 |
|
but by human beings of flesh and blood, as you say, and among these
administrators are the gentlemen who are here in the dock.
Q. This
grave accusation is based first of all upon the fact that Sandre is accused in
the letter of Mr. Rothschild from prison of having reported Mr. Rothschild to
the police. (NIK-10590, Pros. Ex. 662).*
A. Yes, that is
correct. But even without the letter — as my brother-in-law was arrested
10 days after the visit of Sandre — I would have assumed even without the
letter from the prison that Sandre was responsible. But on top of that
assumption I received this letter from my brother-in-law from the prison, where
he writes and accuses Sandre and bases his accusation on the fact that he had
received quite precise information. Also I would like to add that a man like my
brother-in-law, who at that time knew perfectly well what was going to happen
to him, had no reason to lie and I ask the Tribunal that he be believed.
Q. Your second conclusion is that Mr. Sandre was a friend of Mr.
Schmitt’s. Is that correct?
A. That is quite correct, and I think
we discussed this question at great length yesterday.
Q. We
needn’t talk about it any more, need we. Two more brief questions. When
there was a change in the office of the provisional administrator, was there an
inventory taken every time?
A. The inventories were not taken and
listed on the occasion of every change. Only when Erhard was appointed was
there an inventory taken. But I am very glad you asked that question because
yesterday I forgot something, some clause in the Krupp contract which was not
complied with. There was a clause in the contract between Krupp and the
provisional administrator according to which an inventory was to be taken of
everything, of the machines, the furniture, the spare parts, and the tools, and
also the installations; but only the inventory of the machines was ever taken.
Q. One more question on the topic of the arrest of Mr. Rothschild. At
the time when Mr. Rothschild was arrested wasn’t there a general wave of
arrests of Jews in France, or at any rate a large number of arrests?
A.
That is quite correct, but I have to add there, that Mr. Rothschild had always
defended his viewpoint quite clearly and had insisted that the appointment of a
provisional administrator and line seizure and the spoliation of his property
was not even in line with the then existing laws in France and was quite
|
__________
* Document reproduced above
in this section.
527 |
. 
