The photos and documents presented here were selected from the files of Paul M. Hebert, who served as Dean of the Louisiana State University Paul M. Hebert Law Center from 1937 until his death in 1977. Between 1947 and 1948, Hebert was appointed as a judge for the United States Military Tribunals in Nuremberg. As judge for the Tribunals, Hebert most famously presided over the I.G. Farben trial (Case Six), concerning the use of slave labor, and is well-known for his lone dissenting opinion, in which he disagreed with the majority’s acquittal of fifteen of the twenty-three named defendants who were members of the Vorstand, the principle governing corporate board of I.G. Farben.
Hebert’s Nuremberg files, as well as many of his professional and personal papers, now reside in the Louisiana State University Paul M. Hebert Law Center Library.
-
Harvard Law Review Memo
Paul M. Hebert
This document is a draft of a memo analyzing the implications of an article entitled "The Nurnberg Verdict" (60 Harvard Law Review 857) that dealt with the findings of the IMT. Hebert quotes sections of that article that have bearing on the case before him and analyzes the impact that those opinions might have on the Tribunal's deliberations.
-
IMT findings
Paul M. Hebert
This is a series of notes prepared by Paul M. Hebert summarizing some of the salient facts about some of the defendants brought before the IMT. These pages deal with von Papen, Fritzsche, Raeder and Doenitz.
-
Jottings 1
Paul M. Hebert
In this document Judge Hebert addresses the issue of foreknowledge, by considering the cartel agreements between Farben and industrial firms in other countries. He realizes that there may be technical developments that are with held for reasons of national security. However does the knowledge that this information is being with held from foreign companies make one guilty of actively participating in the planning of an aggressive war?
-
Jottings 10
Paul M. Hebert
This document begins with quotations from the findings of the IMT which Judge Hebert uses to answer the question of whether the defendants in the Farben trial could or could not be found guilt of the charge of participating in the planning and preparation of a war of aggression as charged under Count 5 of the indictment.
-
Jottings 11
Paul M. Hebert
In this document Judge Hebert expresses his doubts towards defense claims that one aspect of Farben's pre-war expansion was for purely peace-time usage. He cites a contract from December 1940 that mentions an earlier agreement between Farben and the German High Command to share the cost of an experimental program to create alternate methods of ethylene production.
-
Jottings 12
Paul M. Hebert
In this note Paul M. Hebert predicts a defense motion that the defendants would claim that they did not attend any of the conferences listed and did not think that Hitler would actually start a war of aggression. Hebert cites a finding of the I.M.T. that defines Hitler's "peaceful" conquest plans.
-
Jottings 13
Paul M. Hebert
In this note Paul M. Hebert sets out the definitions of what is slave labor and what activities are prohibited under the Geneva Convention and Hague Rules in regards to the amount and types of work allowed by prisoners of war. Hebert raises questions as to whether such activities are supported by the evidence presented in this case.
-
Jottings (Count Five)
Paul M. Hebert
This note is an early draft of Judge Hebert's concurring opinion on Count Five of the indictment. It simply sets forth and defines the part of the indictment that accuses the Farben defendants of conspiracy in the common plan.
-
Less culpable
Paul M. Hebert
This one page of notes addresses the issue of how guilty the defendants are in relation to the Nazi party members tried before the International Military Tribunal. Hebert quotes the findings of the IMT to support his point that the Farben defendants are as equally guilty of those in the previous trial.
-
Slave Labor
Paul M. Hebert
In this one page note Paul M. Hebert points out that all of the Nazi labor programs for inmates were a method of getting useful labor out of people while exterminating them.
-
The difference
Paul M. Hebert
In this note Paul M. Hebert notes that is a distinction between the military personnel who were duty bound to follow orders and private citizens who have a much wider freedom of action. This division also applies when considering the aspects of the counts involving rearmament and participating in the slave labor programs.
-
Identification card
Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes
Identification card issued to Paul M. Hebert by the Office of the chief of counsel for war crimes.
-
Magnitude of preparations
Paul M. Hebert
This document is part of the Judge Hebert's written opinions on the outcome of the Tribunal. This document cites the findings of the International Military Tribunal in reference to Erich Raeder.
