Chapter XIX: Part 19

“The staff and two battalions of the SS Panzer Division ‘Das
Reich’ are, in addition, to remain available for the operation
in Cantal.”

General Brodowski turned over to the SD (which is equivalent to execution without trial) the French prisoners who were wounded on 15 June 1944. The Prefect of Le Puy asked the liaison staff whether the men wounded in the battle of Montmouchet and taken into safety by the Red Cross of Puy could be delivered to Puy as prisoners of war. This German general, executing the orders of the German High Command—particularly of Keitel and Jodl—said that those wounded men were to be treated as _francs-tireurs_ and to be delivered to the SD or to the Abwehr. Those wounded men were turned over to the German Police and tortured and killed without trial.

According to the statement of Goldberg, which I have submitted, any man turned over to the SD was executed. Events took place on 21 June 1944 as indicated by Goldberg, “Twelve suspects were arrested and turned over to the SD.”

Under the date of 16 August 1944, Page 133, this general of the German Army had 40 men murdered after the battles at Bourg-Lastic and at Cosnat:

“In the course of operation Jesser, on 15 July 1944 in the
Bourg-Lastic region, 23 persons were executed. Martial law.
Attack on Cosnat; 3 kilometers east of St. Hilaire, during the
night of 17 July, 40 terrorists were shot.”

On Page 136, this German general admits in his own diary that our comrades were fighting as soldiers and not as assassins. This general of the German Army acknowledges that the French Forces of the Interior took prisoners:

“Southeast of d’Argenton, 30 kilometers southwest of
Châteauroux, the ‘Jako’ discovered a center of terrorists; 16
German soldiers were liberated; arms and ammunition were
captured; 7 terrorists were killed, 2 of them being captains.
One German soldier was seriously wounded.”

Another similar incident is also related further on:

“Discovery of two camps of terrorists in the region of
d’Argenton. Nine enemies were killed, two of whom were officers;
16 German soldiers were liberated.”

At the bottom of the page he states, “We liberated two SS men.”

These French soldiers were entitled to the respect of their adversaries. They conducted themselves as soldiers; they were assassinated.

THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now until two o’clock.

[_The Tribunal recessed until 1400 hours._]

_Afternoon Session_

MARSHAL: May it please the Court, I desire to announce that the Defendants Kaltenbrunner and Seyss-Inquart will be absent from this afternoon’s session on account of illness.

M. DUBOST: We had arrived, gentlemen, at the presentation of the terrorist policy carried out by the German Army, Police, and SS, indistinguishably united in their evil task against the French patriots. Not only the militant patriots were to be the victims of this terrorist policy. There were threats of reprisals against their relatives, and these threats were carried into effect.

We submit Document 719-PS as Exhibit Number RF-406, which you will find on Page 147 of the document book. It is the copy of a teletype from the German Embassy in Paris to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Berlin. The German Ambassador reports a conversation which the Vichy unit had had with Laval.

The author of this message, who is probably Abetz, explains that Bousquet, who was with Laval at the time of this conversation, stated that he was completely ignorant of the recent flight of Giraud’s brother:

“Madame Giraud, three of her daughters, her mother, another
brother and the daughter-in-law of Giraud, were in
Vals-les-Bains. I replied that such measures were insufficient
and that he must not be surprised if the German police some day
reverted to sterner measures, in view of the obvious
incompetence of the French police in numerous cases.”

The threat was put into execution. We have already stated that the family of General Giraud were deported.

We submit Document F-717 under Exhibit Number RF-407, Page 149 of your document book: “Paris, 1030 hours, 101, Official Government Telegram, Paris, to the French Delegation of the IMT Nuremberg.”

From this telegram it is evident that 17 persons, members of the family of General Giraud, were deported to Germany. Madame Granger, daughter of General Giraud, aged 32, was arrested without cause in Tunis in April 1943, as well as her four children, aged 2 to 11 years, with their young nurse, and her brother-in-law, M. Granger. The family of General Giraud was also arrested, on 9 October 1943. They were first deported to Berlin, then to Thuringia.

May I ask the forbearance of the Tribunal; the telegraphic style does not lend itself to interpretation, “Sent first to Berlin and then to Thuringia; women and children of M. Granger to Dachau.” (I suppose that we must understand this to mean the wife of M. Granger and the nurse who accompanied her.)

THE PRESIDENT: M. Dubost, what is the document?

M. DUBOST: This is a French official telegram. You have the original before you, Mr. President, “—101—Official State Telegram Paris,” typed on the text of the telegram itself.

THE PRESIDENT: Can we receive a telegram from anybody addressed to the Tribunal?

M. DUBOST: Mr. President, it is not addressed to the Tribunal; it is addressed to the French Delegation. It is an official telegram from the French Government in Paris, “Official State Paris,” and it was transmitted as an official telegram.

THE PRESIDENT: What does “IMT Paris” mean?

M. DUBOST: The International Military Tribunal in Paris. It is our office in Paris at Place Vendôme—it is an office of the French Ministry of Justice. The telegram begins, “General Giraud.” It is a telegraphic declaration. The letters “OFF” at the beginning of the telegram mean “Official.” Please forgive me for insisting that the three letters “OFF” at the beginning of the telegram mean “Government, official” from Paris. No French telegraph office could transmit such a telegram if it did not come from an official authority. This official authority is the French Delegation of the IMT in Paris, which received the statement made by General Giraud and transmitted it to us: “By General Giraud, French Delegation of the IMT.”

THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will receive the document under Article 21 of the Charter.

M. DUBOST: I am grateful to the Tribunal. I read further on, at Page 150:

“On the other hand, the death of Madame Granger on 24 September
1943 is undoubtedly due to lack of care and medicine, in spite
of her reiterated requests for both. After an autopsy of her
body, which took place in the presence of a French doctor,
specially summoned from Paris after her death, authorization was
given to this doctor, Dr. Claque to bring the four children back
to France, and then to Spain, where they would be handed over to
their father. This was refused by the Gestapo in Paris, and the
children were sent back to Germany as hostages, where their
grandmother found them only 6 months later.”

The last four lines:

“The health of Madame Giraud, her daughter Marie Theresa, and
two of her grandchildren has been gravely impaired by the
physical, and particularly by the moral, hardships of their
deportation.”

As a reprisal for the escape of General Giraud, 17 persons were arrested, all innocent of his escape.

I have frequently shown that in their determination to impose their reign of terror the Germans resorted to means which revolt the conscience of decent people. Of these means one of the most repugnant is the call for informers.

Document F-278(b), Page 152, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-408, is a reproduction of an ordinance of 20 December 1941, which is so obviously contrary to international law that the Foreign Ministry of the Reich itself took cognizance of it. The ordinance of 27 December 1941 prescribes the following:

“Whosoever may have knowledge that arms are in the possession or
keeping of an unauthorized person or persons is obliged to
declare that at the nearest police headquarters.”

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Berlin, on 29 June 1942, objected to the draft of a reply to the French note, which we do not have here but which must have been a protest against this ordinance of 27 December 1941. The Tribunal knows that in the military operations which accompanied the liberation of our land many archives disappeared, and therefore we cannot make known to the Tribunal the protest to which the note of 29 June 1942, from the German Foreign Ministry refers.

Paragraph 2 summarizes the arguments of the French protest. The French evidently had written: If German territory were occupied by the French, we would certainly consider as a man without honor any German who denounced to the occupying power an infraction of their laws, and this point of view was taken up and adopted by the German Foreign Ministry. The note continues:

“As a result of consideration of this matter, the Foreign Office
considers it questionable whether punishment should be inflicted
on whomsoever fails to denounce a person possessing or known to
possess arms. Such a prescription of penalty under this general
form is, in the opinion of the Foreign Office, the more
impracticable in that it would offer the French the possibility
of calling attention to the fact that the German Army is
demanding of them acts which would be considered Criminal if
committed by German citizens.”

This German note, I repeat, comes from the Reich Ministry of Foreign Affairs and is signed “Strack.” There is no more severe condemnation of the German Army than that expressed by the Reich Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself. The reply of the German Army will be found by the Tribunal on Page 155, “Berlin. 8 December 1942. High Command of the Wehrmacht.” The High Command of the Wehrmacht concludes:

“. . . since it does not seem desirable to enter into discussion
with the French Government on the questions of law evoked by
them, we too consider it appropriate not to reply to the French
note.”

This note begins, moreover, by asserting that any relaxing of the orders given would be considered as a sign of weakness in France and in Belgium.

These are not the signs of weakness that the German Army gave in our occupied countries of the West. The weakness manifested itself in terror; it brought terror to reign throughout our countries, and that in order to permit the development of the policy of extermination of the vanquished nations which, in the minds of all Nazi leaders, remained the principal purpose, if not the sole purpose, of this war.

This terrorist policy, of which the Tribunal has just seen examples in connection with the repression of attacks by our French Forces of the Interior on the enemy, developed without any military necessity for it in all the countries of the West. The devastations committed by the enemy are extremely numerous. We shall limit our presentation to the destruction of Rotterdam at a time when the city had already capitulated and when only the question of the form of capitulation had to be settled; and secondly, to a description of the inundations which the German Army caused, without any military necessity of any sort, in 1945 on the eve of its destruction when that Army already knew that it had lost the game.

We have chosen the example of Rotterdam because it is the first act of terrorism of the German Army in the West. We have taken the inundations because, without her dykes, without fresh water, Holland ceases to exist. The day her dykes are destroyed, Holland disappears. One sees here the fulfillment of the enemy’s aim of destruction, formulated long ago by Germany as already shown by the citation from Hitler with which I opened my speech, an aim which was pursued to the very last minute of Germany’s existence as is proved by those unnecessary inundations.

We submit to the Tribunal Document F-719 as Exhibit Number RF-409, which comprises Dutch reports on the bombing of Rotterdam and the capitulation of the Dutch Army. On Pages 38 and 39 of the second document book are copies of the translations of documents exchanged between the commander of the German troops before Rotterdam and the colonel who was in command of the Dutch troops defending the city.

Captain Backer relates the incidents of that evening which ended with the burning of the city. At 1030 hours a German representative appeared with an ultimatum, unsigned and without any indication of the sender, demanding that the Dutch capitulate before 1230 hours. This document was returned by the Dutch colonel, who asked to be told the name and the military rank of the officer who had called upon him to surrender.

At 1215 hours Captain Backer appeared before the German lines and was received by a German officer. At 1235 hours he had an interview with German officers in a dairy shop. A German general wrote his terms for capitulation on the letter of reply, which the representative of the Dutch General Staff had just brought to him.

At 1320 hours Captain Backer left the place, this dairy shop where the negotiations had taken place, with the terms to which a reply had to be given. Two German officers escorted him. These escorting officers were protected by the flight of German aircraft, and red rockets were fired by them at 1322 and 1325 hours. At 1330 hours the first bomb fell upon Rotterdam, which was to be completely set on fire. The entry of the German troops was to take place at 1850 hours, but it was put forward at 1820 hours. Later the Germans said to Captain Backer that the purpose of the red rockets was to prevent the bombing. However, there had been excellent wireless communication from the ground to the aircraft. Captain Backer expressed his surprise that this should have been done by means of rockets.

The work on the inundation of the “Wieringermeer” polder began on 9 and 10 April 1945. I quote a Dutch document. That day German soldiers appeared on the polder, gave orders, and placed a guard for the dyke.

“On 17 April 1945 at 1215 hours the dyke was dynamited so that
two parts of it were destroyed up to a height somewhat lower
than the surface of the water of the Ijesselmeer . . . .

“As for the population, they were warned during the night of 16
to 17 April”—that is, at the time when the water was about to
flood the polder—“In Wieringerwerf the news received by the
mayor was passed from house to house that at noon the dyke would
be destroyed. Altogether for this great polder, with an area of
20,000 hectares, not more than 8½ to 9 hours were granted for
evacuation . . . . Telephone communications had been completely
interrupted; and it was impossible to use automobiles, which
meant that some individuals did not receive any warning until 8
o’clock in the morning . . . .

“The time given to the population was, therefore, too short for
the evacuation . . . .

“The looting in the flooded polder has already been mentioned.
During the morning of 17 April, on the day of the disaster,
groups of German soldiers begin to loot . . . These soldiers
came from Wieringen . . . Moreover, they broke everything that
they did not want to take . . .”

This polder by itself covers half of all the flooded lands in Northern Holland. The polder was flooded on 17 April, when defeat was already a fact as far as the German Army was concerned. The Dutch people are seeking to recover the land which they have lost. Their courage, industry and energy arouse our admiration, but it is an immense loss which the German Army inflicted upon those people on 17 April.

Terrorism and extermination are intimately interwoven in all countries in the West.

Document C-45, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-410 and which is the first in the document book, is an order of 10 February 1944 showing that repression, in the minds of the leaders of the German Army, was to be carried out without consideration of any kind:

“Fire must be immediately returned. If, as a result, innocent
people are struck, it is to be regretted but it is entirely the
fault of the terrorists.”

These lines were written over the signature of an officer of the general staff of the German Military Command in Belgium and Northern France. This officer was never denounced by his superiors as can be seen by the document.

Document F-665, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-411, Page 2 of your document book:

“The search of suspected villages requires experience. SD or GFP
(Secret Field Police) personnel should be called upon. The real
accomplices of the guerillas must be disclosed, and apprehended
with all severity. Collective measures against the inhabitants
of entire villages (this includes the burning of villages) are
to be taken only in exceptional cases and may be ordered only by
divisional commands or by chiefs of the SS and Police.”

This document is dated 6 May 1944. It comes from the High Command of the Wehrmacht; and it, or at least the covering letter, is signed by Jodl.

This document involves not only the Army General Staff, but the Labor Service—that is to say, Sauckel—and the Todt Organization—that is to say, Speer. Indeed, in the next to the last paragraph we may read:

“The directive . . . is applicable to all branches of the
Wehrmacht and to all organizations which exercise their
activities in occupied territories (the Reich Labor Service, the
Todt Organization, _et cetera_).”

These orders, aimed at the extermination of innocent civilian populations, were to be carried out vigorously but at the price of a constant collusion of the German Army, the SS, the SD, and the Sipo, which the people of all countries of the West place together in the same horror and in the same reprobation.

In the war diary of General Von Brodowski submitted this morning under Exhibit Number RF-405, an excerpt of which is to be found on Pages 3, 4, and 5 of the document book, it is stated that repressive operations were carried out:

“An action against terrorists was undertaken in the southwestern
area of the Department of Dordogne near Lalinde, in which a
company of Georgians of Field Police, and members of the SD took
part . . .”

Dated 14 June 1944 is a statement on the destruction of Oradour-sur-Glane. I shall come back to the destruction of this village. “600 persons are said to have been killed,” writes General Von Brodowski. It is underscored in the text.

“The whole male population of Oradour has been shot. Women and
children took refuge in the church. The church caught fire.
Explosives had been stored in the church. Even women and
children perished.”

We shall let you know the results of the French inquiry. The Tribunal will see to what degree General Von Brodowski lied when he described the annihilation of Oradour in these terms.

Concerning Tulle:

“On 8 July 1944 in the evening the barracks occupied by the 13th
Company of the 95th Security Regiment were attacked by
terrorists. The struggle was terminated by the arrival of the
Panzer division, ‘Das Reich.’ 120 male inhabitants of Tulle were
hanged, and 1,000 sent to the SD at Limoges for investigation.”

THE PRESIDENT: M. Dubost, could we see the original of this document?

M. DUBOST: I showed it to you this morning, Mr. President, when I submitted it. It is rather a large document, if you will remember, Sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. We would like to see it.

DR. ROBERT SERVATIUS (Counsel for Defendant Sauckel): I should like briefly to rectify an error now, before it is carried any further.

The French Prosecutor mentioned that certain people were put at the disposal of the Arbeitsdienst. I should like to point out that Arbeitsdienst is not to be confused with the Arbeitseinsatz. The Arbeitseinsatz was ultimately directed by Sauckel, whereas the Arbeitsdienst had nothing whatsoever to do with Sauckel. I should like to ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of that distinction.

THE PRESIDENT: On account of a technical incident, the Tribunal will adjourn.

[_A recess was taken._]

THE PRESIDENT: The attorney for Sauckel, I think, was addressing the Tribunal.

DR. SERVATIUS: I had pointed out the difference between the Arbeitsdienst and the Arbeitseinsatz. The French prosecuting attorney apparently confused the Arbeitsdienst with the Arbeitseinsatz, for he said that the Arbeitsdienst was connected with Sauckel. That is not so. The Arbeitsdienst was an organization for premilitary training which existed before the war and in which young people had to render labor service. These young people were to some extent used for military purposes. The Arbeitseinsatz was concerned solely with the recruiting of labor to be used in factories or other places of work. It follows, therefore, that Sauckel cannot be associated with the accusations that were made in this connection. That is what I wanted to say.

M. DUBOST: The two German words were translated in an identical manner in French. A verification having been made, the remarks of the defense are correct and Sauckel is not involved, but only the Army.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

M. DUBOST: Here are a few examples of terrorist extermination in Holland, in Belgium, and in other occupied countries of the West.

In Holland, as one example out of a thousand, there were the massacres of Putten of 30 September 1944. They are included in Document Number F-224, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-324 and which is to be found on Page 46 of the document book. On 30 September 1944 an attack was made at Putten by members of the Dutch resistance against a German automobile. The Germans concluded that the village was a refuge for partisans. They searched the houses and assembled the population in the church.

A wounded German officer had been taken prisoner by the Dutch resistance. The Germans declared that if this officer was released within 24 hours no reprisals would be made. The officer was released, after having received medical care from the soldiers of the Dutch resistance who had captured him. However, in spite of the pledge given, reprisals were made upon the village of Putten, whose inhabitants were all innocent.

I now cite Paragraph 2 of the Dutch report:

“The population gathered in the church was informed that the men
would be deported and the women had to leave the village because
it would be destroyed.

“150 houses were burned down (the total amount of houses in the
built-up area being about 2,000).

“Eight people, amongst whom a woman who tried to escape, were
shot.

“The men were taken to the concentration camp at Amersfoort.
Amongst them were many accidental passers-by who had been
admitted into the closed village but who had been prevented from
leaving the place.

“At Amersfoort about 50 people were selected; and during the
transport, 12 jumped out of the train. 622 men were eventually
deported to Auschwitz. The majority of those died after two
months.

“From the 622 deported men, only 32 inhabitants of the village
of Putten and 10 outsiders returned after the liberation.”

In Belgium, we will cite only a few facts which are related in Document Number F-685, already submitted under Exhibit Number RF-394. This document is to be found on Page 48 in your document book. It describes the murder of a young man who had sought refuge in a dug-out. He was killed by the Germans who were looking for soldiers of the Belgian secret army.

At Hervé the Germans fired on a lorry filled with young men and killed two of them. The same day some civilians were killed by a tank.

On Page 49, the summary executions of members of the secret army are described. I quote:

“At Anhée, shots having been fired upon them, the Germans
crossed the river Meuse. They set fire to 58 houses and killed
13 men. At Annevoie, on the 4th, the Germans came across the
river and burned 58 houses.”

Then follows a report on destruction, useless from the military point of view:

“. . . At Arendonck, on the 3rd, 80 men were killed, five houses
were burned. At St. Hubert, on the 6th, three men killed and
four houses burned. At Hody, on the 6th, systematic destruction
of the village, 40 houses destroyed, 16 people killed. At
Marcourt, 10 people were shot, 35 houses were burned. At
Neroeteren, on the 9th, 9 people were killed. At Oost-Ham, on
the 10th, 5 persons were killed. At Balen-Neet, on the 11th, 10
persons were shot.”

Page 50 contains the description of German extortions at the time of the temporary stabilization of the front.

“At Hechtel, the Germans having withdrawn before the British
vanguard, the inhabitants hung out flags. But fresh German
troops came to drive out the British vanguard and reprisals were
taken; 31 people were shot; 80 houses were burned, and general
looting took place. At Helchteren 34 houses were set on fire and
10 people were killed under similar circumstances. The same
thing took place at Herenthout . . . .

“The circumstances in which these men were executed are always
identical. The Germans search the cellars, bring the men out,
line them along the highway, and shoot them, after having given
them the order to run. In the meantime, grenades are thrown into
the cellars, wounding women and children.”

Another example:

“At Lommel, the unexpected return of the German soldiers found
the village with flags out. Seventeen persons who had sought
refuge in a shelter were noticed by a German. He motioned to a
tank which ran against the shelter crushing it and killing 12
people.”

In the case of Norway we shall take an example from a document already submitted under Exhibit Number RF-323, Pages 51 and 52 of your book:

“. . . on 13 April 1940, two women 30 years of age were shot at
Ringerike. On 15 April, four civilians, of whom two were boys of
15 and 16 years of age, were shot in Aadal. One of those
murdered was shot through the head, and had also been bayonetted
in the stomach. On 19 April four civilians, of whom two were
women and one a little boy 3 years of age, were shot at
Ringsaker.

“To avenge the death of the two German policemen, who were shot
on the 26th of April 1942 at Televaag, the entire place was laid
waste. More than 90 properties with 334 buildings were totally
destroyed, causing damage to buildings and chattels (furniture
and fishing outfits) amounting to a total of 4,200,000 Kroner.”

In this document the Tribunal will find the continuation of the descriptions of German atrocities committed in Norway, without any necessity of a military character, simply to maintain the reign of terror.

In France massacres and destructions without military purpose were extremely numerous, and all of them were closely associated. We submit Document F-243 as Exhibit Number RF-412. The Tribunal will find this document on Pages 178 to 193 of the document book. It is a long list, drawn up by the French Office for Inquiry into War Crimes, of the towns that were destroyed and looted without any military necessity. The Tribunal will undoubtedly be enlightened by the reading of this document. We shall give but a few examples. In submitting this Document F-909 as Exhibit Number RF-413, we intend to relate the conditions under which a whole section of Marseilles was destroyed—Pages 56, 57, and 58, of your document book.

It is estimated that about 20,000 people were evacuated. This evacuation was ordered on 23 January. It was carried out without warning during the night of the 23rd to the 24th. I quote:

“It is estimated that 20,000 persons were evacuated. From Fréjus
some of them were shipped by the Germans to the concentration
camp of Compiègne. . . .

“The demolition operations began on 1 February at about 9
o’clock in the morning. They were carried out by troops of the
German engineer corps. . . .

“The area destroyed is equivalent to 14 hectares: that is
approximately 1,200 buildings.”

Inquiry was made to find those who were responsible for this destruction. After the liberation of Marseilles the German consul in Marseilles, Von Spiegel, was interrogated. His testimony is in Document F-908, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-414, Page 53 of your document book. Spiegel stated:

“I know that a very short time after the evacuation of the old
port the rumor spread that this measure had been brought about
by financial interests, but I can assure you that in my opinion
such a hypothesis is erroneous. The order came from the higher
authorities of the Reich Government and had only two
motives—the security of troops and the danger of epidemics.”

We do not intend to give you a complete description of the attacks committed by the Germans but merely a few examples. We submit Document F-600 as Exhibit Number RF-415, Page 59:

“At Ohis (Aisne) a civilian wanted to give an American soldier
some cider to drink. The Germans returned. The American soldier
was taken prisoner, and M. Hennebert was also taken away by the
Germans to a spot known as the ‘Black Mountain’ in the village
of Origny en Thiérache where his body was later discovered
partly hidden under a stack of wood. The body bore the trace of
two bayonet wounds in the back.”

I submit Document F-604 as Exhibit Number RF-416, Page 61 of the document book. A civilian was killed in his vineyard. Young men and girls walking along the road were killed. The motive was given as “presence of Maquis in the region.” All these victims were completely innocent.

Document F-904, which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-417, Page 62 of your document book. At Culoz “. . . young boys were arrested because they had run away at the sight of the Germans. . . .” They were reported. “. . . not one of them belonged to the resistance.”

At St. Jean-de-Maurienne—Document F-906, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-418, Page 63 of your document book:

“On 23 August the gendarmes, Chavanne and Empereur, dressed in
civilian clothes, and M. Albert Taravel were arrested by German
soldiers without legitimate reason. The lieutenant who was in
charge of the Kommandantur promised the officer of the gendarmes
to release these three men. This German later surreptitiously
ordered his men to shoot these prisoners.

“Mademoiselle Lucie Perraud, 21 years of age, who was a maid at
the Café Dentroux, was raped by a German soldier of Russian
origin, under threat of a pistol.”

I will not mention any more of the atrocities described in this document.

I now come to the Vercors. This region was undeniably an important assembly center for French Forces of the Interior. Document F-611, which we submit as Exhibit Number RF-419, describes the atrocities committed against the innocent population of this region in reprisal for the presence of men of the Maquis. This document appears in your book on Page 69 and following. In Paragraph 3 is an enumeration of police operations in the Vercors area.

On 15 June, in the region of St. Donat: rape and looting. Execution at Portes-les-Valence on 8 July 1944 of 30 hostages taken from among the political prisoners interned at Fort Montluc at Lyons. Police raids carried out against the Maquis of the Vercors region from 21 July to 5 August 1944. Rape and looting in the region of Crest, Saillans, and Die. Bombing by aircraft of numerous villages in the Vercors area and in particular at La Chapelle and Vassieux-en-Vercors; summary execution of inhabitants of these places; looting. Execution, after summary judgment, of about a hundred young men at St. Nazaire-en-Royans; deportation to Germany of 300 others from this region. Murder of 50 gravely wounded persons in the Grotto of La Luire. On 15 June 1944, attack by German troops at St. Donat. I quote, “The Maquis had evacuated the town several days earlier . . . 54 women or young girls from 13 to 50 years of age were raped by the maddened soldiers.”

The Tribunal will forgive me if I avoid citing the atrocious details which follow. Bombing of the villages of Combovin, La Baume-Cornillanne, Ourches, _et cetera_:

“The losses caused by these bombings among the civilian
population are rather high, for in most cases the inhabitants,
caught by surprise, had no time to seek shelter . . . 2 women
were raped at Crest . . . 3 women were raped at Saillans . . . .

“A young girl of twelve, who was wounded and pinned down between
beams, awaited death for 6 long days unable either to sit down
or sleep, and without receiving any food, and that under the
eyes of the Germans who were occupying the village.”—A medical
certificate from Doctor Nicolaides, who examined the women who
were raped in this region.

I will pass on.

I submit Document F-612 under Exhibit Number RF-420. To terrorize the inhabitants at Trebeurden in Brittany they hanged innocent people, and slashed the corpses to make the blood flow.

I proceed. Document F-912 is submitted as Exhibit Number RF-421, Page 82 of your book. It is the report of the massacre of 35 Jews at St. Amand-Montrond. These men were arrested and killed with pistol shots in the back by members of the Gestapo and of the German Army. They were innocent of any crime.

I submit Document F-913 as Exhibit Number RF-422—Page 96, I am quoting:

“On 8 April 1944 German soldiers of the Gestapo arrested young
André Bézillon, 18 years of age, dwelling at Oyonnax (Ain),
whose brother was in the Maquis. The body of this young man was
discovered on 11 April 1944 at Siège (Jura) frightfully
mutilated. His nose and tongue had been cut off. There were
traces of blows over his whole body and of slashes on his legs.
Four other young men were also found at Siège at the same time
as Bézillon. All of them had been mutilated in such a manner
that they could not be identified. They bore no trace of
bullets, which clearly indicates that they died from the
consequences of ill-treatment.”

I submit Document F-614 as Exhibit Number RF-423, at Page 98 of your document book. It describes the destruction of the village of Cerizay, (Deux-Sèvres). I quote:

“The fire did not cause any accident to persons, but the bodies
of two persons killed by German convoys and those of two victims
of the bombardment were burned.”

This village was destroyed by artillery fire; 172 buildings were destroyed and 559 were damaged. We now submit another document, Document F-919 as Exhibit Number RF-424, Page 103. It concerns the murder of a young man of Tourc’h in Finistère. The murderers compelled the mother to prepare a meal for them. Having been fed, they had the victim disinterred. They searched and found that the body bore a card of identity bearing the same name and address as his mother, brothers, and sisters, who were present and in tears. One of the soldiers, finding no excuse to explain this crime, said dryly before going away: “He was not a terrorist! What a pity!” and the body was buried again. Document F-616 submitted as Exhibit Number RF-425, Page 104, concerns the report of the operations of the German Army in the region of Nice, about 20 July 1944. I quote:

“. . . having been attacked at Presles by several groups of
Maquis in the region, by way of reprisal, this Mongolian
detachment, as usual commanded by the SS, went to a farm where
two French members of the resistance had been hidden. Being
unable to take them prisoners, these soldiers then arrested the
proprietors of that farm (the husband and wife), and after
subjecting them to numerous atrocities, rape, et cetera, they
shot them with submachine guns. Then they took the son of these
victims, who was only 3 years of age; and, after having tortured
him frightfully, they crucified him on the gate of the
farmhouse.”

We submit Document F-914 as Exhibit Number RF-426, Page 107 of your document book. This is a long recital of murders committed without any cause whatever by the German Army in Rue Tronchet at Lyons. I now read:

“Without preliminary warning, without any effort having been
made to verify the exact character of the situation and, if
necessary, to seize those responsible for the act, the soldiers
opened fire. A certain number of civilians, men, women, and
children fell. Others who were untouched or only slightly
wounded fled in haste.”

The Tribunal will find the official report that was drawn up on the occasion of these murders.

We submit without quoting, asking the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it only, the report relating to the crimes of the German Army committed in the region of Loches (Indre-et-Loire), Document F-617, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-427, Page 115 of your document book.

Document F-607, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-428, which is on Page 119 of your document book, describes the looting, rape, and burnings at Saillans during the months of July and of August 1944. I quote, “During their sojourn in the region”—referring to German soldiers—“rapes were committed against three women in that area.” I pass on. Document F-608, Page 120 of your document book, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-429: A person was burned alive at Puisots by a punitive expedition. This person was innocent.

I submit Document F-610 as Exhibit Number RF-430, Page 122 of your document book. The whole region of Vassieux in the Vercors was devastated. This document, Number F-610, is a report by the Red Cross prepared prior to the liberation. I am quoting:

“We found on a farm a wounded man, who had been hit by 8 bullets
in the following circumstances. The Germans forced him to set
fire to his own house, and tried to prevent him from escaping
the flames by shooting at him with their pistols. In spite of
his wounds, he was able miraculously to escape.”

We submit Document F-618 as Exhibit Number RF-431, Page 124 of the document book. I quote, concerning people who were executed:

“Before being shot these people were tortured. One of them, M.
Francis Duperrier, had a broken arm and his face was completely
mutilated. Another, M. Feroud-Plattet, had been completely
disembowelled with a piece of sharp wood. His jaw bone was also
crushed.”

We submit Document 605 as Exhibit Number RF-432, Page 126. This document describes the burning of the hamlet of des Plaines near Moutiers, in Savoy: “Two women, Madame Romanet, a widow, 72 years old, and her daughter, age 41, were burned to death in a small room of their dwelling, where they had sought refuge. In the same place a man, M. Charvaz, who had had his thigh shattered by a bullet, was also found burned.”

We now submit as Exhibit Number RF-433 the French Document F-298, Page 127 and following in your document book, which describes the destruction of Maillé in the department of Indre-et-Loire. That area was entirely destroyed on 25 August 1944, and a large number of its inhabitants were killed or seriously wounded. This destruction and these crimes had no terrorist action, no action by the French Forces of the Interior as a motive.

Document F-907 submitted as Exhibit Number RF-434—Page 132 and following in your document book—relates the incidents leading to German crimes at Montpezat-de-Quercy. This is a letter written to the French Delegation by the Bishop of Montauban, Monseigneur Théas, on 11 December 1945. This document really explains Document F-673, already submitted as Exhibit Number RF-392, from which I will read. The first part consists of a letter by the French Armistice Commission, and has been taken from the archives of the Armistice Commission in Wiesbaden:

“On the night of 6 to 7 June last, in the course of an operation
in the region of Montpezat-de-Quercy, German troops set fire to
four farmhouses which formed the hamlet called ‘Perches.’ Three
men, two women, and two children, 14 and 4 years old, were
burned alive. Two women and a child of ten who disappeared
probably suffered the same fate.

“On Saturday, 10 June, having been fired at by two recalcitrants
at the village of Marsoulas, German troops killed these two men.
Moreover, they massacred without any explanation all the other
inhabitants of the village that they could lay their hands on.

“Thus 7 men, 6 women, and 14 children were killed, most of them
still in their beds at the early hour when this happened.

“On 10 June, at about 1900 hours, five Luftwaffe aircraft
attacked the town of Tarbes for half an hour with bombs and
machine guns. Several buildings were destroyed, among them the
Hôtel des Ponts et Chaussées, and the Academic Inspectorate.
There were 7 dead and about 10 wounded who were hit by chance
among the population of the town. On this occasion the general
in command of the VS-659 at Tarbes immediately informed the
Prefect of the Department of Basses-Pyrénées that the operation
had been neither caused nor ordered by him.

“Following each of these events the Regional Prefect of Toulouse
addressed to the general commanding the HVS-564 letters in which
in dignified and measured terms he protested against the acts in
question, through which innocent women and children were
deliberately killed. He asserted very rightly that under no
circumstances could children in the cradle be considered as
accomplices of the terrorists. He requested finally that
instructions be given to avoid the recurrence of such painful
events.

“Replying on 19 June to the three letters of the Regional
Prefect of Toulouse, the chief of staff of the general
commanding the head liaison staff 564 announced the principles
which determined the position taken by his chief, which
justified the acts of reprisal quoted on the following grounds:

“The duty of the French population is not only to flee from
terrorists but also to render their operations impossible, which
will avoid any reprisals being taken against innocent people. In
the struggle against terrorism the German Army must and will
employ all means at its disposal, even methods of combat new to
Western Europe.

“The terror raids of the Anglo-Americans also massacre thousands
and thousands of German children. There, too, innocent blood is
being shed through the action of the enemy, whose support of
terrorism is forcing the German soldier to use his arms in the
South of France.

“I beg to ask you”—concluded General Bridoux, writing to the
German Commission—“whether the French Government is to consider
the arguments cited above as reflecting accurately the position
taken by the German High Command, in view of the facts disclosed
in the first part of the present letter.”

We now submit Document E-190 as Exhibit Number RF-435, Page 141 of the document book, which describes the crimes committed at Ascq by a German unit which, in reprisal for the destruction of the railway, massacred 77 men of all categories and all ages, among whom were 22 employees of the French State railway, some industrialists, business men, and workmen. I quote:

“The oldest of these victims, M. Briet, retired, was 74 years
old; he was born on 3 October 1869 at Ascq. The youngest, Jean
Roques, student and son of the postmaster, was 15 years old,
born on 4 January 1929 at Saint Quentin. Father Gilleron, a
priest at Ascq, and his two protegées, M. Averlon and his son,
who had fled from the coast, were also shot.”

This massacre was the cause of a protest made by the French Government at that time, to which Commander-in-Chief Von Rundstedt replied on 3 May 1944 (Document F-673, already submitted as Exhibit Number RF-392, Page 154):

“The population of Ascq bears the responsibility for the
consequences of its treacherous conduct, which I can only
severely condemn.”

General Bérard, president of the French delegation attached to the German Armistice Commission, was not satisfied with the reply given by Rundstedt; and on 21 June 1944 he reiterated the French protest, addressing it this time to General Vogl, president of the German Armistice Commission. This is still Document F-673, Exhibit Number RF-392. I quote:

“In all, from 10 October 1943 to 1st May 1944, more than 1,200
persons were made the victims of these measures of
repression. . . .

“These measures of repression strike the innocent and cause
terror to reign among the French population . . . .

“A great number of the acts that have been mentioned took place
in the course of repressive operations directed against
population accused of having relations with the Maquis. In these
operations there was never any care taken to discover whether
the people suspected of having served the Maquis were really
guilty; and still less in this case, to ascertain whether these
people had acted voluntarily or under duress. The number of
innocent people executed is therefore considerable. . . .

“The repressive operation in Dordogne, from 26 March to 3 April
1944, and particularly the tragic affair of Ascq, which have
already brought about the intervention of the head of the French
Government, are grievous examples. At Ascq, especially, 86
innocent people paid with their lives for an attempted attack
which, according to my information, did not cause the death of a
single German soldier. . . .

“Such acts can only stimulate the spirit of revolt in the
adversaries of Germany, who finally are the only ones to
benefit.”

The reply of the Armistice Commission, Document F-707, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-436, is the rejection of General Bérard’s request. The document is before you. I do not think it is necessary for me to read it.

The general, on 3 August 1944, reiterated his protest. This is Document F-673, Exhibit Number RF-392, already submitted. At the end of his protest he writes:

“An enemy who surrenders must not be killed even though he is a
_franc-tireur_ or a spy. The latter will receive just punishment
through the courts.”

But this is only the text of stipulations to be applied within Germany.

We submit Document F-706, Exhibit Number RF-437, which is a note from the French Secretary of State for Defense to the German general protesting against the measures of destruction taken by the German troops in Chaudebonne and Chaveroche. We shall not read this document. The Tribunal may take judicial notice of it, if it deems it necessary.

We now come to the statement of the events of Tulle, in which 120 Frenchmen were hanged, Page 169 (Document F-673, Exhibit RF-392). I am quoting:

“On 7 June a large group of _francs-tireurs_ attacked the French
forces employed in the maintenance of order and succeeded in
seizing the greater part of the town of Tulle after a struggle
which lasted until dawn. . . .

“The same day, at about 2000 hours, important German armored
forces came to the assistance of the garrison and penetrated
into the city from which the terrorists withdrew in
haste. . . .”

These troops, which re-took Tulle, decided to carry out reprisals. The French Forces of the Interior that had taken the town had withdrawn. The Germans had taken no prisoners. The reprisals were carried out upon civilians. Without discrimination they were arrested.

“The victims were selected without any inquiry, without even any
questioning, haphazardly; workmen, students, professors,
industrialists. There were even among them some militia
sympathizers and candidates for the Waffen SS. The 120 corpses
which were hanged from the balconies and lamp-posts of the
Avenue de la Gare, along a distance of 500 meters, were a
horrible spectacle that will remain in the memory of the
unfortunate population of Tulle for a long time.”

We now come to the crowning event in these German atrocities: the destruction of Oradour-sur-Glane, in the month of June 1944. The Tribunal will accept, we hope, the presentation of Document F-236, which now becomes Exhibit Number RF-438. This is an official book, published by the French Government, which gives a full description of the events. I will give you a brief analysis of the report which the _de facto_ government of the time sent to the German general who was Commander-in-Chief for the regions of the West:

“On Saturday, 10 June, a detachment of SS belonging very likely
to the ‘Das Reich’ division which was present in the area, burst
into the village, after having surrounded it entirely, and
ordered the population to gather in the central square. It was
then announced that it had been reported that explosives had
been hidden in the village and that a search and the checking of
identity were about to take place. The men were asked to make
four or five groups, each of which was locked into a barn. The
women and children were taken to the church and locked in. It
was about 1400 hours. A little later machine-gunning began and
the whole village was set on fire, as well as the surrounding
farms. The houses were set on fire one by one. The operation
lasted undoubtedly several hours, in view of the extent of the
locality.

“In the meantime the women and the children were in anguish as
they heard the sound of the fires and of the shootings. At 1700
hours, German soldiers entered the church and placed upon the
communion table an asphyxiating apparatus which comprised a sort
of box from which lighted fuses emerged. Shortly after the
atmosphere became unbreathable. However someone was able to
break open the vestry door which enabled the women and children
to regain consciousness. The German soldiers then started to
shoot through the windows of the church, and they came inside to
finish off the last survivors with machine guns. Then they
spread upon the soil some inflammable material. One woman alone
was able to escape, having climbed on the window to run away.
The cries of a mother who tried to give her child to her, drew
the attention of one of the guards who fired on the would-be
fugitive and wounded her seriously. She saved her life by
simulating death and she was later cared for in a hospital at
Limoges.

“At about 1800 hours the German soldiers stopped the local train
which was passing in the vicinity. They told passengers going to
Oradour to get off, and, having machine-gunned them, threw their
bodies into the flames. At the end of the evening, as well as
the following day, a Sunday morning, the inhabitants of the
surrounding hamlets, alarmed by the fire or made anxious because
of the absence of their children who had been going to school at
Oradour, attempted to approach, but they were either
machine-gunned or driven away by force by German sentinels who
were guarding the exits of the village. However, on the
afternoon of Sunday some were able to get into the ruins, and
they stated that the church was filled with the corpses of women
and children, all shrivelled up and calcinated.

“An absolutely reliable witness was able to see the body of a
mother holding her child in her arms at the entrance of the
church, and in front of the altar the body of a little child
kneeling, and near the confessional the bodies of two children
in each other’s arms.

“During the night from Sunday to Monday the German troops
returned and attempted to remove traces by proceeding with the
summary burial of the women and children outside the church.

“The news of this drama began to spread through Limoges on the
11th of June.

“In the evening, the general commanding the Verbindungsstab
refused to grant the pass, which was personally requested by the
Regional Prefect, for him and the Deputy Prefect to move about
in the area. Only the Subprefect of Rochechouart was able to go
to Oradour and report to his chief on the following day that the
village, which comprised 85 houses, was only a mass of ruins and
that the greater part of the population, women and children
included, had perished.

“On Tuesday, 13 June, the Regional Prefect finally obtained
authorization to go there and was able to proceed to the town,
accompanied by the Deputy Prefect and the Bishop of Limoges. In
the church, which was partly in ruins, there were still the
calcinated remains of children. Bones were mixed with the ashes
of the woodwork. The ground was strewn with shells with ‘STKAM’
marked upon them, and on the walls there were numerous traces of
bullets at a man’s height.

“Outside the church the soil was freshly dug; children’s
garments were piled up, half burned. Where the barns had stood,
completely calcinated human skeletons, heaped one on the other,
partially covered with various material made a horrible
charnel-house.

“. . . although it is impossible to give the exact number of
these victims, it can be estimated that there were 800 to 1,000
dead, among them many children who had been evacuated from
regions threatened by bombardment. There do not seem to have
been more than ten survivors among the persons who were present
in the village of Oradour at the beginning of the afternoon of
10 June.”

Such are the facts.

“I have the honor, General, to ask you”—concluded General
Bridoux addressing his enemy—“to be good enough to communicate
these facts to the German High Command in France. I greatly hope
that they will be brought to the knowledge of the Government of
the Reich, because of the political importance which they will
assume from their repercussion on the mind of the French
population.”