Gallows for a Propagandist: How the Third Reich's chief proponent failed to defend himself in Nuremberg

The Insider continues its series on international tribunals. In the aftermath of May 8, V-E Day, we remember the most famous among them — the Nuremberg Tribunal. One of the key figures brought to justice in the series of trials that followed WWII was Julius Streicher, chief propagandist of the Nazi regime. Streicher stood apart among the defendants in Nuremberg, receiving a death sentence not for participating in war crimes and genocide, but for promoting genocidal ideology. During the trial, Streicher adamantly refused to admit his guilt, claiming that his disdain for synagogues stemmed from aesthetic preferences alone. He dismissed reports about the extermination of Jews as foreign propaganda. But despite his unending efforts at argumentation, Streicher was found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to hang. As present day Kremlin propagandists promote hatred against Ukrainians, the case of Streicher remains as relevant as ever.

• 1.“80–90% of what's published is truth”
• 2.“The Ugly Synagogue” and the Jewish State in Madagascar
• 3.Interrogation of Streicher by British prosecutor Griffith-Jones
• 4.Julius Streicher attempts to disown the articles published in his own newspaper
• 5.Final speech of Streicher, excerpts
• 6.Final speeches of the prosecutors, excerpts
• 7.The Judgement

RU

Julius Streicher was a prominent Nazi political figure known for his extreme anti-Semitic views. Starting in 1923, he published Der Stürmer (“The Stormtrooper”), Germany's most radical anti-Semitic newspaper. Streicher relentlessly attacked Jews, accusing them of conspiring against the German people and committing ritual murders, among various other unfounded allegations. In May 1945, Streicher was arrested by American forces and brought to trial at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, a body he derisively referred to as the “triumph of world Jewry.” Streicher faced charges of inciting the extermination of Jews. Despite his vehement denials, the court found him guilty on four counts and sentenced him to death by hanging. The sentence was carried out on October 16, 1946.

Drawing from transcripts of Streicher's trial proceedings, The Insider reconstructed the blow-by-blow of the trial that brought Nazi Germany’s chief propagandist to justice

“80–90% of what's published is truth”

Day 115 of the trial — April 26, 1946

Julius Streicher begins his address by presenting a complaint about the unfairness of his situation. He then recounts his biography, which mirrors that of many local leaders within the Nazi movement: he commenced his career as a teacher in 1909 before serving in World War I. Upon his return from the front lines, he engaged in both local and state administration. Streicher asserts that in 1918, following the end of the Great War, Jews emerged as a potent political force in Germany. He describes delivering speeches at significant gatherings in major German cities almost every Friday. He says the gatherings were organized entirely voluntarily. He recounts his participation in Hitler’s 1923 Beer Hall Putsch, an event that engendered between them a “friendship founded on shared action” (Freundschaft aus einer Tat).

Following the failed coup attempt, Hitler integrated Streicher into his inner circle (Kreis der Parteigenossen — circle of party comrades), appointing him as head of propaganda. Streicher assumed the role of Gauleiter (Nazi party regional leader) of Franconia in 1925 and became a member of the Reichstag in 1933. In 1933–1934, he was honored with the title of Gruppenführer, akin to that of a lieutenant general.

Julius Streicher in the courtroom of the Nuremberg Tribunal

Before the Nuremberg interrogation commenced, the chief propagandist of the Reich made it clear that he had no intention of taking his own life. Instead, he was prepared to see the proceedings through:

“I will follow my path — come what may — the path of a 'fanatic for truth' until the end... I didn't choose the subtitle for the Der Stürmer newspaper lightly: 'Weekly of the Struggle for Truth.' Even if I haven't fully grasped the entire truth, I firmly believe: 80% or 90% of what's published is indeed the truth.”

Streicher then detailed his experiences of being interrogated in prison. His lawyer proceeded to question him regarding the first charge — crimes against peace. His lawyer sought clarification on whether Streicher had attended secret meetings (he denied it), whether he was a friend of Hitler (he claimed he had no friends), and whether he had made any significant decisions alongside Hitler (he stated that their meetings were merely private dinners).

The attorney also posed general questions about the “Judenboykott” — the first coordinated action by the Nazi regime against German Jews, which took place on April 1, 1933 — Streicher stated that a few days before the boycott, he received an order to attend a meeting with Hitler in Munich. There, Hitler told Streicher that, due to the negative coverage of the “new Germany” in the foreign press, the party needed to send a clear message to “world Jewry” that it was time for such treatment to stop (“bis hierher und nicht weiter” — “draw the line here”). Hitler also instructed Streicher to establish an “anti-boycott day.” Streicher claimed that Hitler forbade attacks on Jewish shops, insisting that each shop display a sign stating that property damage was unacceptable.

The call for boycotting Jews in Der Stürmer

“At the 1935 Reichstag session in Nuremberg, the 'racial laws' were revealed. Were you involved in drafting them?” the defense attorney asked the defendant. Streicher confirmed, referencing his long standing writings on the purported danger of further mixing German and Jewish blood. He pointed out that according to the “laws of the Jewish race,” Jews were also prohibited from marrying non-Jews:

“For years, I've advocated for halting the further mixing of German and Jewish blood. Jews should serve as an example to other races, as they have their own racial law: Moses' law, which states, 'When you come into a foreign land, you must not 'use' foreign women.'“

“The Ugly Synagogue” and the Jewish State in Madagascar

Day 116 of the trial — April 29, 1946

The session begins with Dr. Marx, the defense attorney, questioning Streicher about his articles in Der Stürmer. Streicher responds:

“My speeches and articles were intended to clarify to the public an issue that I deemed most important. They did not incite or urge anyone, but rather aimed to provide clarification.”

Streicher mentions that besides Der Stürmer, other German newspapers published anti-Semitic articles at Hitler's behest. The court accuses Streicher of inciting hatred, to which he counters that proving such a charge would require reading all issues of Der Stürmer from the past 20 years, as it was over this entire period, he claims, that he published explanatory articles about the Jewish race and its history. Streicher argues that if Der Stürmer had incited hatred, there would have been pogroms in Germany:

“In 20 years in Germany, as far as I know, there hasn't been a single pogrom, not a single Jew has been killed. There hasn't been a single death caused by anti-Semitism from the authors of the newspaper. Gentlemen, we are in Nuremberg, and history shows: nowhere were Jews safer or enjoyed greater freedom than in Nuremberg.”

It was Hitler, in his final testament, who took full responsibility for the extermination of the Jews, stating that all killings were carried out on his personal orders. Streicher himself claims to have learned about the mass murders only while in detention, shortly before the Nuremberg trials:

“I first learned about the mass murders in Mondorf. I explain that if I had been told that two or three million were killed, I would not have believed it...”

According to the accused, he doubts that SS members and others executing Hitler’s orders read Der Stürmer; they simply listened to the Fuhrer: “Hitler was an expert on the 'Jewish question,' otherwise he would not have written 'Mein Kampf.’”

The topic then shifts to the demolition of the synagogue in Nuremberg in August 1938. The defense attorney inquires as to whether it was demolished on Streicher's orders. Streicher confirms that it was before explaining that, even before the “beginning of the so-called struggle (Kampfzeit)” in 1933, he had regarded the house of worship as disgraceful, orientalist, and monstrous — solely for architectural reasons. Additionally, he ordered the demolition of the “ugly” planetarium. Streicher clarifies that he did not authorize the destruction of any other synagogues and denies any involvement in Kristallnacht — the pogrom organized by the Nazis throughout Germany and Austria on November 9-10, 1938 — which resulted in several synagogues being burnt down.

The synagogue in Nuremberg

Discussion of anti-Semitic publications in Der Stürmer

The defense attorney states that the prosecution claims that Streicher knew about the mass killings of Jews as early as 1942. Streicher responds that he may have had suspicions about certain issues, perhaps the result of reading a Jewish weekly newspaper published in Switzerland:

“There were occasional hints that something wasn't right... In late 1943 or 1944, there was an article suggesting that Jews were disappearing en masse in the east, in Poland... However, I openly clarify that I don't consider this newspaper authoritative and don't believe what's written. There were no numbers mentioned, no mention of mass killings, only about the disappearance [of Jews].”

The defense attorney inquires if Der Stürmer proposed a solution to the “Jewish question,” to which Streicher responds that his proposed course of action was to establish a Jewish state in Madagascar. However, this idea was rejected by the censors in Berlin, as Madagascar was under French control. The attorney then questions whether Streicher considers his personal view on the “Jewish question” to be one-sided. Streicher counters that he sees no reason to think otherwise:

“It goes without saying for an anti-Semite, which I am. I [as an anti-Semite] studied the 'Jewish question,' and I had no interest [in studying it from different perspectives]. Perhaps I didn't see the good traits that you or others see in the Jewish race. In any case, I had no interest in finding out [exactly] what special advantages could be found among Jews.”

The proposed areas for the resettlement of Jews in Madagascar, according to the Franco-Polish version of the 1937 plan

Interrogation of Streicher by British prosecutor Griffith-Jones

Day 116 of the trial — April 29, 1946

The prosecutor asks if it's true that Streicher had been urging Germans for many years to “know their enemy.” Streicher agrees, but he clarifies that he referred not to Jews as individuals practicing Judaism but to Jews by blood and race. Therefore, labeling them as “bloodsuckers and extortionists” was not a message of hatred, but rather a statement of fact.

The prosecutor then points out a quote from the same speech (provided below), and Streicher explains that he considered himself capable of “enlightening” people about the “Jewish question.” He insists that his articles indeed constituted “enlightenment,” not “persecution”:

“While I lead this struggle, it is conducted with such sincerity that 'the eternal Jew' will derive no pleasure from it.”

The prosecutor outlines the measures implemented by Nazi authorities against the Jewish population — such as the loss of voting rights, fines, and the requirement to wear “yellow stars” — and questions whether these policies align with Streicher's notion of “enlightenment.” Streicher dismisses any connection between these measures and his own words or writings, asserting that he neither issued orders nor enacted laws:

“However, I must clarify that these laws — what the Jewish people consider their law — stand as the paramount, most significant legislative acts in the modern state, enacted for its protection.”

(By “their law,” Streicher was referring to the Jewish prohibition of miscegenation, which he had referenced previously.)

The discussion proceeds to Streicher's advocacy for the continuation of the “struggle against ‘world Jewry’” that followed the enactment of the Nuremberg Laws. Streicher redirects the court to his previous assertions regarding an international solution to the “Jewish question.” The prosecutor then cites Streicher's article containing the phrase “crush the head of the ‘world Jewry’ serpent,” prompting Streicher to explain his phrasing’s biblical reference.

Subsequently, the prosecutor inquires about Streicher's stance on “Aryanization.” Streicher admits that he was “opposed in his heart,” but expresses conditional support, suggesting he would endorse measures benefiting Germans, even at the expense of Jews. He attributes the directive for the “Aryanization“ of Jewish areas to other decision makers in Berlin.

Streicher admits that he was “opposed in his heart,” but suggests he would endorse measures benefiting Germans, even at the expense of Jews

Julius Streicher attempts to disown the articles published in his own newspaper

The prosecutor asserts that, starting from 1939, Streicher incited the German people to kill members of the Jewish race, citing “clippings of articles” from Der Stürmer as evidence. The accused denies the guilt.

From Der Stürmer, January 1939: “The 'Jewish question' is not yet solved. It will also not be solved when the last Jew leaves Germany. It will only be solved when 'world Jewry' is destroyed.”

From the editor's column of Der Stürmer, April 1939: “And then their [Jews'] graves will proclaim that this people of murderers and criminals has after all met its deserved fate.”

Adolf Hitler and Julius Streicher

Streicher contends that he is encountering the April 1939 quote for the first time and suggests it might be a play on words. He adds, “To my knowledge, and as much as we discussed the 'Jewish question,' there was no talk of mass killings then.”

The subsequent quote, from May 1939, is presented by the prosecutor, who reminds the court that Streicher claimed responsibility for what was published in Der Stürmer:

“A punitive expedition must come against the Jews in Russia. A punitive expedition which will provide the same fate for them that every murderer and criminal must expect: death sentence and execution. The Jews in Russia must be killed. They must be exterminated root and branch, and then the world will see that the end of the Jew will come after the end of Bolshevism.”

Streicher admits to his responsibility for publishing the article in question but argues that the quoted passage reflects the personal opinion of an individual contributor and serves as a theoretical expression of anti-Semitic ideology rather than an explicit call to violence. He emphasizes that understanding the context requires reading the entire text.

The prosecutor questions whether Streicher truly didn't see any messages about the extermination of Jews from January 1939 to January 1941, to which Streicher responds in the affirmative. The prosecutor reminds the defendant that, earlier that day, he had told the defense attorney that the Swiss newspaper article had led him to observe that “not everything was in order and many [Jews] were disappearing, but without specifics.” Streicher nevertheless maintains his stance.

The prosecutor presents excerpts from a Jewish newspaper. The stories, which range from July 1941 until the war's end, detail specific numbers of missing, killed, and abducted Jews. For instance, in the July 11, 1941 issue, the paper states: “In Poland, about 40,000 Jews have been killed in recent years, hospitals are overflowing” — Streicher claims he did not read this. From November 1941: “In Ukraine, 10,000 Jews have been killed” — Streicher says he may have read it, but the information only mentioned thousands, not millions. From December 12, 1941: “Thousands of Jews in Odessa, Kiev, and other cities have been executed” — Streicher argues this is not evidence and mentions that during the war, the deliveries of this newspaper were reduced, thus he did not read every issue.

Next, the prosecutor reads quotes from an issue of Der Stürmer published on December 25, 1941 — i.e., after the previously cited excerpts regarding the mass deaths of Jews in Poland and the Soviet Union. From Der Stürmer:

“If the danger of the reproduction of that curse of God in the Jewish blood is to finally come to an end, then there is only one way: the extermination of that people whose father is the devil.”

Streicher once again argues that the quote has been taken out of context.

The prosecutor questions whether Streicher truly remained unaware of the mass killings of Jews, and the defendant affirms his ignorance. The prosecutor cites a quote taken from a “Jewish newspaper” and published in Der Stürmer. The prosecutor notes that the original article contains concrete information about the scale of Jewish victimhood:

“In essence, the Jews of Europe, excluding England and minor Jewish communities in neutral countries, have vanished. The Jewish reservoir of the East, which once balanced assimilation in the West, no longer exists. Three million killed, an equal number impoverished. Countless thousands scattered worldwide, physically and mentally shattered.”

The prosecutor presses, “Do you still contend you didn't see specific figures?” Streicher responds, citing subjectivity and German censorship:

“Whether I read it or not, I couldn't believe that three million Jews were killed. Hence, I omitted this passage from the quote. Moreover, German censorship would have barred such dissemination, as it prohibits the spread of implausible facts.”

The caricature in Der Stürmer features a caption stating: “Every little Jewish child grows up to be a Jew”

The prosecutor then presents various excerpts from Der Stürmer containing calls for the destruction of the Jewish race. As usual, Streicher responds by claiming that the quotes are taken out of context — that the call is for ideological destruction, rather than physical extermination. When confronted with a passage stating, “The world can only recover if the most horrible human microbe — Jewry — is eradicated,” he retorts, “There is a big difference between statements in an article and mass murders.”

The prosecutor proceeds to ask if Streicher believes that people reading his articles were inclined to support the extermination of Jews only through propaganda and incitement, rather than through physical actions. Streicher replies:

“I contend that we incited — we explained... It needs to be reiterated again and again that the German people did not desire killings — neither individual nor mass.”

He goes on:

“My goal was — and I partially achieved it — to establish laws intended to make sexual relations between people of different blood impossible. Therefore, the public should know that Jews are not a religion but a people, a race. I helped create this foundation. But mass murders were not the result of enlightenment or, as the prosecution claims, incitement. These mass murders were the final act of will of the greatest man in world history, who perhaps knew he would not prevail.”

With this, Streicher's interrogation concludes.

Final speech of Streicher, excerpts

Day 216 of the trial - August 31, 1946

“It has been established, first, that all mass killings were carried out on the orders of the head of state, Adolf Hitler. Second, the conduct of mass murders occurred without the knowledge of the German people, in complete secrecy, and was led by Reichsführer Heinrich Himmler.

“It's been established that in 1933, I led the so-called 'Day of Boycott,' and in 1938, I participated in a demonstration ordered by Goebbels. I want to clarify that during these events, I did not incite violence, took no action against Jews, and did not engage in any anti-Jewish activities. Furthermore, it has been established that in many articles of my newspaper Der Stürmer, I viewed resolving the 'Jewish question' through the creation of a Jewish state as entirely natural. I advocated for this state's establishment and supported this demand. These facts show that I opposed resolving the 'Jewish question' through violence. If, in some articles of Der Stürmer, I or other authors discussed the destruction or eradication of Jewry, these were, so to speak, counter statements in response to provocative statements by Jewish writers...

Julius Stecher in a prison cell

“Per Adolf Hitler's testamentary statement, the mass killings were meant as retribution, solely in response to the unfavorable turn of the war, as it became apparent at the time. This act against Judaism, initiated by the national leader, stands apart from my own position on the Jewish question. Hitler aimed to punish Judaism, holding it responsible for initiating the war and bombing German civilians.

“Regrettably, these mass killings, traced back to Hitler's personal decree, resulted in treatment of the German people that must also be deemed inhumane. I, like any decent German, reject such mass killings. Honorable judges, neither as a Gauleiter nor as a political writer have I committed any crimes. I await your verdict with a clear conscience. I make no plea for myself, but I do for the German people, of which I am a part. Fate has vested you, honorable judges, with the authority to pronounce any judgment. I implore you not to issue a verdict that would brand an entire nation with dishonor.”

Final speeches of the prosecutors, excerpts

USA (Robert Jackson):

“Streicher, a venomous scoundrel, authored and disseminated indecent racial slanders that encouraged people to approve increasingly ruthless operations of 'racial cleansing' and to aid in their implementation.”

UK (Hartley Shawcross):

“As early as 1925, Streicher declared, 'Let us today initiate the annihilation of the Jews.' Perhaps even before Hitler, Himmler, and others, he mentally envisaged the destruction of the Jews. However, the Nazis initially were not ready to completely disregard world public opinion and limited themselves to persecuting Jews and creating unbearable conditions for them in Germany. Amidst the incessant drumbeat of Der Stürmer and the official Nazi press, campaigns of Jewish persecution were conducted and encouraged.

“The Tribunal need not be reminded of Streicher's role. In March 1938, Der Stürmer newspaper began systematically propagating ideas of Jewish extermination. The first in a series of articles, which continued to be printed for the following seven years, was signed by Streicher and ended with the following words: 'We are approaching marvelous times — a Great Germany without Jews!'”

France (François de Menthon):

“Streicher joined the party almost immediately after its foundation. He fully dedicated himself to unrestrained propaganda against Jews, urging the German people to persecute and exterminate them in his speeches and articles. He was a Gauleiter. He never once condemned what was done. On the contrary, he stated: 'He who understands how deep the personality of the Führer was, as I understand it from his will, which deliberately ordered the extermination of Jews, cannot help but exclaim: he had the right to do so!'”

USSR (Roman Rudenko):

“Provoking national and racial hatred, fostering perverted cruelty, and inciting killings were not only lifelong party duties but also profitable specialties of this man.”

Chief Prosecutor from the USSR at the Nuremberg Trials, Roman Rudenko

The Judgement

Source: Correction Sheet for 1 October 1946 M Session, (b) Official Court Transcript (Judgment concluded, and sentences) 1 October 1946 M & A) + transcript — quoted in full

Streicher is charged in Count I and Count IV. One of the earliest members of the Nazi Party, he joined in 1921 and participated in the Munich [Beer Hall] Putsch. From 1925 to 1940, he was the Gauleiter of Franconia. Elected to the Reichstag in 1933, he attained the rank of Gruppenführer. His attitude towards Jews is well known. He was the publisher of Der Stürmer, an anti-Semitic weekly newspaper, from 1923 to 1945, and served as its editor until 1933.

Crimes against Peace

Streicher was a staunch Nazi and supporter of Hitler's main policies. There is no evidence to show that he was ever within Hitler's inner circle of advisers, nor during his career was he closely connected with the formulation of the policies which led to war. He was never present, for example, at any of the important conferences when Hitler explained his decisions to his leaders. Although he was a Gauleiter, there is no evidence to prove that he had knowledge of those policies. In the opinion of the Tribunal, the evidence fails to establish his connection with the conspiracy or common plan to wage aggressive war.

Crimes against Humanity

For his twenty-five years of speaking, writing, and preaching hatred of the Jews, Streicher was widely known as “Jew-Baiter Number One.” In his speeches and articles, week after week, month after month, he infected the German mind with the virus of anti-Semitism and incited the German people to active persecution. Each issue of Der Stürmer, which reached a circulation of 600,000 in 1935, was filled with such articles, often lewd and disgusting. Streicher had charge of the Jewish boycott of April 1st, 1933. He advocated the Nuremberg Decrees of 1935. He was responsible for the demolition on August 10th, 1938, of the Synagogue in Nuremberg. And on November 10th, 1938, he spoke publicly in support of the Jewish pogrom which was taking place at that time.

But it was not only in Germany that this defendant advocated his doctrines. As early as 1938 he began to call for the annihilation of the Jewish race. Twenty-three different articles of Der Stürmer between 1938 and 1941 were produced in evidence, in which the extermination “root and branch” was preached. Typical of his teachings was a leading article in September 1938, which termed the Jew a germ and a pest, not a human being, but “a parasite, an enemy, an evil-doer, a disseminator of diseases who must be destroyed in the interest of mankind.” Other articles urged that only when world Jewry had been annihilated would the Jewish problem have been solved and predicted that fifty years hence the Jewish graves “will proclaim that this people of murderers and criminals has after all met its deserved fate.” Streicher, in February 1940, published a letter from one of Der Stürmer's readers which compared Jews with swarms of locusts which must be exterminated completely. Such was the poison Streicher injected into the minds of thousands of Germans, which caused them to follow the National Socialists policy of Jewish persecution and extermination. A leading article of Der Stürmer in May 1939, shows clearly his aim:

“A punitive expedition must come against the Jews in Russia. A punitive expedition which will provide the same fate for them that every murderer and criminal must expect. Death sentence and execution. The Jews in Russia must be killed. They must be exterminated root and branch.”

As the war in the early stages proved successful in acquiring more territory for the Reich, Streicher even intensified his efforts to incite the Germans against the Jews. In the record are twenty-six articles from Der Stürmer, published between August 1941 and September 1944, twelve by Streicher's own hand, which demanded annihilation and extermination in unequivocal terms. He wrote and published on December 25th, 1941:

“If the danger of the reproduction of that curse of God in the Jewish blood is to finally come to an end, then there is only one way — the extermination of that people whose father is the devil.”

And in February, 1944, his own article stated:

“Whoever does what a Jew does is a scoundrel, a criminal. And he who repeats and wishes to copy him deserves the same fate: annihilation, death.”

With knowledge of the extermination of the Jews in the Occupied Eastern Territory, this defendant continued to write and publish his propaganda of death. Testifying in this trial, he vehemently denied any knowledge of mass executions of Jews. But the evidence makes it clear that he continually received current information on the progress of the “final solution.” His press photographer was sent to visit the ghettos of the East in the Spring of 1943, the time of the destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto. The Jewish newspaper, Israelitisches Wochenblatt, which Streicher received and read, carried in each issue accounts of atrocities against Jews in the East, and gave figures on the number of Jews who had been deported and killed. For example, issues appearing in the summer and fall of 1942 reported the death of 72,729 Jews in Warsaw, 17,542 in Lodz, 18,000 in Croatia, 125,000 in Rumania, 14,000 in Latvia, 85,000 in Yugoslavia, 700,000 in all of Poland. In November 1943, Streicher quoted verbatim an article from the Israelitisches Wochenblatt which stated that the Jews had virtually disappeared from Europe and commented “This is not a Jewish lie.” In December 1942, referring to an article in the London Times about the atrocities, aiming at extermination, Streicher said that Hitler had given warning that the second World War would lead to the destruction of Jewry. In January 1943, he wrote and published an article which said that Hitler's prophecy was being fulfilled, that world Jewry was being extirpated, and that it was wonderful to know that Hitler was freeing the world of its Jewish tormentors.

In the face of the evidence before the Tribunal it is vain for Streicher to suggest that the solution of the Jewish problem which he favored was strictly limited to the classification of Jews as aliens, and the passing of discriminatory legislation such as the Nuremberg Laws, supplemented if possible by international agreement on the creation of a Jewish State somewhere in the world, to which all Jews should emigrate.

Streicher's incitement to murder and extermination at the time when Jews in the East were being killed under the most horrible conditions clearly constitutes persecution on political and racial grounds in connection with war crimes as defined by the Charter and constitutes a crime against humanity.

The body of Julius Streicher after hanging, October 16, 1946

Conclusion

The Tribunal finds that Streicher is not guilty of Count One (crimes against peace), but that he is guilty on Count Four (crimes against humanity).