 |
Judge Morris will continue with the reading of the judgment.
3. Rhône-Poulenc.
JUDGE MORRIS: There are two
aspects of the charges of spoliation in the matter of Rhône-Poulenc.
Prior to the war this firm was an important French producer of pharmaceuticals
and related products. The first aspect relates to a licensing agreement entered
into between Farben and Société des Usines Chimiques
Rhône-Poulenc, Paris (referred to as Rhône-Poulenc), and the second
aspect relates to the so-called Theraplix Agreement. Under the first agreement
substantial sums of money were paid to Farben during the war years on products
covered by the licensing agreement and manufactured by the French firm. Under
the second agreement Farben eventually acquired a majority interest in a joint
sales company operated in the joint interest of IG Bayer and
Rhône-Poulenc. It is the contention of the prosecution that both
agreements constitute spoliation in that they were entered into unwillingly by
the French as a result of pressure applied by Farben during the military
occupation of France and as part of Farben’s plan to subject the French
pharmaceutical industry to its claim to leadership.
The main physical
properties involved in the Rhône-Poulenc transactions were situated in
the unoccupied zone of France. We need not concern ourselves with the strict
nature of these agreements with reference to the acquisition of an interest in
physical property. The agreements, in any event, involved the proceeds arising
from the production of physical plants located in unoccupied territory. Thus
the productive facilities so located were the source of the valuable interests
involved in the contracts.
The location of the physical property and
plants are of decisive importance in determining whether a case of spoliation
might arise from the transactions involved. It is clear that the location of
these properties was not in territory under the occupation or immediate control
of the Wehrmacht. Farben was not in a position to enlist the Wehrmacht in
seizure of the plants, or to assert pressure upon the French under threat of
seizure or confiscation by the military. This is disclosed by a report of
discussions held in Wiesbaden between the. defendant Mann as representative of
Farben and officials of the Reich, wherein it is said: “Considerable
difficulties will certainly arise from the fact that Rhône-Poulenc is
situated in the unoccupied zone, as our chances of gaining control there are
very slight. For this reason, Dr. Kolb suggests that we should endeavor to
acquire direct influence both in the occupied and unoccupied zones by the
exercise of control over the allocations of raw materials.” Thus it
appears that the pressure sought to be exercised in inducing the French to
enter into time agreements involved in these transactions could not have been
carried out by military seizure of physical properties. The pres- [...sure]
|
1151 |
. 
