointed. Why didn't the mayor of the town, or the Dire Director of the University Library go to the town commander and tell him about these things?
VAN DER ESSEN: Why didn't he tell him about these things for the very simple reason that at that time everything was in complete disorder and there was hardly anybody left in the town, and on the other hand as soon as the German Army arrived, it systematically closed the entrance gate of the library so that the Belgians could not make any inquiry. Then two German inquiry commissions came upon the scene. The first worked on 26 May 1940 with an expert, Professor Kellermann of the School of Technology in Aachen, accompanied by a Party man in a brown shirt. They examined what was left and they summoned before them as witnesses the Rector of the University and the Librarian. From the very beginning of the inquiry they wished to force the rector and the librarian to declare and admit that it was the British who had set fire to the library. And as a proof, this expert showed shell cases saying, "Here, sniff this, it smells of gasoline and shows that chemicals were used to set fire to the library." Whereupon the Rector and the Librarian of the University said to him, "Where did you find this shell case, Mr. Expert?" "In such and such a place." "When we went by that place," said the rector, "it wasn't there." It had been placed there by the German expert. And I will add, if you will permit me, because this is of considerable importance, that a second inquiry commission came in August 1940, presided over by a very distinguished man, District Court of Appeal Judge Von Neuss. He was accompanied this time by the expert who had directed the inquiry into the firing of the Reichstag. This commission again examined everything, and before the rector and another witness, Krebs, from the Benedictine Abbey of Mont-Cesar, they simply laughed at the conclusions of the first commission, and said they were ridiculous.
DR. EXNER: You have said that the library building had towers. Do you know whether there were artillery observers in these towers?
VAN DER ESSEN: You ask whether there were artillery observers? All I can say is that the rector had always opposed this from the beginning, and he certainly would have opposed any attempt of this kind, knowing that the' presence of artillery observers in the tower would obviously provide the enemy with a reason to fire on the library. The rector knew this and he always said to me, "We must be extremely careful to see that British soldiers or others who might take the sector do not go up in the tower." I know from the statements of the janitor that no Englishman, no British soldier, went into the tower. That is absolutely certain. As for Belgians, I must confess that I cannot answer your question, as I don't know.
DR. EXNER: It would not be so very amazing, would it, if the university library had been hit by German artillery. After all, it has happened that the libraries of the Universities of Berlin, Leipzig, Munich, Breslau, Cologne, et cetera, have been hit. The only question is whether this was done deliberately, and here it occurs to me that the peasant ...
VAN DER ESSEN: The peasant ...
DR. EXNER: I would like to ask you: Was there any mention in these inquiries as to the motive which might have induced the German Army to make this an objective?
VAN DER ESSEN: All the evidence seems to indicate, and this was the conclusion arrived at by the commission, that t he motive, I will not say the main motive, because there is no certainty in this sort of thing-that the motive which is very probable, almost certain, for the destruction of the library was the German Army's desire to do' away with a monument which commemorates the Treaty of Versailles . On the library building there was a virgin wearing a helmet crushing under her foot a dragon which symbolized the enemy. Certain conversations of German officers gave the very clear impression that the reason why they wished to set fire systematically to this building was their desire to get rid of a testimony of the defeat in the other war, and above all, a reminder of the Treaty of Versailles . I may add that this is not the first time that the Germans have destroyed the University of Louvain.
DR. EXNER: You believe that the commander of that battery knew that?
VAN DER ESSEN: There is very interesting testimony which I should like to submit to the honorable Counsel for the Defense. On the day when the batteries were installed, the two batteries which I mentioned, I spoke to a tax collector, a civil servant, who lived in a villa on the road to Roosweek, a few kilometers from Louvain. That afternoon some German high ranking officers came to his house to ask for hospitality. These officers had with them a truck with all the necessary radio apparatus for sending wireless orders to the German artillery to fire. These officers installed themselves in his house, and dinner was naturally served to them, and they invited him to sit with them. After hesitating a moment, he accepted, and during the meal there was a violent discussion. The officers said, "These Belgian swine"-excuse my using this expression, but they used it-"at any rate they did put that inscription on the library." They were referring to the famous inscription "Furore Teutonica" which in fact was never on the library; but all the German officers were absolutely convinced that this inscription "Furore teutonica diruta, dono americano restituta" (destroyed by German fury, restored by American generosity) was on the building, whereas, in fact, it never has been there. However, I am quite willing to admit that in Germany they might have believed that it was there; and the very fact that there should have been a discussion among the officers in command of these two batteries, seems to prove that if they directed the fire onto the library, it was in order to destroy this monument. It was probable that they wanted to get rid of a monument which, according to their idea, bore an inscription which was insulting to the German Army and the German people. That is the testimony which I can give to the honorable Counsel for the Defense. I give it as it is.
DR. EXNER: You mean that the captain who commanded this battery knew about that inscription! I don't believe it.
VAN DER ESSEN: Certainly.
DR. EXNER: Thank you.
DR. STAHMER: Witness, you have said that 43 airplanes flew over the library and dropped bombs on it. As you told us yourself, in reply to Professor Exner's question, you were not in the town at the time; where did you get that information?
VAN DER ESSEN: As I have already said, it is not my testimony which I am giving here, because for my part I have none; but it is the testimony of the lawyer, Davids, who had a country house a Kesseloo. This lawyer went out in the morning to look at the sky. He had a considerable number of refugees in his home, among them women and children, and as- airplanes were continually overhead he had gone out in the morning to see what was going on. He saw this squadron of airplanes which he counted-remember he was an old soldier himself-and there were 43 which were flying in the direction of the library; and when they arrived over the library, exactly over the gable at the farthest point from the house of the witness, they dropped a bomb, and he saw smoke immediately arise from the roof of the library. That is the testimony on which I base the statement I just made.
DR. STAHMER: So it was just one bomb that hit the library?
VAN DER ESSEN: We must distinguish here, sir, between artillery fire and bombs which are dropped by planes. From a technicalpoint of view, it seems absolutely certain that a bomb from a plane hit the library, because the roof has metal covering and this metal roofing is quite level, except in one part where it caves in. We consulted technicians, who told us that a metallic surface would never have sunk in to such an extent if it had been hit by artillery fire and could only have been caused by a bomb from a plane.
DR. STAHMER: How many bombs in all were dropped by airplanes?
VAN DER ESSEN: As the witness was at a height dominating the Louvain area from where he could see the library on the plain, it was impossible for him to count exactly the bombs which these planes dropped. He only saw the bombs fall. Then he saw the smoke which arose from the roof of the library. That's all I have to say concerning this point.
DR. STAHMER: How many bomb hits were counted in the city?
VAN DER ESSEN: On this point I can give you no information, but I know that some airplanes passed over the library quarters in a straight line going north to south. These bombs, at that time, in May 1940, damaged, but not very seriously, the Higher Institute of Philosophy, the Institute of Pharmacy, and a few other university buildings; also a certain number of private houses.
DR. STAHMER: When were the bombs dropped, before the artillery fire or afterwards?
VAN DER ESSEN: The bombs were dropped before and afterwards. There were some air raids. I myself was present during a terrible air raid on the afternoon of 10 May 1940 by a squadron of seven planes. I am not a military technician, but I saw with my own eyes the planes -which dive-bombed the Tirlemont Bridge. The result of this bombing was that a considerable number of houses were destroyed and 208 persons killed on the spot, on the afternoon of 10 May 1940. [A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the other Defense Counsel wish to cross-examine?
HERR BABEL: Witness, when did you last see the university building; that is, before the attack?
VAN DER ESSEN: Before the fire? I saw it on 11 May 1940.
HERR BABEL: That is to say, before the attack?
VAN DER ESSEN: Before the attack.
HERR BABEL: Was it damaged. at that time, and to what extent?
VAN DER ESSEN: On 11 May absolutely nothing had happened to the library. It was intact. Until the night of the 16th to 17th of May, when I left, there was absolutely no damage.
HERR BABEL: Apart from the hits on the tower, did you notice any other traces of artillery fire on the building?
VAN DER ESSEN: On the building I don't think so. There were only traces of artillery fire ...
HERR BABEL: From the fact that only the tower had been hit, couldn't it be thought that the tower and not the building was the target?
VAN DER ESSEN: When I said that the tower was struck, I meant only the traces that could be seen on the walls, on the balcony of the first story, and on the dial of the clock. Apart from that, nothing could be seen on the building for the simple reason that the building had been completely burned out inside and nothing could be seen on the charred walls. But it is absolutely certain that either a bomb from a plane or an artillery shell-I personally think it was the latter-hit the building on the north side, after the fire. The trace of shell fire can be seen very visibly. It is just here that the fire began. Witnesses who saw the fire of the Abbey of Mont Cesar. . . .
HERR BABEL: After the fire, when did you see the building for the first time?
VAN DER ESSEN: After the fire, in July 1940.
HERR BABEL: That is, much later?
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, but still in the same condition. Nothing had been done to it. It was still as it was originally.
HERR BABEL: Do you know whether, while the building was burning, an attempt was made to stop the fire and save the building?
VAN DER ESSEN: It is absolutely certain that attempts were made to stop the fire. The Rector of the University, Monseigneur Van Wayenberg, told me himself and has stated that he sent for the firemen, but the firemen had gone. Only the chief and two members of the fire brigade were left, and all the water mains at that time were broken as a result of the bombardment. There was no water supply for several days.
HERR BABEL: Did German troops take part in these attempts to save the building?
VAN DER ESSEN: No, they were not there yet.
HERR BABEL: How do you know that? You weren't there.
VAN DER ESSEN: But the Rector of the University did not leave the town of Louvain. The rector was there and so was the librarian.
HERR BABEL: Did you speak to the rector on this question, as to whether German troops took part in the attempt to save the building?
VAN DER ESSEN: I spoke to the rector and to the librarian. In my capacity as General Secretary of the University I discussed with the rector all general questions concerning the university. We discussed this point especially, and he told me categorically that no soldier of the German Army tried to fight the fire.
HERR BABEL: You also have spoken about the resistance movement. Do you know whether the civilian population was called upon to resist the German troops?
VAN DER ESSEN: Where? In the Ardennes?
HERR BABEL: In Belgium?
VAN DER ESSEN: In Belgium the resistance was mainly composed of the secret army, which was a military organization with responsible and recognized commanders, and wore a distinctive badge so that they could not be confused with simple francs-tireurs.
HERR BABEL: Do you know how many German soldiers fell victims to the resistance movement?
VAN DER ESSEN: How German soldiers fell victims to this resistance? I know very well because everywhere in the Ardennes the resistance went into action, and legally, with chiefs at their head, carrying arms openly, and with distinctive badges. They openly attacked the German troops from the front.
HERR BABEL: That was not my question. I asked you if you knew roughly how many German soldiers became victims of that resistance movement?
VAN DER ESSEN: I don't understand what is implied by the question of the honorable Counsel for the Defense.
HERR BABEL: That is not for -you to judge, it is for the Tribunal.
VAN DER ESSEN: Does the honorable Counsel for the Defense mean the events of the Ardennes which I alluded to a while ago, or does he speak in a quite general sense?
HERR BABEL: The witness in his statements had himself brought up the question of the resistance movement, and that is why I asked whether the witness knows.. .
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Babel, the witness has already answered the question by saying that he cannot say how many Germans were killed by the resistance movement.
HERR BABEL: But he can say whether a certain number of Germans did fall victims to the resistance.
VAN DER ESSEN: There were real battles.
HERR BABEL: The witness will also be able to confirm that the members of the resistance are today considered heroes in Belgium. From what we have read in the papers and from what has been brought up here, these people who were active in the resistance movement are now considered heroes. At least I could draw that conclusion.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you' please continue your examination.
HERR BABEL: Witness, you have said, if I understood you correctly, that you lost 15 kilograms weight.
VAN DER ESSEN: Yes, indeed.
HERA BABEL: What conclusion did you draw from that fact? I could not quite understand what you said.
VAN DER ESSEN: I simply meant to say that I lost these 15 kilos as a result of the mental suffering which we underwent during the occupation, and it was an answer to a question of M. Faure on whether I considered this occupation compatible with the dignity of a free man. I wanted to answer "no," giving the proof that as a result of this occupation we suffered much anguish, and I think the loss of weight is sufficient proof of this.
HERR BABEL: During the war, I also, without having been ill, lost 35 kilos. What conclusion could be drawn from that, in your opinion? [Laughter.]
THE PRESIDENT: Go on, Dr. Babel, we are not interested in your experiences.
HERR BABEL: Thank you, Sir. That was my last question.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other Counsel wish to ask any questions? [There was no response.] M. Faure?
M. FAURE: I have no questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may retire. [The witness left the stand.]
M. FAURE: I ask the Tribunal kindly to take the presentation file and the document book constituting the end of the section on the seizure of sovereignty, which bears the title "France." France, Eke Belgium, was placed under the regime of the military occupation administration. There was, moreover, in France a diplomatic representation. Finally, it must be noted that the police administration always played an important role there. It became increasingly important and was extended, particularly during the period which followed the appointment of General Oberg in 1942. As regards this last part of my section on the seizure of sovereignty, I should like to limit myself to mentioning a few special features of these usurpations in France and certain original methods employed by the Germans in this country, for this question has already been extensively dealt with, and will be further dealt with by me under the heading of consequences of German activities in France. I wish to draw the attention of the Tribunal to four considerations. First, the German authorities in France, at the very beginning, got hold of a special key to sovereignty. I speak of the splitting up of the country into five different zones. This splitting up of the country by the Germans compensated to a certain extent for the special situation which the existence of unoccupied French territories created for them. I have already indicated that the Armistice Convention of 22 June, which has already been deposited with the Tribunal , provided for the establishment of a line of demarcation between the occupied zone and the so-called unoccupied zone. It might have been thought at that time that this demarcation between the occupied and the unoccupied zone was chiefly drawn to meet the necessity of military movements in the occupied zone. It might also have been concluded that the separation of the zones would be manifested only through the exercise in the occupied zone of the ordinary rights of an armed force occupation.
M. FAURE: I have already had occasion to quote to the Tribunal a document, the testimony of M. Mon Noel, which contained the verbal assurances given in this respect by General Keitel and by General Jodl, who are now the defendants before you bearing these names. Now, in fact, this demarcation of zones was interpreted and applied with extreme rigor and in a manner that was wholly unforeseen. We have already seen the far reaching consequences of this from the point of view of the economic life of the country. There were also serious consequences from the point of view of local administration, which was continually hampered in its tasks, and from the point of view of the life of the population, which could move from one part of French territory to another only with great difficulty. In this way the Germans acquired a first means of pressure on the French authorities. This means of pressure was all the more effective as it could be used at any time and was very elastic. At times the Germans could relax the rules of separation of the zones, at others they could apply them with the greatest severity. By way of example, I quote an extract from a document, which I present in evidence under the Document Number RF-1051. This document is a letter of 20 December 1941 addressed by Schleier of the German Embassy to the French Delegate De Brinon, a letter concerning passes to German civilians wishing to enter the unoccupied zone. The French authorities of the de fa cto government had protested against the fact that the Germans obliged the French authorities to allow any person provided with German passes to enter the unoccupied zone where they could take on any kind of work, particularly spying, as one may imagine. The letter which I quote is in answer to this French protest, and I wish to mention only the last paragraph which is the second paragraph on page 2 of this Document Number 1051.