Gun Control in Nazi Occupied-France Read online

  A massive raid by hundreds of police took place in the 13th arrondissement of Paris on October 1. At 6:14 a.m., police surrounded several blocks of apartment buildings. No one was allowed to leave as police searched from house to house, netting a mere seven arrests. One had tracts hidden in the chimney pipe and some explosives; two women were arrested for complicity, and one of them—a mother of four—also had a duplication machine and a stack of tracts entitled “France Is Being Pillaged.” Two suspects had revolvers, and another had three rifles and edged weapons.52

  Misunderstood Duty to Surrender Arms?

  The Avis columns signed by Stülpnagel announcing people executed for possession of firearms continued to appear regularly. Sylvain-André Tribouillois from Vaires (Seine-et-Marne) was executed for possession of a stolen German rifle and 196 rifle and pistol cartridges in the Vaires train station; another rifle was found in his home.53 René Darreau from Vendôme was executed for possession of a revolver loaded with ten cartridges and for handing out anti-German tracts.54

  Stülpnagel realized that the prospect of facing a firing squad did not entice many stubborn French to turn in their guns, and the policy demoralized collaboration. On October 9, he wrote to Vichy representative Jean-Pierre Ingrand that the populace must have misunderstood its duty to turn in their firearms, particularly hunting guns, usable parts of weapons, and damaged or destroyed weapons. He thus requested that the French authorities announce that all such arms should be surrendered to the French authorities by October 25 without penalty. The French authorities were required then to turn them over to the Germans, who would transfer them to the weapon depots.55

  Yet Stülpnagel announced two executions that same day for possession of firearms. Lucien Marcot from Vexaincourt (Vosges) was shot for having three guns, over a hundred rifle and revolver cartridges, and numerous cartridge cases, primers, and lead used for fabricating ammunition. Gaston Pinot from Courmelles (Aisne) was shot for possession of a French submachine gun, a Browning pistol, a revolver, three hand grenades, and over 600 cartridges.56 An internal report called Pinot a Communist.57

  Pinot’s execution for arms possession was reported in the New York Times, which also noted the announcement of the seventy-fifth execution of a French citizen—Jean Labragere of Angoulême—for possession of firearms. It also reported the reissuance in Paris of the decree that all arms of any kind, including hunting arms, firearm parts, and inoperable guns, be surrendered to the police. October 25 was set as the deadline for compliance, after which people in possession of such items would be subject to the death penalty. On the same day as the above, four “youths” armed with revolvers attacked a munitions depot in a Paris suburb and carried away one hundred pounds of dynamite.58

  The United States had not yet entered the war, and this was just a sampling of the regular coverage American reporters devoted to the German occupation of France.

  “Those of the Liberation”

  Maurice Daguier, president of Ceux de la Libération (Those of the Liberation)—a group of Resistance fighters who kept their organization alive after the war—responded to my questionnaire in 2002. During the occupation, he lived with his parents in Paris. While some were afraid to possess a gun, he was not; he kept a 7.65 mm (32 cal.) automatic pistol as well as a 9 mm revolver from his service in 1939–40. “Moreover,” he wrote, “I owned a small 6.35 mm [.25 cal.] pistol, a real jewel, which friends of mine had given me, afraid of keeping it themselves.”59

  He recalled that, despite the threatened death penalty, “many civilians continued to keep firearms, mostly revolvers and pistols. In our movement, called Ceux de la Libération, that was most important in 1940 and the beginning of 1941 as these arms were kept in order to be able to serve at the time of the battles for liberation.”

  Regarding those who hid their firearms despite the German decrees, Daguier remembered how he recovered his own guns in Vendée, located in west-central France, on the Atlantic Ocean:

  In the summer of 1941, I went to search for my hidden arms that were buried close to a tree in Vendée. I found them, a 7.65 mm automatic pistol and a 9 mm revolver, with ammunition. I then hid them under a marble plate over the chimney in the dining room in my domicile at my parents’ house in Paris. Both of these arms served in the battle for the liberation of Paris. I also had a small 6.35 mm pistol, a little jewel that I kept during the whole campaign after the liberation, from the 2nd Shock Battalion. [J’avais aussi un petit pistolet 6,35 mm., petit bijou, que j’avais conservé pendant toute la campagne après la libération, au 2ème. Bataillon de Choc.] Fortunately, we had other, more serious weapons when the time came for combat.

  Daguier recalled that arms used in the Resistance came from various sources. Some older people who were afraid gave their weapons to younger people. Abandoned or hidden French arms were found, but robbing a weapon from German soldiers was rare, because of the risk. However, during fighting in the liberation of Paris, he knew that some German soldiers sold their weapons, before disguising themselves as civilians to desert the routed German army.

  Asked about use of arms by civilians, Daguier recounted how Roger Coquoin (aka Lenormand)—chief of the movement Ceux de la Libération—fell into a trap set by the Germans. He drew his pistol and cut down one of the Germans before being shot down.

  Daguier told the story of the Gallais group, called La Toucheférond, which was founded in July 1940 in Brittany by René Gallais and his family together with Jules Frémont and three of his companions. Answering General de Gaulle’s call, the group dedicated themselves to securing the passage of young people to the free zone and to England, to gathering intelligence on the German troops and their movements, and to the recovery of the abandoned weapons of war. Numerous citizens from the commune of Fougères courageously came forward and swelled the ranks of the group.

  Weapons and munitions were unearthed, cleaned, and repaired by the group and then transported to and hidden in nearby towns of the Ille-et-Vilaine department and the neighboring forests. The armaments of the group included thirty military rifles (twenty were German), a radio transmitter, nine French machine guns, four light machine guns, and a heavy machine gun with belts. They had plentiful ammunition, cheddite, and other explosives.

  The group was organized in clandestine combat units that were decentralized into sectors. Small units operated with arms and explosives in the forests. The depots of German munitions were located, and the station and troop movements were carefully watched. A gendarme named Jagu kept the group informed of police checkpoints on the roads, allowing arms to be safely transported.

  A denunciation led to tragedy on October 9, 1941. A number of German soldiers had been brought in during the night by the Gestapo. Extensive searches turned up two depots of arms, and fifty-eight persons were arrested, almost all members of the Gallais group. They were tortured by the Gestapo, but no one confessed. Seven were executed, in some cases by decapitation at the Stadelheim Prison in Germany, which was notorious for its use of the guillotine. Madame Gallais and her daughter Huguette Gallais were deported to death camps but survived.

  The sixtieth anniversary of the mass arrests was commemorated in the city of Fougères on October 9, 2001. Maurice Daguier represented the Ceux de la Libération, and various prefects, mayors, and former Resistance fighters from Brittany attended to pay homage to the group. The ever-valiant and animated Huguette Gallais, who had been part of the team to recover and render weapons serviceable during the Resistance and who survived her deportation, was there.

  A Dire Need for Arms and Supplies

  A true resistance movement required far more than the isolated acts of independent groups. Ties between the French and de Gaulle in London were sparse. Into the void stepped Jean Moulin, a former prefect who was very familiar with the groups operating in France. He made his way to London via Lisbon in October 1941. The Resistance, he reported to British intelligence and to de Gaulle, needed discipline, orders, financing, and especially arms. Isolated acts
and disorganization was a recipe for failure.60

  Independently of the above, in mid-October Henri Frenay met with two Americans, whose real names he was not told, in the dimly lit home of a Lyons businessman. He spoke at length about the Resistance and the secret army that was beginning to take shape, and which would attack when requested by the Allies. He noted that “the liberation of our country will be accomplished mostly by the Allied armies,” but “our contribution to the struggle will save you valuable lives and equipment.” He detailed the need for finances, radio sets, and weapons. Frenay later learned that the Americans were Colonel Barnwell Legge, the American military attaché in Bern, and Allen Dulles, Office of Strategic Services (OSS) operative in Switzerland.61

  The Last Deadline?

  While most announcements of executions for gun possession revealed not much more than the name, town of residence, and dates of sentence and execution, one Stülpnagel Avis gave more detail. Jean Labregère from Angoulême (Charente) was sentenced to death on October 7 and executed on the 12th, rather than being shot on the day after sentencing, which was the usual timeline. Indeed, he had been apprehended in September. The delay of several weeks gave ample time to torture him in hopes that he would denounce comrades. He allegedly attempted to set fire to straw stored in the Angoulême train station, was caught by a German patrol, brandished a loaded pistol, and also had a revolver and over a hundred cartridges. Le Matin denounced his cowardly act that would make things worse for everyone.62

  At this point, French authorities cooperated to inform the public of Stülpnagel’s latest demand and threat to disobedient gun owners. On October 15, Paris newspapers published the following:

  Last Deadline for Surrendering Arms

  Communiqué from the Office of the General Secretary of Information:

  In order to avoid any misunderstanding about the surrendering of firearms still possessed by private citizens, it is announced to the population that hunting guns, as well as usable parts of arms or deteriorated or inoperable arms, also must be turned in.

  This turning in shall be risk- and sanction-free until October 25. These arms shall be surrendered in neighborhoods to the ward police stations, and in the suburbs to the district police stations. Upon request, a receipt shall be issued to the owner of hunting weapons, and the arm shall be tagged.

  Anyone who does not take advantage of this last opportunity to get rid of the arms listed above risks the most serious punishment.63

  As proof of the risks of punishment, newspapers went into a frenzy to publish notices of executions with admonitions to reject foreign propaganda and comply with the occupation authorities. Executions for possession of explosives and for complicity with the enemy were justified, given the air attack on Le Havre by the British, as a traitor must have guided the enemy strikes.64

  Such seething propaganda extended to people whose only offense was the mere possession of firearms. Stülpnagel issued an Avis that René Baudet from Villejuif (Seine) was sentenced to death on October 17 and executed the next day for possession of a double-barreled shotgun with two spare barrels, a rifle, a revolver, and over 200 cartridges. Le Matin blamed this innocuous cache on the Gaullist and Communist criminals who would only bring bloodshed to France.65

  Yet another Avis announced that Hubert Tuffery from Beaugency (Loiret) was executed for a hunting gun, a pistol, cartridges, and nine explosive charges. Le Matin asked whether France could rise from such chaos and ruin.66

  “We’re in a state of numbness,” Jean Guéhenno confided to his diary. “Every morning the paper gives us the name of another man who has been shot. We grit our teeth as we read.”67 Yet the worst was yet to come.

  Execution of 150 Hostages for the Shooting of Lt. Col. Hotz

  On October 20, in Nantes, Communists Gilbert Brustlein and Guisco Spartaco were looking for Germans to shoot when two well-dressed officers suddenly appeared at the Place de la Cathédrale.68 They quickly followed the officers until they reached the sidewalk of the rue du Roi-Albert. According to his account, Brustlein told Spartacos, “‘You take the one on the right, I’ll take that one.’ I take my two 6.35s [mm, .25 cal. pistols] and Spartaco his 7.65 [mm, .32 cal. pistol]. We are on the sidewalk, a half meter right behind them. We fire….” One collapsed, hit by Brustlein’s pistol, the other looked back—he was not shot, as Spartaco’s pistol had jammed. The shooters sprinted away and escaped on a tram.69

  The dead officer turned out to be none other than the Feldkommandant of Nantes, Lieutenant Colonel Karl Friedrich Hotz. Hitler wanted as many as 150 prisoners executed in retaliation, but Stülpnagel urged delay to give the French police a chance to apprehend the perpetrators. Hitler relented, but ordered that 50 be executed immediately and another 50 be promptly executed if the killers were not quickly found.70 Stülpnagel issued this Avis on October 21:71

  Cowardly criminals in the pay of England and Moscow shot the Nantes Feldkommandant in the back and killed him on the morning of October 20, 1941.

  As penalty for this crime, I ordered the execution of 50 hostages.

  Given the seriousness of the crime, 50 other hostages shall be executed, if the guilty parties are not arrested by midnight on October 23, 1941.

  I shall give a FIFTEEN MILLION FRANC REWARD to inhabitants of France who contribute to finding the guilty parties.

  Any helpful information can be given to any German or French police service.

  Upon request, this information shall be kept confidential.

  Guéhenno quipped in his diary, “The newspapers, docile as they are, have printed the figure of 15 million francs in large capitals; it seems it’s a new prize in the National Lottery.”72 The newspapers denounced the crime as an assassination directed by London and Moscow to disrupt French-German collaboration.73

  The morning after the shooting, a list of one hundred names of hostages to execute was given to Dr. Franz Albrecht Medicus, chief military administrative officer (Kriegsverwaltungschef ) of District B at Angers.74 While the list was being considered, Medicus directed, “The military police are to report by November 10, 1941, the extent to which the population has followed the order to surrender [weapons]. This deadline must be observed at any cost.”75 Stülpnagel had ordered that a month earlier, but now it was ever more urgent either to scare gun owners to surrender their arms or to eradicate the gun owners who refused.

  Stülpnagel issued the following further Avis the same day as the above, that the following people in eastern France were executed for possession of firearms: Henry Tirole from Saint-Hippolyte (Doubs), Georges Bourotte from Troyes (Aube), and Jules Steinmetz from Bayon (Meurthe-et-Moselle). Le Matin deplored the illusions propagated by the Communist-Gaullist radio that tricked such people to risk their lives and the lives of countless innocents.76

  Yet another attack took place on the evening of October 21, this time in Bordeaux. A cyclist came upon Dr. Hans-Gottfried Reimers of the military administrative office (Kriegsverwaltungsrat) as he walked down Wilson Boulevard and fired five shots, killing him. Hitler again ordered the execution of as many as 150 hostages.77

  Stülpnagel issued yet another Avis the next morning. He recounted that at dusk on October 21, a day after the Nantes murder, cowardly assassins in the pay of England or Moscow shot and killed a German in Bordeaux and were able to flee. As retaliation, he again ordered the execution of fifty hostages. If the murderers were not arrested by midnight on October 26, fifty more would be executed. He again offered a reward of fifteen million francs.78

  A total of forty-eight hostages would be shot on October 22 in retaliation for the Nantes attack—two World War I veterans had been crossed off the list.79 Most were Communists, but a few were Gaullists; a seventeen-year-old boy was included, as was a farmer with a death sentence for not turning in his hunting rifle.80 Some of the hostages were shot at the firing range of Le Bêle, near Nantes, three or four at a time. The rest were taken to a quarry near Châteaubriant, where they were tied to stakes and shot nine at a time. A fi
lm entitled La mer à l’aube (Calm at Sea) that depicts the episode was released in 2011.81

  The Germans never discovered who shot Hotz. Spartaco would be arrested and executed the following year because of other activities. Brustlein was never apprehended. After the end of the war, he revealed his role, but he was not seen by all as a heroic resister: Hotz was not a Nazi and followed a lenient occupation policy; Brustlein shot him in the back, and then allowed almost fifty hostages to be executed instead of turning himself in.82

  De Gaulle: Random Shootings Premature

  The evening of October 22, Pétain broadcast a speech deploring the deaths of the Germans and of the fifty hostages, to which would be added fifty more if the guilty parties were not found. He admonished, “Fellow French, your duty is clear: the killing must stop. As a result of the Armistice, we have handed over our arms. We may not take them back to strike the Germans in the back.”83

  Guéhenno summarized the speech thus: “At two o’clock, the Marshal spoke to us once more. He denounced foreign plots, hatched in England, and invited us to become informers.”84

  Admiral François Darlan, Vichy’s prime minister, met with Stülpnagel after the Nantes attack to urge that collaboration counseled restraint.85 In a radio address, Darlan condemned the attacks and implored the French people to abide by the armistice, adding that while the occupation was heavy, it was supposedly correct.86

  Le Matin justified the executions of hostages under this premise: “It is the law of war.”87 Stülpnagel himself, while willing to carry out orders from Berlin, told General Eduard Wagner, a member of the Wehrmacht general staff, that “the attacks were carried out by small terror groups and English soldiers or spies who move from place to place; that the majority of Frenchmen do not support them. I clearly believe that shooting hostages only embitters the people and makes future rapprochement more difficult…. I personally have warned against Polish methods in France.”88 Wagner called back with Hitler’s response, ordering that fifty hostages be executed for each attack.