Catalogue description Detailed Interrogation Report No 6 by the Art Looting Investigation Unit of the OSS on...

Detailed Interrogation Report No 6 by the Art Looting Investigation Unit of the OSS on art historian Bruno Lohse divided into five sections, dated 15 August 1945. Part I includes an overview of Lohse's personal life, political affiliation and military service. Part II provides detailed information on Lohse's activity with the ERR, first with the Special Staff for Pictorial Art and then with Goering, stating that 'it had been his [Lohse's] original impression, and that of his colleagues in the ERR in Paris, that the confiscations were entirely legal and carried out by agreement of the French and German governments'. 'He was given the initial responsibility for the preparation of a catalogue and inventory of the newly confiscated Alphonse Kann Collection.' According to Lohse's interrogation, 'two days before the expiration of his duty [at the ERR], Goering arrived in Paris to examine the material confiscated to date by the ERR'. Specialised in 17th century Dutch painting, Lohse impressed Goering 'with his knowledge' and was 'ordered to remain in Paris as a member of the Einsatzstab art staff'. 'Lohse received a special document signed by Goering, authorizing his activity in the Reichsmarschall's behalf and requesting all military, state and Party organizations to facilitate his mission'. After the approval by Rosenberg of Scholz and von Ingram's 'revision' report, von Behr left the art staff in January 1943 [as written] and Lohse and Dr Walter Borchers were made Scholz's deputies for Paris. After one year in this semi-executive position, Lohse was dismissed by Scholz as a consequence of his disagreement with Borchers. He made a request 'to return to active duty' and was replaced by Rehbock. After breaking his leg on a skiing holiday, he was ordered by Goering to remain in Paris and continue working on his behalf 'divorced from the art staff, but remaining under the ERR for administrative purposes'. Further includes details of ERR activity from the fall of Paris until the German surrender. Records that whereas, until the implementation of the 'revision' report, confiscations were carried out by von Behr's assistants, 'unaccompanied and unadvised by the professional art historians attached to the special staff', afterwards 'Lohse, as well as Borchers, Kuntze, Bammann, Fraeulein Eggemann, Fraeulein von Tomforde and other members [...] engaged in this activity'. 'Lohse was obliged, furthermore, to determine, through the French Commission for Jewish Problems and the Sicherheitsdienst, whether the prospective seizures encompassed property abandoned by Jewish owners. [...] [He] stated that, to the best of his belief, no seizure was ever effected by the ERR unless the owner had actually fled; but he admitted that this principle was not applied in the indiscriminate confiscations undertaken by von Behr and the Dienststelle Westen in the course of the M-Aktion'. Lohse also shared responsibility, together with von Behr and Scholz, 'for the initiation of certain exchanges of confiscated paintings carried out by the ERR with a number of individuals. The majority of these were transacted with the German dealer Gustav Rochlitz on behalf of Goering'. Part III is a detailed account of Lohse's activity for Goering, both his dealings in Paris with Allen Loebl, Gustav Rochlitz, Adolf Wuester, Pat-Zaade and Leegenhoek, and those out of Paris, especially in Holland, Switzerland and the South of France. Provides the text of the letter of authority which Lohse was given by Goering. 'Lohse emphasized that his activity for Goering had been hampered constantly by his lack of independence and by Goering's ultimate reliance in all important transactions on Hofer'. Provides information on the other dealers with whom Lohse was on friendly terms and on Lohse's involvement in the Schloss collection affair. Part IV provides an extended summary of Lohse's interrogation with particular reference to the following accusations, 'leveled [sic] against him by French and other informants: a. responsibility for reckless confiscation of French art properties; b. personal theft of valuable works of art; c. threatening and persecution of Frenchmen, Jews and other individuals; d. active membership in the S.S.' Further provides detailed information on Lohse's relations with Victor Mandl, Baron Olivier Allard, the art dealer Leegenhoek and with Loebl and the Galerie Garin in Paris; on his alleged personal appropriation, 'in company with the dealer/agent Lefranc', of 'three paintings from the Schloss Collection'; on the role he played in M Jacques Beltrand's low appraisals of the paintings confiscated by the ERR 'which had been selected for the Goering collection'; on the projected exchange with art dealers Fabiani and Dequoy of 60 modern paintings confiscated by the ERR, worth an approximate value of 20,000,000 francs, for seven 18th century paintings, which had been given 'an aggregate evaluation of 2,000,000 francs'; on his activity for Himmler, Hitler, Bormann and Ribbentrop, whose acquisitions of paintings was the result of exchanges arranged by Lohse but not initiated by him. Further includes information on Lohse's relationship with Mlle Seratski and his business trips. Part V sets out the Unit's recommendations, pointing out that 'whereas Lohse appears to have been victimised in large measure by the jealousy of his colleagues, there can be no doubt that he played a leading part in the confiscation of Jewish art properties conducted by the Einsatzstab Rosenberg in Paris. It is recommended therefore that he be held as a material witness in such war crimes proceedings as may be directed against Einsatzstab personnel and that, if tried as war criminal, the severity of charges brought against him be determined by the extent to which his complicity in the Einsatzstab operations is judged to have been criminal'. 'If Lohse's statement that he received no personal profit whatever from the transactions conducted on behalf of Goering is finally confirmed, his activity for Goering may be regarded in the same light as his duty with the ERR -- namely, the performance of an assignment under orders'.