. NMT03-T0773
Volume III · Page 773
| Jewish, and if that could not be proved, they
also could refer to the fact that other ancestors of theirs were not Jewish.
The question as to whether a person was a Jew or was not a Jew was laid down in
the meaning of the Nuernberg laws, these laws and the decrees to carry out
these laws. But the suits themselves were not concerned with that, but
subsequently the main thing was whether — Q. Did they have to prove that their grandparents were not Jewish? A. Mr. President, we have to distinguish here Q. Just tell me yes or no first, and then you may distinguish. Here is a man who claims he is an Aryan. He wants to prove it. What of his ancestors must he prove were not Jews? Can you answer? A. Framed in this way, as far as these suits were concerned, I cannot answer the question because as far as these suits were concerned that question was of no importance. Q. Was he an Aryan if his grandfather was a Jew? A. He had two grandfathers and two grandmothers. Q. Yes. A. And there the distinction was made, but according to the Nuernberg laws, which were only of interest before the administrative authorities and not for these trials, the distinction was made whether he was one-eighth, one-fourth, or one-half Jew, that is to say, a person of mixed descent of that degree, or whether be was a full Aryan. But I say that that is a question which for carrying out these descent cases was of no importance. Q. Will you tell me then, and do it briefly, because I know you can, what did the person have to prove in order to establish in a descent case that he was an Aryan? A. It was established, Mr. President, that contrary to the legal assumptions, he was not the descendant of that and that father. Nothing else. Q. That is, that he was not the descendant of his purported father. A. Of the purported father according to the legal assumption. Q. That is, if the father was a Jew. A. If the father was a Jew. Q. Then he had to prove he was a bastard. Is that what you mean? |
907802 — 51 — 51
