The roundup of December 1941, particularly, was aimed at intellectual circles, and then there were the roundups of July 1942. All these cities in the southern zone, particularly Lyon, Grenoble, Cannes, and Nice, where numerous Jewish persons had taken refuge, became familiar with these roundups after the occupation of all France". ing. "They sought out all Jewish children who sought refuge with private citizens or with groups. In May 1944, they proceeded to arrest the children of the Colony of Eyzieux, and the arrests of children who had sought refuge in the Colonies of Ugif, in June and July 1944. I do not believe that these children were enemies of the German people." I do not know of what peril the German army might have suffered through these children.
THE PRESIDENT: Let us break off now.
(Whereupon at 1700 hours, an adjournment was called until 1000 hours the following day, 25 January 1946).
Military Tribunal, in the matter of:
25 January, 1946, 1000-1245; Lord Justice
COURT OFFICER: Your Honors, Defendants Kaltenbrunner and Streicher will be absent from this morning's session.
M. DUBOST: Yesterday I was reading from an official French document, which is in your document book. It is a report. It is a report which concerns the arrest of Jewish children in France, who were in private asylums or in public institutions where they had been put. viously, concerning the execution of orders given by the German General Staff, with the approval of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Reich, to arrest all French generals and imprison all the families of these generals, who were dissidents as far as collaboration was concerned. not require facts of public knowledge to be proved. In the enormous amount of facts which we submit to you there are many which are known but are not of public knowledge. There are some, nevertheless, which are both known and also are of public knowledge in all countries. like to remind the Tribunal of six principal points as to this deportation. In the first place, we all remember to have learned by the Allied radio that Madame Giraud, the wife of General Giraud -
THE PRESIDENT: What is it that you are going to ask us to take judicial knowledge of with reference to the deportation of General Giraud's family?
M. DUBOST: I requested, Mr. President, that the Tribunal, as far as this fact is concerned, according to the application of Article 21 of the Charter, to wit, that this provision specifies that the Tribunal will not require that facts of public knowledge be proved.
of these facts, which we consider to be of public knowledge for they are known not only in France but in America, since the American Army participated in these events.
THE PRESIDENT: The words of Article 21 are not "of public knowledge" but of "common knowledge." It is not quite the same thing.
M. DUBOST: Before me now I have the French translation of this document, which is interpreted according to the French translation: "The Tribunal will not require that facts of public knowledge --" -- "notoriete publique" is the translation.
We interpret it thus; it is not necessary to bring documentary proof or evidentiary proof of a fact which is universally known.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you say "universally known", but supposing the members of the Tribunal did not know the facts? How coult it then be taken that they were of common knowledge/The members of the Tribunal may be ignorant of the facts. At the same time it is difficult for them to take cognizance of the facts if they do not know them.
M. DUBOST: I understand, Mr. President, it is a question of fact which will be decided by the Tribunal. The Tribunal will say whether they know or do now have knowledge of these six points which I submit to them.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will retire.
(Whereupon at 1020 hours the Tribunal recessed until 1030 hours)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is of the opinion that the facts with reference to General Giraud's deportation and the deportation of his family, although they a re very probably matters of common knowledge or of public knowledge within France, cannot be said to be of common knowledge or of public knowledge within the meaning of Article 21, which applies generally to the world. from France which state the facts with reference to the deportation of General Giraud, the matter assumes a different aspect and if there are such documents the Tribunal will, of course, consider them.
M. DUBOST: I must bring proof that the crimes committed individually by the leaders of the German police in each city and in each region of the occupied countries of the West were the execution of the central will and permanent will of the German Government, which will permit me to take up one by one the accusations of which the defendants are guilty.
This can only be done by submitting documents. You must consider as facts and as valid the depositions which I am about to read, which were collected by the American and French Army and the French Service for the Research of War Criminals. The Tribunal will excuse me if I am obliged to read numerous documents. the proof that everywhere and in every case the German police used the same methods concerning patriots who were interned. The internment, the custody or arrest took place in France in civilian prisons, which the Germans had seized or French prisons which the French had requisitioned which they occupied and French officials were forbidden to enter there. Those in custody in all these penal institutions were subject to the same regime. We shall prove this through the reading of depositions of those arrested and who were in German penal institutions in France or in the Western occupied countries. This regime was absolutely inhuman and permitted those in custody to survive under the most precarious conditions.
cup of herb tea at 7 o'clock in the morning and a ladle of soup with a small piece of bread at 17 hours. This is established by Document 555, which you will find in your document book, which we submit under the number 302.
THE PRESIDENT: I have not found the document.
M. DUBOST: The eleventh in the document book, F 555, first page of the document.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but you see, these document books are not paged or tabbed in any way. We have it now.
M. DUBOST: It is the first page of this document, second paragraph. This is an analysis of the depositions which were received. It is adquate to refer to this analysis from which we will read a few lines. Montluc, the prisoners who were taken in the round-up of the Gestapo on September 20, 1943, were stripped of all their property. The prisoners were treated in a brutal fashion. The food ration was quite insufficient. The modesty of the women was not respected. at Saint Gingolph. This deposition refers to the arrests made at Saint Gingolph, which were carried out in the month of September 1943. The witness relates on page 2, fifth paragraph, at the top of the page, number 2; after returning from the interrogation the young boys had their fingers burned by means of wadded cotton which had been dipped with gasoline.
THE PRESIDENT: Which paragraph on page 2?
M. DUBOST: The fourth paragraph -- fifth paragraph.
"On their return from the interrogation the young people had their toes burned by means of wadding, soaked with gasoline; others their ankles burned by means of a flame from a soldering lamp; others were bitten by dogs."
DR. MERKER (Counsel for Gestapo): The French prosecution submits documents which do not contain affidavits under oath and confirmations which do not show who took them. As a matter of principle I have to protest that these mere depositions of persons who did not take an oath and who didn't make whatever they had to say in the form of affidavits, should be admitted as proof.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that all you have to say?
DR. MERKER: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: We will hear the answer from M. Dubost.
M. DUBOST: Mr. President, the Charter which admits evidence of public knowledge does not fix rules as to the way in which testimony should be received, which is submitted to you as proof. The Charter leaves one free to determine or decide as to certain documents, whether such and such a way of investigating can be accepted. is quite legal, according to the customs and usages of my country. It is obvious, in fact, that the police transcripts were received without the witnesses having given the oath. uncover war crimes must be considered as authentic proof. Article 21 says: "The Tribunal will not require that the facts of public knowledge must be proved but will take judicial notice of them. They will also consider as authentic proof the documents and official reports of the Governments of the United Nations, including those which were made by Commissions, established in different Allied Countries for investigation of war crimes, as well as the transcript of sessions and decisions of Military Tribunals or any other tribunals."
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dubost, is the document that you are reading to us either an official document or a report or is it an act or document of a Committee set up in France?
M. DUBOST: This report, Mr. President, comes from the Surete Nationale. You can establish that by examining the second sheet of the copy which you have in your hand, at the top to the left: "General Direction of the Surete Nationale." That is the top to the left, the second page: "Special Commissariat of Saint Gingolph."
THE PRESIDENT: May we see the original document?
M. DUBOST: Certainly. This document was submitted to the Clerk of the Tribunal. The Clerk or Secretary only has to bring that document to you.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Is this a certified copy?
M. DUBOST: Yes, it is a certified copy. It is a copy which is certified by the Director of the Cabinet of the War Ministry.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dubost, I am told that the French Prosecutors have all the original documents and are not depositing them in the way which was done by the other Prosecutors.
Is that so?
M. DUBOST: The French Prosecutor submitted the originals of yesterday's session, and they were handed over this morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we wish to see the original document. We understand it is in the hands of the French Secretary. We should like to see it.
M. DUBOST: I shall send for it, Mr. President.
(A document was submitted to the Tribunal).
M. DUBOST: This document is a certified copy of the original, which is preserved in the archives of the French War Crimes Commission. This certification was made, on the one hand, by the French Delegate of the Public Prosecution. You will see the signature of M. De Menthon, and it is certified also by the Director of the Cabinet of the Minister of Justice, M. Jombeau, with the official seal of the Ministry of Justice.
THE PRESIDENT: It does appear to be a governmental document. It is the act and document of a committee set up by France for the investigation of war crimes, is it not?
M. DUBOST: Mr. President, it is a document which comes from the general direction of the Surete Nationale, which was established by the French Committee for the Search for War Crimes. the Cabinet of the Ministry of Justice in Paris.
THE PRESIDENT: I was not upon the question of whether it was a true copy or not; the question I was upon was whether or not it was, within Article 21, either a governmental document or a report of the United Nations, or a document of a committee set up in France for the investigation of war crimes. I was asking you whether it is, and it appears to be so. It is, is it not?
M. DUBOST: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to add anything to what you have said, M. Dubost?
M. DUBOST: No, I have nothing to add.
THE PRESIDENT: You may speak now, sir.
DR. MERKER: These reports are not reports of a government, and cannot be considered as such. They are only minutes which have been taken by police authorities, and are thus not at all authentic declarations of a government or a government agency. police authorities have not been taken under oath, and I have to protest that they are introduced here and considered as proof.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wash to add anything further?
DR. MERKER: No.
THE PRESIDENT: Who is M. Binaud? J. Binaud?
M. DUBOST: He is the police inspector of the special police, who was attached to the special commissariat of Saint Gingolph. said this was a petty police office. This is not true. This was a very important police service, which was a border service. Even though they are found in small towns, they are still part of a very important police service.
M. DUBOST: M. Dubost, you understand what the problem is? It is a question of the interpretation of Article 21. The Tribunal requires your assistance upon that interpretation, as to whether this document does come under the terms of Article 21. If you have anything to say upon that subject we will be glad to hear it.
M. DUBOST: Mr. President, it seems to me impossible that the Tribunal should not receive this document and documents such as this, for all these document bear, for authentication, not only the signatures of the French Government, but of the Delegate of the Ministry of Justice for War Crimes.
THE PRESIDENT: Tell us where the signatures are.
M. DUBOST: There is here, sir (indicating on document), a mention of that. This document was handed over by the French Ministry as a proof of the Service concerned with the seeking out of war crimes, and below is the signature of the Director of the Cabinet of the French Ministry of Justice. And you find, over this signature, the seal of the Ministry of Justice.
You read: "The Service for the Research of Enemy War Crimes."
THE PRESIDENT: Is this the substance of the matter, that there was an inquiry by the police?
Can't you hear? Is my voice not coming through to you, or is the translation not coming through to you.
M. DUBOST: The translation has not been completed.
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't complete the sentence. What I was asking was this. Is this the substance of the matter, that there was an inquiry by the police into these facts, and that police inquiry was recorded, and then the Minister of Justice, for the purposes of this Trial, adopted that police report?
Is that the substance of it?
M. DUBOST: That is correct, Mr. President. I think that we are in agreement. The Service for the Research of Enemy War Crimes in France is directly attached to the Ministry of Justice. It carries out investigations. These investigations are made by the police authorities, such as M. Binaud, the inspector of special police, attached to the special commissariat of Saint Gingolph.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to know when the Service of Inquiry into War Crimes was established.
M. DUBOST: I cannot, from my memory, give you the exact answer, or the exact date, but this Service was established in France shortly after the liberation. Beginning in October of 1944, they already functioned.
THE PRESIDENT: Was it established after the police report was made?
M. DUBOST: In the month of September.
THE PRESIDENT: September of what year?
M. DUBOST: In September, 1944, this Service for the Inquiry into Enemy War Crimes in France was established. This Service gave orders -
THE PRESIDENT: Then the Police inquiry was held under the Service? You see, the police report is dated -- I think it would be better if you kept your earphones on. The police report is dated the 9th of October, and therefore the police report appears to have been made after the Service had been set up. Is that right?
M. DUBOST: You have the testimony, Mr. President. If you look at the top of the second page at the left, it shows the beginning of the testimony: "Purpose: Investigation of atrocities committed by Germans against the civilian population." into War Crimes.
THE. PRESIDENT: Yes. It appears, though, as if the Service was established in September, and this police investigation is dated the 9th of October.
(Whereupon a recess was taken from 1105 to 1130 hours)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has considered the arguments which have been addressed to it, and is of the opinion that the document offered by counsel for France is a document our committee set up for the investigation of war crimes within the meaning of Article XXI of the Charter. The fact that it is not upon oath does not prevent it being such a document within Article XXI, of which the Tribunal is directed to take judicial notice. The question of its probative value would of course be considered under Article XIX of the Charter, and therefore in accordance with Article XIX and Article XXI of the Charter the document will be admitted in evidence, and the objection of counsel for the Gestapo is denied. the General Secretary of the Tribunal, and that when they a re being discussed in Court the original document should be present in Court at the time.
DOCTOR BABEL (Counsel for the SS): I have been informed that General Giraud and his family could possibly have been deported to Germany upon the orders of Himmler, but that they were treated very well and that they were billetted in a villa; that they were brought back to France in good health; that they are in perfect health and condition up to this date.
THE PRESIDENT: Forgive me for interrupting. The Tribunal are not now considering the case of General Giraud and his family. with the deportation of General Giraud, and were stating facts to us, what you allege to be facts, as to that deportation. The Tribunal is not considering that matter. The Tribunal has already ruled that it cannot take judicial notice of the facts as to General Giraud's deportation.
DOCTOR BABEL: I was of the opinion that what I had to say could explain the situation, and might facilitate and expedite the trial in that respect. That was the purpose of my inquiry.
THE PRESIDENT: What you wish to state . . . . I am merely pointing out to you that we are not now considering General Giraud's case.
DOCTOR BABEL: Yes.
M. DUBOST: If the Tribunal will permit me to continue. Thus it seems to me necessary to come back to the proof which I propose to submit. I must show the uniform methods and tortures which were used by each of the departments of the German Police.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think the document which we have just admitted-have you finished the document we have just admitted?
M. DUBOST: Yes, Mr. President; I have completed this and I will read from other documents. But first I would like to sum up the proofs which I wish to submit this morning through the reading of documents. I said that I was going to show that, through the uniform ill-treatments which were inflicted upon prisoners under interrogation by all departments of the German police, we come to the realization of a common will. I don't want to give you a direct proof as we did yesterday in relation to hostages in bringing you papers that were signed by Keitel notably, but we shall bring out in a certain fashion this uniformity of method which exposes a uniform will which can only go back to the head of the police; to the very center of the German Government, to which the Defendants belonged. ill-treatment of prisoners at Monluc and Lyon. I pass to document 556, which we shall submit under the number 330, which relates to the prisons at Marsaille, the document after 555 in the document bock. Security Service of Vaucluse concerning atrocities committed by Germans upon political prisoners, and this transcript reinforces the written deposition of M. Mousson, who was chief of an intelligence service.
"Arrested the 16th of August 1943. Then transferred the 30th of August 1943 to the prison Saint-Pierre in Marseille."
Last paragraph of the first page of this document. We read:
"Transferred to Marsaille, the frontier prison, 30th of August 1943. Placed in Room P, twenty-five metres long and five metres wide."
THE PRESIDENT: Is that the last paragraph?
M. DUBOST: Document F-556. It is the last paragraph at the bottom of the page.
"There were seventy-five or often eighty in there. Two straw mattresses for three.
Repulsive hygienic conditions. Lice. Fleas. Bed-bugs. Dreadful food. For no reason at all comrades were struck and put in their cells two or three days without food."
"Taken into custody again the 15th of May in rather a brutal way. I was imprisoned in the prison of Saint Anne."
And the fifth paragraph of the same page:
"The conditions of life in Saint Anne were deplorable -- the hygienic conditions. Food was furnished by the National Relief Society."
"The living conditions in Petites Beaumettes -- just enough food to keep one alive. No packages. Red Cross gives a great many, but we receive very few."
The prison of Poitiers. This was a prison entirely under the orders of the Germans. The following document, F-558, which we depose as No.304. Joined to this document, next to last and last page, a report from the American Information Service in Paris. The press department, October 18, 1941. The Tribunal should know that all these reports were incorporated with the documents which were presented by the French Office for the Investigation of war Crimes. We read under number two:
"M. C'laeys was arrested December 14, 1943, by the Gestapo and kept in custody in a prison "Pierre Levee" until August 26, 1944."
"During his imprisonment he requested a mattress since he was wounded from the war. The answer was that he would have one if he confessed. He had to sleep on straw which was two centimetres thick spread over the ground. Seven men in a room four metres long and two metres wide and two metres and eighty centimetres high. Twenty days without leaving the cell. His wounds bothered him and prevented him from going to the place of convenience. The Germans refused to bother about him."
"Another prisoner weighed 120 kilograms and lost thirty kilograms in a month. He was kept in solitary confinement for a month. He was tortured and died of gangrene of the limbs. Wounds were caused by the torture having been inflicted. He died after ten days of agony, alone, and without any aid."
Under number five. Here are the torture methods.
"The victim was forced to double up; his hands attached to the right leg. They then threw him to the ground. They beat him with a huge stick for twenty minutes. If he fainted they threw a pail of water upon his face. This was done to make him speak. Mr. Francheteau was thus beaten four days out of six. Sometimes the patient was not bound. If he fell they picked him up by his hair and they continued."
"At other moments the victim was placed nude in a cell of special collection and his hands were bound to an iron bar above his head. He was then beaten until he decided to talk.
"(b) The method above was not as common, but he has friends who saw electrical tortures. An electric wire was attached to the foot of the victim and another wire to different parts of his body. The torture was all the more horrible. In many cases the Germans had no exact ideas about what information they wished to obtain, and they merely tortured them in various ways."
"A method of torture consisted in hanging the victim by his hands, which were brought behind his back until his shoulders were completely dislocated. Then they cut the bottom of his foot with razor blades and obliged him to walk on salt." We submit it under No.305. It also comes from the American War Crimes Commission. Page one, under the letter "A" you will read: committed by the Germans in northern France and in Belgium is analyzed. This report tells about the activities of the German police in Arras, Bethune Lille, Valenciennes, Malo les Bains, La Madeleine, Quincy, Loos, Belgium Saint Gilles, Fort de Huy, and Camp de Belveroo. This report is accompanied by seventy-three depositions from victims. From the examination of these testimonies the fact emerges that the brutal barbarity of the methods used during the interrogations was the same in divers places which we have visited This we find in an American report.
I think it is not necessary to stress too much this fact since these syntheses are carried out in that way. The Tribunal may read moreover, page four, five, six and seven, a detailed description of the atrocities systematically used and identically practiced by all these German police to obtain avowals of confession.
Page seven. I shall read to you the fifth paragraph.
"That the prisoner who tried to escape was captured and delivered from his cell to police dogs who tore him to pieces." the German text. This is a reproduction of a report to M. Proville, which is an excerpt I shall read because of the nature of the facts. I quote:
"Condemned by the German Tribunal to eighteen months of imprisonment for possessing arms after having been in the prison Arras, Bethune and Loos. I was sent to Germany. As a result of ill-treatment in Eastern Prussia I was obliged to have my eyes locked after. Having been taken to an infirmary, a German doctor put drops in my eyes. A few hours later, after painful suffering, I became blind. After having spent several days in the prison of Fresnes they sent me to the clinic of Quinze-Vingt at Paris. Professor Guillamat examined me and certified that by a carrosive agent I had my eyes burned." Crimes Commission, which we submit under the number 306. The Tribunal will find, page two, the proof that M. Herrera was present at tortures inflicted on various persons, and saw a Pole by the name of Riptz have the bottoms of his feet burned. Then he had his head split with an ax and then was shot after the skull had healed. threatened by those who conducted the interrogations to fracture his second limb, and this was carried out. He became half mad as a result of a hypodermic injection, and the Germans caused him to disappear or did away with him. that the Tribunal should know entirely these American official documents, which all show in a very precise way the tortures which were carried out by the different German police services in numerous regions of France, which show obviously the uniformity of the methods used. read one paragraph of, four pages, page thirty-six, the third paragraph from the bottom; the fourth paragraph of page twenty of the German text.
M. Robert Vanessche, living in Tourcoing -- page thirty-six, the last page of document No. 571 -- M. Robert Vanessche reciting at Tourcoing, states:
"I was arrested the 22 of February 1944 at Mouseren in Belgium by the Gestapo who were dressed in civilian clothing. During the interrogation they were clad in military garb."
"I was interrogated the second time at Gand, at the main German prison, where I remained thirty-one days. There I was shut up for two or three hours in a sort of wooden coffin through which one could breathe only by nine holes in the top."
M. Remy Marcel, residing at 112 Rue de Cimetiere at Armentieres, states:
"Arrested May 2, 1944, at Armentieres. I arrived at the Gestapo headquarters and taken to Rue Francois Debats at La Madeleine the same day about three o'clock. I was subjected to interrogation on two different occasions. At first for about an hour lying on my stomach. I received about 120 blows with a whip. The second interrogation lasted a bit longer. The same thing followed; lying on my stomach and I also received blows with a whip. As I did not wish to say anything, they unclad me and put me in a bathtub.
"The 5th of May I was subjected to interrogations at Loos. That day they hung me by my feet and blows rained over all my body. As I refused to speak they unbound me and put me again on my stomach. As the suffering drew cries from me they kicked me in the face with their boots. The result was I lost seventeen lower teeth." us here. We are merely trying to show that everybody, whether those two did the torturing, used the same methods. They could only have done it through carrying out orders which were given by their chiefs.
Page forty-six, the testimony of M. Guerin, first paragraph, eighth line.
"Not wishing to admit anything, one of them carrying on the interrogation put my scarf around my mouth to stifle my cries. Another German policeman took my head between his legs and two others, one on each side of me, began to strike me with a blub on my loins.
They each struck me twenty-five times, every time I got up. This session lasted two hours. The next morning they began again and it lasted as long as the day before. These tortures were inflicted upon me because on the 11th of November I had taken part in the manifestation by placing awreath on the monument to honor the dead of the war of 1914-18 with my comrades of the resistance." Page forty-six. Page twenty-nine of the German text. Report of Mr. Alfred Deudon. Paragraph three. Here is the ill-treatment which was inflicted upon him.
"18th of August the sensitive parts were struck with blows from a hammer. 19th of August was passed under the water. Then I had my head placed in a squeezing apparatus. 21st and 24th of August I was chained day and night. 26th of August I was chained day and night and hung for a certain time by the arms."
Page forty-nine; page thirty of the German text. Report of M. Delltombe.
"Arrested by the Gestapo June 14, 1944.
Paragraph two I read:
"Thursday, June 16, at eight o'clock in the morning, they took me to the cellar where they carried out their tortures. There they asked me to confess the sabotage which I had carried out with my group, and asked me to denounce my comrades as well as my hiding places. Because I did not they applied the torture again. They made me put my hands behind my back. They put special handcuffs on me and they hung me by my wrists. Then they struck me with a whip, principally on the loins and in the face. That day the torture lasted three hours.
"Friday, June 16, the same thing took place but for an hour and a half, for I couldn't stand it any longer, and they took me back to my cell on a stretcher.
"Saturday the tortures began even more strongly. Then I was obliged to confess my sabotage, when they stuck all sorts of needles in my arms. At that time they left me alone until August 10; then they brought me back to the office and said that I was to be condemned to death. I was taken towards Brussels, from which I was freed from the train of deportees on the 3rd of September by Brussels patriots.
Women were subjected to the same treatment as the men. The tortures were physical tortures. The sadism of the torturers added moral torture, being especially painful for a woman or a young girl to be unclad and made nude by her executioners. The state of pregnancy did not keep one from being beaten, and whrn the brutality brought about an abortion they were left without any care, exposed to all complications as a result of this criminal abortion. carried out this investigation. The Tribunal will find, at page 58, page 36 in the German text, at the bottom of the French text, the report of Madame Sindemans, who was arrested in Paris the 24th of February, 1944, by four soldiers who each had a machine gun, and two other Germans in civilian clothes holding a revolver:
"Having looked into my handbag, they found three identification cards. They discovered in my room the passes of the kommandantur and German workman cards, which I had succeeded in stealing from them the day before."
Page 59: I shall quote the second paragraph of the French text:
"Immediately they placed handcuffs upon me and took me to be interrogated. Not giving them a reply, they slapped me in theface with such force that I fell from my chair. Then they whipped me with a rubber full in the face. This interrogation began at 10 o'clock in the morning and ended at 11 o'clock that night. I must say that I had been pregnant for three months."
It is a report which was carried out concerning the atrocities committed by the Gestapo of Bourges. We shall read from a part of this report, page 6 of the French text, page 5 of the German text.
THE PRESIDENT: How do you establish what this document is? It appears to be the report of M. Marc Toledano.
M. DUBOST: That is correct, Mr. President. It is this report. This report was incorporated into the document with the remainder of documents which were collected by the French commission for Crimes of War, with the official signatures which were approved by M. Tombeau on the original, which is in your hands or in the hands of the Secretary of the Court. We shall read from it, page 5. This is the first page of the original:
"I, the undersigned, Madame Bondoux, supervisor at the house of arrest Bourges, certify that nine men, most young people, were subjected to arduous treatment. With their hands bound behind their backs, chains on their feet, it being absolutely impossible for them to carry on a normal way of living, they screamed with hunger. Faced with this state of affairs, several of the prisoners manifested their desire to come to their aid by making small parcels for them, which were taken from their own provisions and which I handed over to them in the evening. One, a certain German supervisor whom I knew under his first name, Michel, threw their bread in a corner of the cell and came up at night to beat them. All these young people were shot the 20th of November, 1943.
"On the other hand, a woman named Hartwig, residing in Chavannes, I believe, said she remained bound for four days to a chair. At all events, what I can verify is that she had her body completely bruised."
Page 6, page 5 of the German text; we shall read the statement of M. Labussiere, who is a reserve captain at Marseilles-les-Aubigny. Eighth line from the bottom of the page:
"The 11th I was beaten twice with a whip. To receive the blows I had to bend over a bench, The muscles of my thighs and my calves were stretched out. I received at first 30 blows from a huge whip. Then the session continued with another instrument which had a buckle at the end. I then was struck on the anus, on the thighs, and on the calves."