 |
| company, and if he is in error in making that judgment he does not
become punishable. He only becomes punishable if he misrepresents
facts.* |
| |
| * * * * * * * * * * |
| |
| |
N. The "New Order" and Expansion into
German-Occupied
Europe |
| |
| I. INTRODUCTION |
| |
Subdivision H of count one of the indictment was entitled “With
the approach of war and in connection with each new act of aggression, Farben
intensified its preparation for and participation in, the planning and
execution of such aggressions and the reaping of spoils therefrom.” The
first specifications under this title dealt, in general, with the allegations
that, as the wars of aggression approached, the collaboration between Farben
officials and officials of the Nazi Reich became more intensified and that
Farben began to conceal and sell its assets abroad to prevent wartime seizure
(pars. 67-73). Evidence on the charge of closer collaboration has not been
collected in any particular subsection of the publication, but some of the
evidence on cloaking is reproduced in the next major subsection below, “O.
Knowledge of Aggressive Intent.” The present subsection deals with those
charges under this title which began with the allegation that “Farben not
only protected its foreign holdings but prepared and carried out plans whereby
it would reap the spoils of each aggressive act, and expand its empire at the
expense of each invaded nation” (pars. 74-83).
The evidence
reproduced immediately below deals mainly with Farben's activities (1), in
Austria before and after the occupation of Austria in March 1938; (2), in the
so-called “Sudetenland” of Czechoslovakia before and after the Munich
Pact of September 1938; and (3), with respect to the “New Order”
planning for the chemical industry of Europe, and particularly of France, which
came under active consideration about the time of the fall of France in the
summer of 1940. The charges involving Austria, Czechoslovakia, and the
“New Order” are closely connected with the charges of count two of
the indictment, “Plunder and Spoliation,” which were also
incorporated in count one of the indictment by reference (see par. 84).
Consequently, the evidence reproduced in the present subsection is closely
related to the materials reproduced later on in section VIII, “Plunder and
Spoliation.” Count five, which charged a common |
__________
* A number of the
representations of DAG in the tax suit are reproduced above in the next but,
last document (NI-11746. Pros. Ex. 1958).
1392 |
. 
