840.4061 Motion Pictures/205

The Chargé in Germany ( Morris ) to the Secretary of State

No. 5919

Sir: With reference to the Embassy’s despatch No. 5292 of June 14, 1941, with respect to the protection of the interests of American motion picture companies in Germany, I have the honor to enclose a translation and a copy of a Note Verbale from the German Foreign Office dated October 9, 1941. This German note constitutes a generic reply to the Embassy’s various communications on the subject and was written in direct answer to the Embassy’s Note No. 2343,38 a copy of which was forwarded to the Department with the Embassy’s despatch under reference.

The Department will observe that the German government has taken the stand that the “sequestration” of American films in Germany has become necessary because of the fact that the American companies have and are engaged in the production of films which are anti-German in character. It might be noted that by analogous reasoning a ban on the exhibition of any German Ufa film in the United States would now be justified, since Ufa films of a distinctly anti-American nature have recently been showing in Berlin. As an example of these, the film “Reitet für Deutschland” would be cited, in which Americans were portrayed in a caricatured and ridiculous aspect.

Respectfully yours,

Leland Morris
[Page 626]
[Enclosure—Translation]

The German Ministry for Foreign Affairs to the American Embassy

[No.] Kult K F 3270

Note Verbale

The Foreign Office has the honor to confirm to the Embassy of the United States of America the receipt of Note Verbale No. 2343 of June 13, 1941, concerning the distribution and sequestering of products of American film companies in the Reich as well as in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.

The Note Verbale deals in a general form with the questions of distribution and sequestration of American films, which, as far as the rights of the companies Loews Incorporated Metro Goldwyn Film AG, Berlin, are concerned, were the subject of previous exchanges of Notes. Reference is made to the Embassy’s Notes Verbales No. 1727 of December 3, 1940, and No. 1811 [1817?] of January 14, 1941, concerning 7 films of the above named firms, which were provisionally replied to by Note Verbale (Kult K F 194) of January 18, 1941. The Embassy referred again to the same matter in its Notes Verbales No. 2008 of March 22, 1941, and No. 2155 of May 8, 1941.

The Foreign Office takes this occasion, to begin with, to reject most decisively the implied imputation at the end of the Note Verbale of March 22, 1941, that American property rights were arbitrarily disrespected and has the honor, with reference to Note Verbale No. 2343 of June 13, 1941, to communicate the following. This likewise constitutes a reply to the previous Notes Verbales.

I. Distribution

It is correct that the Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda felt compelled during the summer of 1940 to order the cessation of the distribution of the products of the Fox-Film AG., the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Film AG. and the Paramount AG. in the territory of the Reich. This measure was brought about by the conduct of the companies themselves which, as the Embassy will be aware, long before the outbreak of the European war had begun producing films, whose anti-German character was unmistakable. At the time this fact was noted by German quarters with regret and was temporarily put up with. Whenever a new film of the type mentioned appeared, the Berlin agents of the producing firm in question were repeatedly reminded by the competent German authorities of the loss of the German market which was to be expected if their companies should continue to produce films directed against Germany. The number of these warnings amounted to more than a dozen before resort was had to the embargo, to the legal basis of which the Embassy itself refers.

[Page 627]

In this connection, the fact that all or a large part of the American films intended for distribution within Germany had already been passed by the German censorship did not preclude the application of the law, since Art. I of the Second Law amending the German Motion Picture Law, June 26, 1935, expressly authorizes the Reich Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda to forbid even a film which has previously been passed if he considers it necessary for urgent reasons of public welfare.

Since then there have been no indications of any slackening in the anti-German tendency of certain films of the companies mentioned. On the contrary, it has increased and it is particularly evident from reports of the past few months that these firms have further such films in preparation. The Foreign Office therefore regrets to have to state under these circumstances that the reasons which led to the prohibition still exist.

In the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia American film matters are being treated analogously.

II. Sequestration

The Embassy in its Notes Verbales speaks erroneously of the seizure of American films. The measures taken by German quarters, however, were sequestration, the character of which the American Embassy has already had an opportunity to ascertain from the Note Verbale of the Foreign Office of January 18, 1941 (Kult K 11425/II) concerning the treatment of American film property in the occupied western territories, in view of which the repeated references in the Embassy’s Notes Verbales “to take careful note of the property rights in question” are superfluous. Sequestration is a police measure which became necessary in view of the production of anti-German films by American film enterprises. It leaves the property rights untouched. The American film prints sequestered in the territory of the Reich and in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia or elsewhere are only subjected to an examination procedure in order to establish whether they have a tendency directed against Germany. Films found to be free of tendency are returned to the property of the individual companies. Disposition thereof will have to be subject to the regulations which have since been issued concerning the blocking of American property.

Responsibility for this development falls solely on the American film enterprises which seek to make a profit from the incitement of hatred between nations. As this activity is directed exclusively against Germany, it goes without saying that German quarters take steps against this scheme. In this connection, respect is granted to private property which is unobjectionable in a political sense.

  1. Not printed.