Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, 1945, European Advisory Commission, Austria, Germany, Volume III

740.00119 Control (Germany)/11–1645: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the United States Political Adviser for Germany (Murphy)⁵⁶

Washington, November 16, 1945—6 p.m.

891. Urtel 1001, Nov. 13.⁵⁷ Dept is in agreement with General Clay’s rejection of Committee’s recommendation on suffrage requirements whereby only persons in mandatory arrest categories are disqualified. However, Dept does not approve view that all members of the party should be disbarred from the polls, regardless of whether affiliation was nominal or not.

Dept maintains opinion previously presented (Deptels 507, Sep. 19; 576, Oct 1; 655, Oct. 11) that all persons in mandatory removal and exclusion categories as well as in mandatory arrest categories should be denied suffrage. This middle course between two above alternatives has been advocated for following reasons:

1. Articles of Potsdam Agreement dealing with treatment of Nazis⁵⁸ are based on distinction between active and nominal Nazis. Such distinction was a part of original US proposal at Potsdam⁵⁹ and is also incorporated in provisions of JCS 1067. Accordingly, Dept believes that treatment of Nazis with respect to suffrage should be in accord with distinction proposed by US and accepted at Potsdam by other powers. Dept sees no cogent reason for altering in matter of suffrage this general policy of distinction between active and nominal Nazis, and particularly without agreement on a quadripartite basis for such change in policy.

2. To restrict voting disqualification to persons in mandatory arrest categories alone would allow suffrage to larger number of active Nazis in removal and exclusion categories. It seems inconsistent to remove persons from office as active Nazis who have demonstrated their anti-democratic convictions, on the one hand, and on the other hand at the same time admit such persons to participate in democratic electoral procedures. If removal from office is justified, it should involve as a corollary deprivation for the time being of civil and political rights, including forfeiture of suffrage.

3. If nominal members of Nazi party are denied suffrage as well as active Nazis liable to arrest or removal, this denial would assimilate status of nominal Nazis in important respect to that of active Nazis and would unduly increase number of persons excluded from normal community life. Consistent with denazification program, greatest number of Germans possible should be brought to participate in resumption of democratic procedures.

4. Even if practical difficulties in enforcing exclusion of active Nazis from suffrage were so great that certain number of such persons were able to vote, Dept believes importance of establishing publicly principle of such exclusion outweighs considerations of possible irregularities. Local assistance of democratic German elements in preparing lists of eligible voters should facilitate enforcement of exclusion of active Nazis and also review of individual cases where mandatory categories may work injustices.

Plans for election codes should accordingly be amended to disqualify from suffrage all persons in mandatory arrest and removal categories and others arrested or removed as demonstrably active Nazis.

Please present Depts position to General Clay and report outcome.⁶⁰

Byrnes

56. In a memorandum attached to the file copy of this telegram, James W. Riddleberger, Chief of the Division of Central European Affairs, explained to H. Freeman Matthews, Director of the Office of European Affairs, that the draft of this message had been taken to the Civil Affairs Division of the War Department for approval, but because of the difficulty in obtaining rapid concurrence via normal channels and the need for sending the telegram immediately, the State Department officials, on the advice of the Civil Affairs Division officers, who “were all inclined to agree with the substance of the message”, had decided to send the telegram without formal War Department clearance.
57. Not printed; the Committee referred to was an interdivisional committee of the Office of Military Government, U.S., which had studied draft local government and election codes submitted by Lander in the U.S. zone. Its reason for making this recommendation stemmed “from consideration of the enormous dimensions of vetting process if all Nazis were denied suffrage and from conviction that [it] would be unwise to exclude such a large segment of the population which, in the Committee’s opinion, should be reintegrated into normal community life.” (740.00119 Control (Germany)/11–1345)
58. See Conference of Berlin (Potsdam), vol. ii, p. 1503.
59. See paragraph 4 of U.S. proposal dated July 17, ibid., p. 776.

60. In despatch 1444, December 1, from Berlin, Mr. Murphy stated: “On November 17, before the views stated in the Department’s telegram no. 891, November 16, could be conveyed to General Clay, he had formally approved a directive which incorporated his own revisions of the committee’s recommendations.” (740.00119 Control (Germany)/12–145) Subsequently, on November 23, a directive was issued by USFET on Local Government Codes of Election which embodied the suffrage provisions of the November 17 document; the USFET directive is treated in Gillen, State and Local Government in West Germany, 1945–1953, p. 9.

    On the same date, USFET authorized Regional Military Government detachments to permit formation of democratic political parties on a Land basis; see ibid., p. 7.