GIOVANNI PALATUCCI (1909-1945): THE LIFE AND WORKS

‘Righteous Among the Nations’. Research of progress. New findings

(Prof. Pier Luigi Guiducci

Pontifical Lateran University)

From 2010 to 2015, a team of historians[1] of the Pontifical Lateran University of Rome carried out an in-depth research on the life and works of Giovanni Palatucci, former acting head of the Questura (Police Headquarters) of Fiume, who died at the Dachau concentration camp in 1944. The initiative, which progressively involved an increasing number of contributions and countries, served to allay the doubts cast on Palatucci by Centro Primo Levi of New York. The project was also endorsed by various exponents of the Jewish community thereby strengthening the interaction with the Yad Vashem Memorial[2] of Jerusalem. The following are the key findings and successive updates the Commission has disclosed to scholars and the press [3].

Resistance

The initiatives that in Italy and elsewhere were part of the resistance against Nazism-Fascism not always involved armed struggle. Resistance did not necessarily lead to bloodshed or violent combat between foes. Resistance was a movement with many faces[4]: 1] moral (censure of doctrines; disapproval of unlawful legislation; outright rejection of oppressive and violent action…); 2] non-cooperation (resistance against recruitment of forced labour; contempt of orders through non-compliance; concealment of equipment and machinery in the face of productivity targets; industrial action; failure to show up when convened…); 3] educational (providing guidance to the younger generation in order to prepare them for a better future; conservation of banned books and works; publication and circulation of works by authors who have been condemned by the regime…);  4] civil (tampering of archives, protection of the persecuted, political deals for a new political system in Italy …); 5] high-risk action (clandestine printing presses, partisan relays, planning and execution of attacks, open combat…).[5]

Civil resistance and whistle-blowing

In such a setting, civil resistance action had to be carried out in an extremely prudent manner so as to not rise suspicion and avoid detection. Whistle-blowing posed, in this light, a major threat. Just consider, for example, the events that occurred in Rome[6]. The following people were denounced and apprehended: Giuseppe Cordero Lanza di Montezemolo, don Giuseppe Morosini, don Pietro Pappagallo, Settimio Sorani, Leone Ginzburg, Aladino Govoni, Unico Guidoni, Uccio Pisino, Ezio Lombardi, Tigrino Sabatini[7], Karel Weirich and others. A number of serious episodes were also recorded in Fiume. One of them involved the custodian of the Jewish temple, one Plech, who used his network of contacts to tip off the police on the whereabouts of fugitives.[8] Key information was provided leading to the arrest of Andra (Alessandra) and Tatiana (recorded as Liliana in the registry office) Bucci, respectively four and six. [9] They were seized with their mother (Mira Perlow), aunt (Gisella Perlow), cousin [10]

Against this critical backdrop, public sector employees, especially those belonging to the forces of law and order, who were against the anti-Semitic legislation had to deal with extremely dangerous situations in order to take action to protect the persecuted.[11]

Historical research method

This initial historical fact is highlighted because it is not likely that accounts of clandestine actions taking place at that time can be found in the Italian public archives (e.g. Archivio Centrale dello Stato), in the historical records departments (of the Police, Carabinieri, Guardia di Finanza… …), and in the scientific institutes of other countries (Germany, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia …), or in Foundations (e.g. the one established by former Nazi camp inmates) and in historical institutes (e.g. the Italo-German institute in Trento; the Croatian historical institute in Zagreb).[12] On the contrary, these archives keep documents providing official information and bureaucratic annotations on:

- the Nazi and fascist organisational system;[13]

- general bans and prohibitions (announcement, ordinances, directives, etc.) and, specifically, repression and extermination orders of Jews;

- briefings for the Purge Commissions (purging of Fascists officials from government and local administrations, state agencies, supervising authorities or private companies of national interest or providing public services);

- economic protection; disciplinary measures; award of merit.

To acquire reserved information of any kind, it is necessary to 1] re-examine the information [14] and accounts of the time; 2] study the reports provided by members of the resistance, including Jewish combatants, and the papers kept by families and diocesan authorities as well as the plans drawn up in Italy and abroad; 3] focus on the clandestine solidarity networks of the time; 4] investigate closely the intelligence reports kept at the Deutsches Bundesarchiv [15], The National Archive of London[16], The National Archives and Records Administration of Washington besides those at Croatian and Serbian archives. This working method will prove to be very useful in shedding light on Giovanni Palatucci, a police commissario who came from the Irpinia region in southern Italy.

Giovanni Palatucci

Giovanni Palatucci was born at Montella, a comune in the province of Avellino on 31 May 1909, and died at Dachau on 10 February 1945. He attended the Tasso high school in Salerno where he received a diploma in classical studies. After military service, he graduated in law (1932) but did not enter the legal profession. Already licenced as an attorney, he joined instead the administration department of the police.

Genova

Palatucci was posted to the Regia Questura of Genoa, which was commanded at that time by the police chief, the questore Rodolfo Buzzi[17]. The city’s prefetto was Umberto Albini[18]. Palatucci took up service on 3 August 1936. The Spanish Civil War had broken out in the previous month (1936-1939) and the young man from Montella volunteered as deputy commissario of police. In Genoa, he met agent Raffaele Avallone[19], who would successively be transferred to Fiume. From February to May 1937, he attended the Scuola di Formazione per Funzionari della P.S., the police officers’ academy in Rome. In an interview given to the ‘Corriere Mercantile,’[20] Palatucci openly criticised some of the working methods in place at the police headquarters of Genoa especially in the area of administration. Informed about the interview, the questore Buzzi ordered the compulsory transfer of   Palatucci, who was ultimately posted to the royal police headquarters of Fiume. To this regard, Buzzi had written on 21 October 1937-XVI to the deputy prefect Carlo Scrivi, head of personnel at the Ministry of Internal Affairs:  «(…) I designate for the transfer from this to another venue, the deputy commisario of police dottor Palatucci Giovanni, whom I am not particularly pleased of».[21]

Fiume

Palatucci took up service[22] on 15 November 1937, when the prefect of Fiume was Francesco Turbacco.[23] The city was then part of the Kingdom of Italy, which it had joined in 1924. Fiume was previously the port of the Kingdom of Hungary and successively a Free City. A feature of the city was the simmering ethnic contrast between Italians and Croato-Slovenians in the Friuli-Venezia Region. But Fiume was also feeling the brunt of declining trade because of the loss of its “Great Hungary” hinterland which had impacted port traffic volumes significantly. As a consequence, the community as well as the local economy had been negatively affected by the changing scenario. In Fiume, Palatucci was appointed head of the Ufficio Stranieri, the Foreign Nationals Office. From his room on the third-floor of the Questura at via Pomerio, he was in charge of issuing the permesso di soggiorno, stay permits, for the relocation of Jews, who had de facto been turned into aliens in their own country. If Jews intended, for example, to go to Trieste, or to other localities within the Kingdom of Italy, they had to apply for a pass from the Questura. Palatucci lived in a room in a fourth-floor flat at via Pomerio 29, belonging to signora Malner, an elderly childless widow, to whom he paid a monthly rent. He had his meals at the officers’ mess.

A local point of reference: the Swiss Consulate of Trieste

A number of significant institutions were located in Fiume at the time of Palatucci’s arrival in Fiume. For the most part they were charitable entities, such as the Opera Nazionale per la Protezione della Maternità e dell’Infanzia, a nation-wide charitable institution providing aid to mothers and children.

Another important institution that operated in the area was the Swiss Consulate in Trieste. The consul at that time was Emilio Bonzanigo, a Catholic, born in Canton Ticino in 1884, who had been appointed to the post on 21 January 1938. Bonzanigo, who died at Bellinzona in 1973, was Swiss consul in Trieste from 13 April 1938 to 31 December 1949, and as the doyen of the consular corps in Trieste was one of the very few to be in office when the Allies arrived in 1945. He has been widely praised for his humanitarian work. Allusions to an “elusive consul in Trieste” were groundless while, on the contrary, the links between Bonzanigo and Palatucci[24] were of utmost importance as were the Helvetic Confederation’s policies on exile.

Palatucci’s political opinions and convictions

The documents kept in various archives in Italy and abroad have revealed that Palatucci was not always in line with the political orientations of the time.[25] Consider, for example, the enrolment in the National Fascist Party (Partito Nazionale Fascista – PNF) which had become compulsory since 27 May 1933. Palatucci did not join the PNF until 23 March 1938 when he sat the exam to qualify as a low-ranking judge. [26] In particular, the following should be observed:

- he was a very reserved person and set a rigorous moral standard on a number of key values;

- he did not absatin from giving his firm opinion on matters concerning Italian affairs;

- he maintained a correct but not servile line of conduct vis-à-vis government representatives, expressing criticism on various occasions.

The following, in addition, has emerged from his private papers:

- a personal impatience with Fascist excesses; an aversion for heavy-handed full-scale roundups;

˗ a clear taking of distance from the racist pronouncements that provided the theoretical foundation of the persecutory system against the Jews and other minorities. Investigations grounded on name,  birth, kinship were not something he sustained. It was a kind of approach that was not in line with his professional conduct, with his ethics;[27]

˗ a personal path to faith while maintaining an active participation in the life of the church community.

Anti-Semitic persecutions

As Palatucci was discharging his institutional duties, the regime issued on 14 July 1938 the Manifesto of racial scientists. This was followed by the royal decree Measures for the defence of the Italian race, which was converted unamended in law n. 274 of 5 January 1939. Following the enforcement of the racial laws between 1938 and 1939, some five-hundred Jews from Fiume and the Carnaro Gulf area[28] lost their Italian citizenship, becoming stateless people with no legal protection. But before long the OVRA[29], the Italian secret police, was informing the Duce about the unpopularity of the laws.[30] The period between 1938 and 1943 was one of extreme hardship for the Jews. The Fascist regime implemented three measures to tackle the situation:

1] schools for Jewish minors and teachers who had been expelled from government schools in 1938; 2] settlement and relocation of refugees who had escaped from Nazi-occupied countries; 3] social assistance for foreign refugees and Italian anti-Fascist Jews interned in camps starting from June 1940, or placed under house arrest under the classification of ‘free interned’[31] or ‘wartime interned civilians.’

Refugees

In the years from 1938[32] to 1943-1944, Palatucci was faced with the tragedy of Jewish refugees from Austria and, successively, from Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Croatia… To avoid internment, the refugees often crossed the border clandestinely. But the orders of Mussolini, who was also the interior minister, were to expel them, which meant handing them over to the police authorities or to collaborationist governments of the time. 

It is difficult to calculate with any accuracy the number of refugees – predominantly Jews – who crossed the border in those years. And, of course, there also was the question regarding the Jews of Fiume and surrounding areas – approximately 1,600 persons – who had been stripped of their nationality following the enforcement of the race laws in 1938. Their relocation to other Italian provinces required the authorization of the Questura, of Palatucci.

The case of the Yugoslav Jews

Following the dismemberment of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia after the German and Italian attack in April-May 1941, a part of that territory was reconverted into a new entity, the Independent State of Croatia, with capital Zagreb. Its appointed leader in 1941 was Ante Pavelić,[33] one of the founders of the ustaša (‘rebel’) movement, which subscribed a policy that violently opposed a multi-ethnic Yugoslavia and was unapologetically intolerant to Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. The other territories of the former Kingdom of Yugoslavia were annexed to Italy, as set down in the decree of 19 May 1941.

In the areas falling under Italian rule, the race laws enforced in the country starting 1938 were applied to local Jews. Consequently, the internment measures targeting foreign Jews applicable in Italy since 1940 were also enforced in these newly-annexed territories. But setting-up camps in these territories proved to be a major obstacle for reasons connected to provisioning and security. That was why most of the persecuted were transferred to Italy. Many were initially interned in the southern Italian camps of Ferramonti or Campagna, near respectively Cosenza and Salerno, before being transferred, as ‘free interned’, and placed under house arrest in isolated towns in central and northern Italy.

The recovered document

A document, dated 4 October 1942, was recently discovered in which Mussolini expresses his will to repel Croatian Jews on the run from the Ustasha. The document is conserved in the Archivio Centrale dello Stato and catalogued as:

Ministero dell’Interno, Direzione generale della pubblica sicurezza, Divisione affari generali e riservati, Repubblica Sociale Italiana, cat. A16 Stranieri (1943-1944), b. 13, fasc. Ebrei stranieri ex-jugoslavi, Direzione Generale della Pubblica Sicurezza, n. 443/152826, Report [for Mussolini], 4 October 1942, with handwritten annotations by Benito Mussolini.

The tasks of the Ufficio Stranieri

With the enforcement of the race laws, Palatucci was given the task of registering the Jews of Fiume, besides checking their personal records and prohibiting all contacts with Aryans. The nature of the work carried out by the Questura of Fiume has been described by the Jewish scholar Prof Anna Pizzuti.

«The Questura collection in the State Archive of Fiume has been made accessible only recently. The digitalised personal files have provided a list of foreign Jews – mainly refugees – whom the police had to deal with following the promulgation of the anti-Jewish laws and the Italian invasion of what was then Yugoslavia. […] The original file from which this work developed contains the personal files of 4,312 people. Some of these files provide a brief outline of the journey of escape most of them made. It should nevertheless be observed that the thesaurus, i.e. the brief description relating to each name, is not complete, and that the Questura collection is yet to be fully catalogued. Considering, in addition, the sheer complexity of the stories of these individuals, it is not easy to choose the most appropriate terms to classify the contents of the documents or even ensure they correspond to what really transpired. It may also be that in many instances the names and surnames have not been transcribed correctly and that some of the persons mentioned may not have any connection with the names written on the file: the shortages caused by war may have forced Prefettura or Questura clerks to reutilise the cover of a file previously compiled for another person. Even the facts as outlined in the documents may be untrue or only partially true, but this is something that must be borne in mind when cinducting research of this kind. It is a risk that can be countered only by comparing and cross-checking the sources thoroughly».[34] 

Additional observations by Prof Pizzuti

In her report, prof Pizzuti points to some facts that should be taken into due account. «Early data show that often the information gathered from the Fiume files and the information drawn from documents conserved in Italian archives mismatch. This is not the first time that discrepancies of this kind have occurred when single or entire groups of people are compared. For example, in many of the personal files concerning foreign Jews kept at the Central State Archive of Rome, there are documents apparently showing that the concerned person, and the members of his family, were emigrants, which is erroneous because in that same file other documents, bearing successive dates, prove that it was a case of people kept in continuing internment. At this stage of the research, we have observed that similar cases are also documented in the Fiume files, albeit not very frequently.

But these data actually point to other possibly even more crucial facts. The first concerns the non-correspondence between cases where the contents of the file seem to indicate that the person concerned was an interned and the results arising from a comparison with the general database on internment in Italy that is available on the site itself.

As the research is ongoing, the findings are therefore not conclusive. However, if the information contained in the Fiume files correspond to the facts as they really occurred, it is clearly becoming apparent that the number of foreign Jews who were present in Fiume under any title prior to and/or during the war and whose entry into the Kingdom was somehow registered but whose names have not been brought to light so far among the interned, was very high.[35]

The second fact is related to the presence in Italy, as interned, of 15 out of the 29 foreign Jews who are instead documented as inmates of camps set up by Italians at Kraljevika, Pag, Rab. But whatever the case may be, the impossibility to establish when the files were opened and the difficulty to set a coherent chronology even for those files that have been summarised, may have led to errors in the reconstruction of a truthful sequence of events in each specific case.

The list of personal files kept in Fiume identifies 938 people ˗ 668 men and 270 women –  recorded in the database of foreign Jews interned in Italy during the war.  Out of these, it is certain that 913 were interned, while 23 – 17 men and six women – were held in camps established by Italians in those areas of Yugoslavia that had been annexed, and taken, after 8 September 1943, across the Adriatic[36] to safety in liberated southern Italy.

Turning our attention back on the interned, we are actually dealing with less than one-quarter of the people who were involved in police operations starting from the mid-1930s. As for the remaining people, we would be able to gain further information by examining the files if not about their ultimate fate at least about the initial part of their ordeal. A closer examination of the data that has emerged thus far would nevertheless provide additional insight on the broader history of internment in Italy.

Two additional levels of information can be drawn from the list. The first concerns the verification of the internment date in Italy. Information is provided of each person’s residence prior to internment, and the venue of the first and last place of internment. Additional information may be added on what ultimately befell these people with a view to completing, whenever possible, the initial documentation available in the file.

The second level of information that can be drawn is connected to the status of the interned. The file may contain information about a refugee who illegally entered the Carnaro, of which Fiume was the provincial capital, soon after the invasion of Yugoslavia; or about a former refugee but now long-time resident; or about a foreign Jew who had acquired citizenship after 1 January 1919. As already observed, the absence of personal data, accompanied by misspellings of names, have caused many problems of identification. It has occurred that for a name present in the Fiume archives, two or more similarly-named persons have been found in the main database with mismatching data that have hindered accurate identification. Countering these difficulties, however, there have been cases where the identification of families whose components have led to the identification of other members of the family. The risk remains, nevertheless, that these data may present a margin of error, hopefully small».[37]

Federico Falk recalls the events of 1940

The 97-year-old Federico Falk died in 2016. Born in Fiume in 1919 from parents of Hungarian origin, he was one of the last survivors of the Jewish community of Fiume that was destroyed by the Nazifascist persecutions and the Shoah. Following his scientific studies, he was prevented from pursuing a university career due to the enforcement of the race laws in 1938. On his retirement, he dedicated a 15-year research on the defunct Jewish community of Fiume so that faces, names, stories would not be forgotten. In his book entitled Le comunità israelitiche di Fiume e Abbazia tra le due guerre mondiali,[38] published in Rome in 2012, Falk traced the painful memory of the Fiume community in Italy, Europe, the Americas, Israel and Australia. Here is what he writes about Palatucci:

“(…) Of course, with the enforcement of the race laws, the Jews of Fiume shared the plight of all the other Italian Jews. They were expelled from all the schools of the Kingdom, and could not enrol in universities; employees of government organizations and agencies and of municipalities were fired; armed forces officers were publicly degraded and expelled 
regardless of the military decorations they had received, as if they had been traitors. And when Italy entered the war on 10 June 1940, some 400 male Jews of the age of 18 and above, now considered enemies of the state, were rounded up on the night between 18 and 19 June on the orders of the prefect Temistocle Testa. An elementary school at the suburb of Torretta[39] was requisitioned and the poor souls were locked up in miserable conditions in groups of 30-40 in each class.

Some of those who were arrested were freed after 8-15 days, the remaining were confined in various localities in central and southern Italy. Many were facilitated by the action of the Vice-Questore[40], dottor Giovanni Palatucci, escaping in some cases deportation to the Nazi death camps”. [41]

Paolo Santarcangeli recalls the events of 1940  

The Jews, as Federico Falk recalls, were rounded up in 1940. With regard to the same episode, the Jewish writer Paolo Santarcangeli,[42] remembers: “(…) When I entered Palatucci’s room, where a colleague of his was also present, he stood up. His face was deathly pale. On that night of 18 June 1940, he shook my hand and invited me to take a seat. ‘We have reached the deepest pit of our shame,’ he told me. “Now you can look at us with your head held high and we have to bow before you. Forgive us’.”[43]

Enlargement of the Province of Fiume (1941)

As from 7 June [44], and the civil commissariat of Sušak with jurisdiction over internal and coastal areas.

Palatucci’s problems with his superiors (1941)

From the documents that have been examined, it would appear that Palatucci’s relationship with his superiors, while formally correct, was tense,[45] as can be gathered from the correspondence with his relatives.

1] On 18 April 1941, Palatucci wrote to his cousin Federico. There is this significant passage in the letter: “(…) it as been months that at work there is no longer that atmosphere of freshness I would like to work in”.[46]

2] In a letter to his relatives dated 8 October 1941 he wrote:

“(…) Relations with the superiors are formal. To be precise, they know they need me: it would even appear they can’t do without me. They certainly view me in high regard. They appreciate my skills and appreciate the way I work, but they also well know – and thanks God for that – I am different, I am not like them.  I am aware of this, so our relations are neighbourly but not cordial.

But it does not really matter. It is not from them I seek gratification, it is from my work, which I get aplenty. I can do some good to people, for which they are very grateful. All in all, people are satisfied with me. As for the rest, I have little else to say of myself. Alas, I’ve stopped writing to most relatives and friends out of sheer lack of time (…)».[47]

The sentences contain messages in code to avoid censorship, for things in Fiume were not at all well. ‘Non-cordiality’ meant there was substantially no understanding between them. Even with regard to the people who benefited from his action, he did not say much more. He did not dare to give further details. It is for this reason that for a historian a superficial observation is not enough. The reference to people that benefited from his action make us aware that there was more than met the eye.

As for the ‘problems” with his superiors, there were in any case two instances that should be considered:

˗ In more than one occasion (1939-1942), Palatucci had asked, as a consequence of the pressure he was feeling, to be transferred to Riccione, Cattolica, or Cesena. His requests were not granted. On the contrary, his superiors started keeping a closer watch over him, because in wartime repeated demands to be transferred can raise suspicion. For this reason, his superiors made a show of being happy with his work;

˗ On 23 July 1943, an inspector, sent by the Ministry to investigate Palatucci’s work, filed a very negative report (see next paragraph).

Now, for a historian this means going beyond the official information that is contained in a file. To gauge the real nature of the conduct of Palatucci’s superiors, a historian must try to find out if Palatucci was spied on.

Deputy Commissario (February 1943)

In a letter dated 28 February 1943, Palatucci informed his parents that he had been promoted to the rank of commissario aggiunto.

Ministerial inspection (July 1943)

From 19 to 23 July 1943, shortly before the fall of the Fascist regime, an inspector was sent by the Ministry to investigate Palatucci’s office. In his conclusive report, dated 4 August 1943,[48] the inspector wrote:

In the meanwhile, besides referring his findings to the superiors, the inspector verbally pointed out Palatucci’s dereliction of duty. The officer in charge of the Questura replied that Palatucci has “received little help due to the absence of qualified staff and the sheer volume of work at hand”.  To which the inspector replied in a written note: “(…) In the light of the exhaustive investigation I have carried out, I can affirm that nothing, or precious little, has been done to properly manage the office in the three years and more he has been in charge, clearly showing not only lack of interest but also little knowledge of the rules that govern the service. To bring the office back in line, it is urgent and no longer deferrable to revise and update the files relating to those foreign nationals, presumably now very few, who still reside in the province. The questore will see to the matter as soon as possible, when the government officers who have been designated to Fiume arrive”.[49]

Observations

The above documents are of key interest for the historian for a number of reasons.

1. If these papers are compared with the testimonies given by the persecuted of the time, nothing at all would emerge of the initiatives carried out by Palatucci that have remained unreported in the documents kept in the archives.

2. The report filed by the inspector is actually of no use in terms of the allegations levelled against Palatucci. In fact, it should be observed that many of the operations depended more on informers and on the political affairs section than on the ufficio stranieri.

3.  In his report, the inspector announces the already decided designation to Fiume of high-ranking functionaries. We can therefore deduce that there were already serious reservations at the interior ministry about Palatucci’s conduct.

After 8 September 1943

On 1 October 1943, Berlin set up the Operational Zone of the Adriatic Littoral (German: Operationszone Adriatisches Küstenland, OZAK), [50] which handed control of the territory directly to the Germans. The High Commissioner was [51] who had commanded Aktion Reinhardt[52] in the camps of Sobibor, Treblinka, Belzec and Majdanek. He was known as the “butcher of Lublin”.

Although part of the Repubblica Sociale Italiana (RSI), Fiume was de facto included in the Zone.

1] The commander of the German forces in the Fiume sector (port and city) was colonel Lothar Zimmerman, who would be charged of war crimes and condemned to death in 1946.

2] The SS commander in Fiume was colonel Henrich Schlünzan, who would also be accused of war crimes.

3] Trieste was home to the Befehlshaber der Ordnungspolizei Triest (public order police, Gendarmerie). The Fiume provincial section was headed by Major der Gendarmerie Kauba (up to May 1944) and successively by the Hauptmann der Schutz Polizei Maas.

4] In the Quarnero provincial capital there also operated a section of the SIPO/SD, the Reich’s political and criminal investigation security agencies. The Sipo had several commanders. Chronologically, they wre SS lieutenant Zörnen[53], SS captain Heinrich Schlünzer[54] and, finally, SS captain Fritz Hinays[55].

5] Head of the Quarnero police for a brief period in May 1944 was SS Sturmbannführer Ernst Lerch[56], who had previously held the post of chief of Globočnik’s Persönliches Büro, and who from 26 June 1944 to February 1945 coordinated anti-partisan activities.

A key role in Fiume was also played by SS Obersturmbannführer Wilhelm Traub[57], who was SS  Polizeigebietskommandeur Quarnero from 27 October 1944 to 1945.

6] In the new territories around Fiume, the Germans dismantled the Italian administrative system and set up the Sušak-Krk (Sussa-Veglia) Commission, the head of which was appointed the lawyer Franjo Špehar.

7] Arturo Maineri de Meichsenau (1904-1966) was appointed Secretary of the Republican Fascist Party and Gino Sirola (1885-1945) podestà.

An observation (October 1943)

The population of Fiume was faced with a difficult condition. The city was now an “occupied ally.” At that time, there were some 3,500 Jews in the city, predominantly refugees from Croatia and Galicia. In the meanwhile, R.S.I. members accused Catholic Church institutions of protecting the Jews. Proof of this can be found in a report filed by the Republican National Guard Command. Here is the key passage: “It can be affirmed without a shadow of doubt that 70% of the vile Israelites has been picked by their long claws and brought to safety by their rebels and bandits.”[58]

The last letter to his parents (October 1943)

On 21 October 1943, Palatucci wrote to his parent. It would be his last letter. The following is a passage from it: “My dearest parents, this letter will reach you when the circumstance will allow it. It will convey you my thoughts for you and the expression of my unfaltering affection. I’m keeping very good health despite all the hard work I have been doing. Spirits are always high. We will overcome the storm, in the hope that to our nation will be reserved an honourable destiny and the best possible conditions of life. There is no need to tell you that, as soon as the circumstances will allow it, I will run back to you. Have no worry whatsoever for me. [59] I am certain no harm will come to me. I wish you the best of everything with the hope I will soon embrace you again. Giovanni.» [60]

The collaborators of the Germans (1943-1945)

With a view to controlling the territories now under their rule, the Germans also relied on the help of collaborators. The historian Silva Bon, for example, recalls one Ludovico Ploh, a carpenter who was paid for the information he gave. By virtue of his knowledge of German and Hungarian, Ploh also acted as an interpreter. [61] The scholar Mihael Sobolevski, for example, cites the figure of David Cherbaz, the illegitimate son of one Emilio Cherbaz. Born in Fiume on 28 December 1910, and residing in via Trieste 94, he worked as a blacksmith and mechanic, was married and had a son. He would be condemned by Tito’s militia in 1944 as a spy at the service of the German security police.[62] In the year the war ended, the Slav partisans executed at Tersatto Fiume-born Gina Mingotti-Messori (1907-1945), a 38-year-old woman who was accused of being a German spy.[63]

Bombardments (1944-1945)

Starting from the early part of 1944 to the end of the conflict, thirty aerial raids hit key targets in Fiume such as the port and the city’s principal industrial structures, prominent among which were the Whitehead torpedoes factory[64], the Cantrida shipyard and the R.O.M.S.A. oil refinery. The bombings prior to May 1945 caused 112 civilian casualties and damaged some 90% of the city’s industrial infrastructure. Approximately 1,700 public and residential buildings were also damaged during the bombradments. It should also be observed that the retreating Germans destroyed vital infrastructure at Porto Petroli, Porto Baross and the main port, where storehouses, quays and piers were blown up, causing some of the piers to be ripped from the shore.

Palatucci is appointed acting chief of the Questura (February 1944)

Following the transfer of the acting chief Roberto Tommaselli[65] on 28 February 1944, Palatucci was called to replace him, reporting first to Tullio Tamburini (1892-1957), head of the RSI police [66], and successively to Eugenio Cerruti (born 1898)[67]. It should be observed that the Questura had been deprived of most of its executive powers. Now disarmed, it had to follow orders given by the Nazis.[68]

Frossard’s invitation

Key information has emerged from the papers kept in the State Archive of Rijeka (two files) and in the private collection on Giovanni Palatucci kept by the lawyer Antonio De Simone Palatucci. One of the closest acquaintances of Palatucci at that time was count Marcel Frossard de Saugy (1885-1949), a Swiss-national born in Graz, Austria, who was married to Gerda von Bülow (born in 1883). The Frossards had two daughters and owned a villa at Laurana. In 1950, when the Frossards were packing in view of the sale of this property, Gerda found a suitcase Giovanni Palatucci had left for safekeeping containing his clothes and personal effects. The letter countess Gerda wrote to Giovanni’s mother on 21 August 1950 tells of the friendship that linked the commissario aggiunto to  the Frossard family. Count Marcel had invited Palatucci to follow him in Switzerland to stay in his residence in Geneva, on rue de la Tertasse, 5. Although he could leave Fiume, Palatucci refused to abandon his post.

The rescue of two Jewish women

In his place, Palatucci sent a young Jewish woman, one Maria Eisler, aka Mika (Mikela). Separated from her husband (Weiss?), she had arrived in Fiume in 1941 from Karlovać in Croatian territory. Her father Ernesto had been arrested by the ustaše on 6 July 1941, and successively murdered in the Jadovno concentration camp. As all those who came from other countries, Mika had to report to the Ufficio Stranieri of the Fiume Questura, where she met Palatucci. It would not be only encounter she had with him.

1] Thanks to Palatucci, Mika found a place to stay for a short while in Fiume sharing a small house with Flora Glavina on via Milano, 6 where the latter was living with her mother Giulia Zagabria. Mika was joined by her mother Dragica (Carolina) Eisler, née Braun[69], who arrived in Fiume on 21 January 1942.[70]

2] Mika would intercede with Palatucci for the protection of other Jewish friends of her. Among others, she sought help for the pianist Elisabeth Ferber Quitt[71], who arrived in Fiume from Croatia in the summer of 1941. Ferber moved in at her sister’s, Blanca Ferber Singer, who was already living in the city with her husband. Mika also asked her friend Giovanni to find out what happened to her father.

3] Mika proved to be invaluable as a translator and interpreter because Palatucci was not acquainted with the Croatian language.

4] On 30 April of 1942, Mika and her mother found refuge in a safer place at Laurana, a short distance from Abbazia, where they found hospitality at Villa Maria in via Oprino, 135.[72] Being there protected them from roundups and the risk of aerial raids.

5] In August 1943, the two women found safety at Monfestino di Serramazzoni, a small town near Modena,[73] where other refugees were already present.

6] At last, on December 1943, thanks to Palatucci’s intercession, Mika and her mother reached Swiss territory. Giovanni Palatucci, according to the witness of his personal physician Dr Giovanni Perini, “(…) aided by a local good-hearted priest who was privy to the secrets of his parishioners, was successful, and the two ladies – mother and daughter – were saved”.[74] According to Dr Perini, Mika, on Palatucci’s bidding, also handed to Swiss authorities a plan for the autonomy of Fiume. [75] In 1946, the two refugees made their way back to Karlovać, before definitely moving to Haifa in Israel.

Against this backdrop, Dr Perini’s reference to a “good-hearted local priest” is corroborated by a message sent by the Varese Provincial Command of the Republican National Guard to General Headquarters on 20 August 1944: “(…) [it is hereby confirmed] the existence of an efficient organisation for the clandestine expatriation of the Israelites who have disobeyed the ban issued last 25 May and who are dangerous political fugitives. While this network appears to refer to the local clergy and Catholic organisations of strict anti-fascist orientation, its key and most dangerous actions are carried out by a well-known rebel band operating from the upper province of Varese through forays carried out skilfully and with determination around the border areas [...] Unfortunately, the German border police leaves a lot to be desired, made up as it is by reservists, mostly tired and elderly elements notoriously reluctant to cooperate with our Institutional Services, in particular the Italian Guardia di Finanza, whose conduct, following the deprecated date of 25 July 1943, has been for the most part – following example the Carabinieri – disinterested, operating alongside the rebel and anti-fascist rebels from across the border [...].[76] [?]

The rescue of two Jewish men from Fiume

Two Jewish men from Fiume – Americo Ermolli and Ernesto Laufer – were saved in 1944 in an operation that involved Palatucci, the commissario Scarpa (cit.) and Father Enrico Zucca, a Franciscan priest. [77] Scarpa declared under oath the following:

The final option. The question of the archives

Researchers have asked why Palatucci did not leave Fiume. There are numerous conjectures. Hence the enigma. A closer investigation of the papers, however help to shed some light. 1] The acting head of the Questura of Fiume did not want to leave his men, who had been disarmed. The men had sought his aid for situations connected to their personal safety and that of family members. By that time, the Questura was in the grip of fear and uncertainty over the future. Palatucci was aware of the impending doom which, indeed, before long befell them in the form of summary executions and mass killings as many were flung the foibe sinkholes.

2] Civilians were at risk and viewed the Italian authorities as the only remaining ones they could rely on.

3] The acting chief seized the opportunity offered to him by count Frossard to save two Jewish women (cit.). This was the right time for Palatucci to tamper with the files relating to Jews, as others did in Rome, Ancona, La Spezia, Trieste… Palatucci did not destroy the archive as it has been erroneously claimed, for that would have been a blatant evidence of guilt. The archive was not destroyed and even  photographed. Palatucci’s course of action was testified in a letter written by the Jewish engineer Carl Selan[79] to monsignor Giuseppe Maria Palatucci (10 March 1954). In it, Selan affirms to have “warned Giovanni to beware” already starting from 1943, “begging him to leave Fiume”, for the arrival of the Germans could put his future in jeopardy. But it did not happen: “He reflected a little but said he could not do it”.[80]

Issues with various interlocutors (April 1944)

In the meanwhile, the situation was falling apart. For this reason, on 26 April 1944 Palatucci wrote a to the Chief of Police Eugenio Cerruti report, which he copied to the Ministry of Interior Affairs.[81] The report contains an explicit complaint:

«(…) The action of the German police continues to be exercised very often on a wide scale and carried out with extreme severity and absolute lack of regard for individual liberty.  Starting from last 29 June, a roundup has affected hundreds of persons – some speak of 650 people – who were indiscriminately arrested in the middle of the night, in many cases simply to carry out routine police checks in the absence of any evidence of guilt. Out of those who were arrested, some – actually, but only a handful – were released; the rest with all probability were sent to Germany or to other jails. The hunt must have been extremely successful considering that the commander of the  “Sicherheitspolizei” asked me, at the beginning of the month, to search for a place to be transformed into a new prison.

Nothing can be done to counter the abuse and mistreatment of Italian citizens because the Italian authorities are entirely kept out of the operations, prevented from coordinating police action with the Questura, or involved by providing information[82], often motivated by personal revenge (militia and P.F.R.). As for the prefect, who could exercise a moderating influence and offer protection, is entirely passive out of lack of temperament or attached to the job for personal motives as is clearly becoming clear. My action and protestations in favour of Italian citizens who have been unlawfully arrested and of protecting Questura agents have so far not even had the honour of a reply  (…)».[83] 

The operation aimed at eliminating Palatucci

As time went by Palatucci’s superiors did not formalise charges against him. Palatucci’s dealings with persecuted people (Jewish men and women and other people kept under surveillance in Fiume) were being monitored. The Jewish scholar Teodoro Morgani wrote[84]: “The Germans already suspected him. Based on the reports of the political section of the Questura, RSI authorities believed he was ‘a likely confidante’ of the Jews”. [85] He was kept under surveillance by various authorities that watched over his movements and monitored what was going on in the Questura. Yet, research by various scholars have oddly not gone beyond this point. Palatucci had poignantly written to the Chief of Police Cerruti: “(…) I heard that the Questura was being targeted by the 3^rd rgt. Milizia territoriale (G.N.R.), taking the cue from commander Globočnik (…).”[86]  And he had even confided: “(…) I am running a huge risk, Fely, and I realise I am becoming ever more untrusting. I no longer even trust my closest friends. You may find it odd, but the feeling is growing in me that it will be a friend who will betray me (…)”.[87]

After having undergone a number of inspections, the acting commissario was finally undone by the methods of the time. The informant [88] was in all likelihood a Questura employee, who was close to Palatucci.[89] The historian Renzo De Felice (1929-1996) wrote: «(…) It should be recalled that Giovanni Palatucci’s footsteps were being followed by law enforcers led by a zealous Italian policeman, who never had any charges brought against him after the Liberation».[90]

The arrest on 13 September 1944

In the night of 13 September 1944, Nazi authorities ordered the Sicherheitpolizei, the German security police, to break into Palatucci’s private residence to arrest him. As erroneously claimed, the orders for Palatucci’s arrest were not given by lieutenant colonel Herbert Kappler.[91] It wasn’t just any ordinary search. The arrest target was the acting chief of the Questura and the charges had to be serious if they were to hold. In this light, no mention was made regarding the commissario’s close links with Jews. Admitting this would have represented a fatal self-accusation, all that was required in Palatucci’s case was to single out evidence – possibly a forbidden piece of political writing – that could be used against him without having to rely on ‘witnesses’. Palatucci was consequently “charged” with high treason.[92]

Information disclosed by the secret service on the arrest 

News of the arrest spread quickly. Tito’s secret police got wind of it as can be read in The fortnightly report of the Department of People’s Defence (OZNA[93]) for Istria: “(…) According to information we received, he (= Palatucci) was arrested for having attempted / wanting to save a group of Jews, whom he holds in special sympathy”.[94]

Torture

The acting commissario was interrogated with the methods reserved to traitors.[95] His position was made even more serious by a number of aggravating factors, including that of being a public officer, of having repeatedly lied, of maintaining links with people considered enemies of the Reich, of adopting in wartime a line of conduct hostile to the government. Tortured[96], he made no names. He did not give the names of colleagues or people who opposed the Nazi and RSI regimes. Nor did he give the names of Jews.[97] Significantly, his capture was not followed up by any other arrest.[98] Palatucci was replaced by the deputy commissario Giuseppe Hamerl (born in 1901), [99] who after fleeing to Venice briefed his superiors of the situation in Fiume (11 June 1945).[100]

Detention at the ‘Coroneo’ and the final deportation

For the crime committed in wartime by the former acting chief of the Questura of Fiume, a sham trial would be held, inevitably ending in a guilty verdict punishable by death. During the German occupation of the Carnaro, alongside the SS, there operated a special court martial.[101] Many believe it was this military court that condemned him to death.[102] Following the trial, Palatucci was transferred to Trieste. According to the entry list of the Coroneo detention centre, Palatucci, like many other non-Jews, was held in the city prison as shown on the commemorative slab. The research carried out so far provides no evidence that Palatucci transited the Risiera San Sabba, the former rice-husking facility where Jews were gathered before being sent on cattle cars to Auschwitz and where partisan combatants were held, tortured for information and murdered.

The detention of the former acting chief of the Questura of Fiume lasted approximately one month, [103] which was unusual considering the outcome of the trial. Evidence has emerged that attempts were made to save his life, as stated in the letter Giovanni Palatucci’s father – Felice – wrote on 25 August 1950 to countess Gerda Frossard. We quote the following from the letter:  

«My noblest Countess, I have received your most kind and much appreciated letters, and I am left with no words to express my heartfelt gratitude for the memory you cherish of my son. Allow me, before all else, to express the most profound condolences for the demise of your husband, and share your sorrow. I know your husband was my son’s paternal friend and helped him greatly in Trieste when he was in the hands of those barbaric Germans (…). I would like to take this occasion to humbly ask you a very kind favour. In my son’s personal file, kept at the personnel department of the Police in Rome, there are important documents which were sent by the Prefect of Fiume at the time when my dear son was transferred to the detention centre in Trieste and the command wanted to execute him. An execution that was stayed thanks to the intervention of that great man who was your husband with the German military command.

This circumstance would be of great honour to my son and would be held in the highest consideration by the Ministry, as a high-ranking police officer told me some two months ago. Clearly, this piece of information is of utmost importance to me, and I therefore kindly ask you the courtesy of writing a letter in which you outline these facts. These documents highlight my son’s dedication to Country and to the Police, besides his interest for the future arrangement of the city of Fiume. Should this be tampered with, I would at least know what is missing (…)”.[104]

It was indeed the count Marcel Frossard de Saugy who took action to save Palatucci’s life. His calls were heeded by the Nazis because the count was not only a prominent businessman but also because he was the husband of Gerda (cit.), a German aristocrat belonging to the family of the barons von Bülow.

Gerda’s father Adam von Bülow Ditrik was a minority shareholder in Companhia Antarctica Paulista, a key player in the process of modernisation underway in Brazil. It should also be observed that prior to the outbreak of World War II, Brazil had set up contacts with Nazi Germany, paving the way for economic ties between the two countries. Brazil, it should also be recalled, was home to the largest Nazifascist party outside Europe.[105] It was therefore quite likely that business links existed between the von Bülows and the leadership in Berlin.

Some observations

The report drafted by the OZNA spy is of crucial historic interest for a number of reasons. Twice, the report mentions Palatucci’s offer to help the Jews. The document also mentions an anglophile streak in him.

It is likely the spy was referring to Kappler’s “official” statement. The OVRA chief is also mentioned in the report, but this piece of information is irrelevant because the secret police was always in contact with local police headquarters, where a political section was operational. The spy then describes Palatucci as a man who loved luxury and prone to squandering money.

Text in Croatian and Italian of the OZNA report of 25 December 1944, pg. 1, point 1.

Transcription and translation by prof Mihály Szentmártoni.

 In this regard, the report fails to mention a number of facts. Palatucci used to dress up properly, and did not want to follow his colleagues who often wore clothes that did not suit their role as public officials. It was therefore a question of personal and institutional dignity. As for money, his spending is recorded in his accounts where there is no evidence of improper, excessive or costly habits.

Dachau (October 1944)

Palatucci was handed over on 18 October 1944 by the Coroneo prison guards to the SS, who were in charge for his “Transportation.” [106] He was transferred to the Konzentrationslager (KZL) of Dachau. He arrived at the camp on 22 October 1944. His identification number, tattooed on his arm, was 117826. Assigned to block 25, he was an Italian national political deportee. He wore a uniform featuring a small red triangle with the letter “I” in the middle. As Gianni Fazzini[107] explained, Palatucci had been interned and classified as “Sch” (abbreviation for ‘Schutzhaft’ or protective custody. It was a status applicable to a number of cases, all relating to treason. In this light, it is most likely that the former acting chief of the Questura had been arrested not for having conspired with the enemy but for having aided the persecuted of the time.[108] 

Several inmates have testified to having encountered Palatucci at Dachau, namely signor Giuseppe Gregorio Gregori [109], who shared the detention barracks, and dottor Feliciano Ricciardelli, who saw him at the infirmary [110]. On 10 February 1945, the former acting chief of the Questura of Fiume died. While his death may have been caused by an epidemic typhus outbreak, the possibility that he may have been killed by the Germans with a lethal injection should not be entirely left out of the reckoning, [111] also because the epidemy struck other barracks but not Palatucci’s.

Palatucci’s body was dumped in a trench dug in Leitenberg hill,[112] seventy-eight days before the liberation of the camp by the Allies. Palatucci’s parents would receive news of his death only in 1948. On 9 April of that same year, the funeral of the former acting chief of the Questura of Fiume was held.

The historical investigation on the informants

An investigation has been carried over time on the various secret networks of informants that operated in Fiume. For example, an OVRA operative was Alfredo Cimadori (agent n. 492).[113] Also active in Fiume was Tito’s network of covert agents.[114] In this regard,  Marino Micich, secretary of Società di Studi Fiumani, and other scholars, have pointed out that some of Palatucci’s closest aides were spared by the OZNA, Tito’s secret police, on 4 May 1945, while the other ninety agents of the Questura of Fiume were killed and their bodies thrown in foibas around Grobnico and Costrena. [115] Regarding the tragic end of these agents, there is the testimony of the daughter of Luigi Bruno, a police agent from Caltanissetta who had previously served at the Questura of Bologna. Signora Anna Maria has called the attention on a colleague of her father’s, a “Judas”, she said, who on 4 May 1945 came to their house to accompany Bruno to the Questura. While Bruno came back home, the other agents simply vanished.[116]

Following Palatucci’s death, and notwithstanding the fascist purging process that was underway, police officers and agents of the time did not disclose information on their former acting chief who had died at Dachau. This line of conduct was motivated by the need to keep silent about the grievous events that had unfortunately occurred at the Questura involving individuals who had collaborated, given information or made unspeakable deals. To speak positively about Palatucci would have necessarily meant revealing the misdeeds of other colleagues.

The occupation of Fiume by Tito’s partisans (May 1945)

On 3 May [117], Riccardo Gigante [118], Giuseppe Sincich[119], [120] and others were eliminated. The militias were received at the Questura by Francesco Antonio Maione [121], at that time brigadier who had worked with Palatucci. Thanks to his intervention, three agents and the deputy commissario Mario Battilomo[122] were released. Partisan operations led to the arrest and disappearance of Gregorio Bettin,[123] the chairman of the Fiume provincial committee of the Italian Reed Cross.

Notes of the War Ministry (June, 1945)

On 19 June 1945, the private office of the undersecretary of state of the Ministry of state sent to colonel Agrifoglio, [124] head of Ufficio I, Rome, the following message:

“Memorandum for col. Agrifoglio. RE: information on PALATUCCI Giovanni.

H.E. General Chatrian[125] would be very grateful if information can be had on dottor PALATUCCI, son of Felice, functionary of the Questura of Fiume. The Malner family, where Palatucci resided, should be able to provide some information (via Pomerio - 29 - Fiume). In hoping to receive a kind reply, I thank you most sincerely. Best regards”.

On 23 June 1945, a new message was sent to the Ministry in the name and on behalf of major  Giuseppe Dotti, head of sezione a.p.s.. It was addressed to Centro Contro Spionaggio (C.S.), the counter-espionage centre of Trieste. The following is the text: “Provide detailed information on dottor PALATUCCI Giovanni, son of Felice, functionary of the Questura of Fiume. The Malner family, where Palatucci resided, should be able to provide some information (via Pomerio - 29 – Fiume)”.[126] The file concerning dottor Palatucci (‘Information on Palatucci Giovanni’, year 1945) that is kept at the Historical Archive of the Army has no additional document on the subject.[127]

Information provided by Raffaele Cantoni (August, 1945)

London hosted from 19 through 23 August 1945, a Special European Conference of the World Jewish Congress.[128] As erroneously claimed, it wasn’t the 2^nd World Jewish Congress, because that took place in Montreux in 1948. One of the Italian representatives attending the Conference was the accountant Raffaele Cantoni (1896-1971). [129] A former Fiume legionary, he had been in contact in Geneva with the Jewish World Congress since 1936. He was an officer of DELASEM (Delegation for the Assistance of Jewish Emigrants) and a Freemason. Politically close to the socialists, he was a staunch Zionist. On January 1944, he fled to Switzerland where he stayed until the end of the war. It was here that he came into contact with exponents of the Jewish World Congress and partisan groups operating in northern Italy.

After the war, he was elected chairman of UCEI, the Union of Italian Jewish Communities. Clearly, Cantoni wasn’t a marginal figure.

During the above-mentioned conference, he provided an overview of the situation in Italy, underlining criticalities and specificities and outlining the initiatives carried out for the Jews, including the assistance to Jewish refugees.[130] It was at this point that he recalled the routes that were established to bring the persecuted to safety, including the ‘Fiume canal’,[131] and the names of those who helped, including the acting chief of the Questura of Fiume, who died at Dachau.

As for the north-eastern regions of Italy, who provided information to Cantoni and the other Jews? The allies who met in Switzerland? The partisans?  The Holocaust survivors? DELASEM local contacts? Information was most certainly not provided by the Sušak rabbi Otto Deutsch, [132] who had died in a mental asylum at Nocera Inferiore in 1943. Information may have been given by the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee.[133] Or maybe by the Jew Lelio Vittorio Valobra,[134] who was acquainted with the situation in the Carnaro.  After having transferred funds amounting to three million liras to Genoa in the weeks prior to his escape to Switzerland, Valobra in the period between January and June 1944, dispatched a further 27 million liras to Genoa and one-million lira to both Fiume and Milan.[135]

Research has so far shown that it is likely Cantoni gathered information from the persecuted who had made it to Switzerland, and probably from allied military forces involved in intelligence gathering operations.[136] Other persons too, besides this influential figure of the Jewish community, were directly involved in identifying escape routes. One such person, for example, was signor Settimio Sorani (1899-1982), a member of the Jewish Community of Rome.

Settimio Sorani’s remarks

Head of the Roman section of DELASEM from 1941 to 1943, Sorani was a key figure of the Jewish resistance. After the end of the war, he became a prominent leader of Zionist organisations. He was in charge of immigration at the Legation of the State of Israel in Rome from 1948 to 1952, and successively director of the Italian branch of Keren Hayesod, the United Israel Appeal, an official fundraising organization for the Zionist movement worldwide that works in coordination with the Jewish Agency for Israel. From 16 October 1955 to 31 December 1964, Sorani was appointed head of the Jewish community of Florence. In 1967, he finished writing his memoirs which, as a consequence of a number of publishing issues, were printed only in 1983, after his death which took place in Florence. He was not a diplomat and expressed blunt criticism on the Vatican. The Fondo Settimio Sorani is kept at the Fondazione Centro di Documentazione Ebraica Contemporanea (Center of Contemporary Jewish Documentation – CDEC). He mentions episodes in his memoirs that are of our interest.

On the situation in Fiume, he wrote: «As for the Jews in Fiume and Sussa, there is little information and that too inaccurate in terms of both dates and number of people. On 16 August 1941, the Secretary of the Community in Florence Signor Francesco Cantori[137] phoned Rome imploring an intervention on the part of the Ministry to ensure that refugees in the area were not sent back to Croatia. There were some 400 refugees, but many of them, as prescribed by law, did not report to the registry office nor to the Questura. Others fled hoping to get to Trieste illegally. They were as if mad, and to escape deportation – for they knew what that meant – they were willing to face the gravest of risks, many of them falling victims to profiteers who in return of exorbitant compensation promised to bring them to safety.

It was following this telephone call that the author of these notes drafted a document for Dante Almansi [138] asking him to intervene with the Ministry. This manuscript may actually be dated a year later, for it contains a remark on the decision to refuse entry to Jewish refugees, who were forced back to Croatia. Such decision was enforced notwithstanding the fact that the Questore dottor Genovese [139] knew that those who were so ruthlessly refused entry would be facing a certain and most horrible death. In fact, it was a decision that may have been taken just for this reason. In another uncertainly dated memorandum, the author returns on this topic, insisting that the tragic decision of driving back in Croatia the Jewish refugees be suspended. This memorandum may be dated July ’42 (…)». [140]

Reference to Giovanni Palatucci

In his memories, signor Sorani explicitly mentioned Giovanni Palatucci, outlining what he did.

«Fiume.
(…) They – the Jews – received a prompt, spontaneous and invaluable help from an officer of the Royal Questura. This man was Giovanni Palatucci, head of the Ufficio Stranieri (…). Dottor Palatucci was, among other things, a devout Catholic and was convinced that civil laws should not override the supreme laws of humanity. When he became aware that in his hands of government official in charge of the control and invigilation of foreigners lay the fate of the Jews of Fiume, he did not hesitate to act according to his conscience as Christian and Italian. Without his involvement, the options of the Fiume patriots would have been very limited.

Holding absolute sway in Fiume, in his role as prefect, was a close aide of Mussolini’s, one Temistocle Testa, the very same person Mussolini, following the landing of the Allies in Sicily, had hastily dispatched to Palermo as Plenipotentiary High Commissioner in the hope of mending what appeared to be a desperate situation by relying on the repressive skills of the trusted henchman who had caused grief and ruin in the province of Fiume and nearby territories.[141]

Testa had categorically ordered the Questura to persecute the Jews. Dottor Palatucci took it upon himself to countervail the orders: he allowed those Jewish refugees who would have been deported to leave Fiume in small groups. Officially, he made sure they were untraceable and provided them with forged IDs [142] where they resulted as “Arians”. He would successively send them to an uncle of his, a bishop in a southern diocese, who would find them safe havens across the country, especially in Abruzzo or Molise, where the racially persecuted could find hospitality in the guise of war refuges (…).

Although it was a fact well known that Jews were being persecuted in Italy following the enactment of the race laws, Jews kept clandestinely coming to Fiume in their attempt to flee occupied Europe. The trickle became a flood following the Nazifascist invasion of Yugoslavia, which greatly put at risk the foreign Jews who had previously sought refuge. While a part of the Croatian state that was set up was occupied for strategic reasons by the Italian II Army Corps, the local authorities reported to the government that had adopted Hitler’s race policies, consequently unleashing a heinous war against the Jews in that area. No option was therefore left to the Jews but to escape through what was known as the “Fiume canal”. Prefect Testa, who also acted as State Commissioner, had taken measures aimed at leading the Jews escaping from Croatia into a trap. But thanks to the cooperation of soldiers and officers of the II Army, the ploy failed as the refugees escaped through the “Fiume canal”, whose existence was known in circles close to the II Army Corps. [143]

Information about the succour given by soldiers and officers of the II Army Corps to fleeing Jews was first disclosed, during the first World Jewish Conference held in London in August 1945, by the delegate Raffaele Cantoni, who revealed that some 5,000 Jews had been saved by them… After 8 September 1943, the conditions in Fiume changed… The C.L.N. of Fiume urged dottor Palatucci to remain in his place so as to ensure that the “canal” continued to be operational … That is how dottor Palatucci became ‘dottor Danieli’ of Movimento di Liberazione Nazionale.[144] After 8 September, the II Army Corps left Yugoslav territory, which was occupied in time by Tito’s partisans, Croatian Ustashas and Germans. In October 1943, the Germans moved in against the Fiume Jews … The measures Palatucci immediately put in place to fend off the German and fascist attack (…) blunted the action set in motion by the SS and the political office against the Jews.

In the meanwhile, he prompted the Jews who were still in the city to move out so that, at the end, most of the Jews in Fiume escaped death. Only those who hesitated, hoping for the mercy of the barbarians, died. In September 1944, Palatucci was taken away by the cops of the RSI Questura (…) in 1945 he was deported to Germany in a camp where he died in mid-April as the victorious and glorious Anglo-American and Soviet armies were nearing (…)».[145]

The ‘Fiume canal’

In the passage quoted above, the Fiume canal is mentioned three times. This has led historians to look closer into what it really was about and to identify the people who were behind it. What has emerged is very interesting. The investigation has, for example, brought to light the role played by father Paolino (Cesarino Beltrame Quattrocchi: 1909-2008). An aspiring Benedictine monk from as early as 1924, father Paolino was the military chaplain of the V Raggruppamento GAF (Frontier Guards) in Fiume from 1941 to 8 September 1943, at the time when the prefect was Temistocle Testa (cit.). [146] The priest was involved in the running of a network helping Croatian Jews to escape to Italy. After 8 September, he started transferring Jews directly from Fiume to Parma, but was soon uncovered by the Germans who went after him in Dalmatia. Padre Paolino was forced to seek refuge in Trieste where he found shelter in the house of Colonel Mario Ponzo of the Corps of Naval Engineering.[147] The writer of this work had the opportunity to interview the sister of father Paolino, Enrica (aka Enrichetta; 1914-2012; Servant of God), before she died in her Roman residence at via Depretis.

Acknowledgements of Palatucci’s merits

A street was named after the former acting chief of the Fiume Questura at Ramat Gan, near Tel Aviv (1953), and several trees were planted in his honour. These acknowledgements were made in the presence of Jews whose transfer to Italy had been overseen by Palatucci and his bishop uncle (Giuseppe Maria). Attending were also those who recalled the dramatic events linked to the ship Aghia Zoni (March 1939).

The historical research successively carried out on the Aghia Zoni relied on a number of sources including the diary of the guide Alfons Goldman who was hired by the Jewish Agency (Vienna and Zurich sections), the captain’s log, the registers of the Port Captaincy and the Fiume prefettura, the passengers’ list, and a photograph. The following facts have emerged – corroborated by additional information gathered by the author of this work from Yad Vashem researchers[148] – on the steamer. By request of a Jewish agency, a ship was hired in 1939 for the transportation to Palestine of a specific number of Jews. On its arrival in Fiume, the steamer was sequestered on the grounds that it was unfit for passenger travel (lack of hygienic facilities, absence of lifeboats, inadequate space to host the agreed number of refugees). As a consequence, the project appeared to be doomed. Not least because the Fascist regime had set the deadline of 12 March 1939 for the completion of the operation. Repairs nevertheless needed to go ahead and the ship was therefore moved to the nearby port of Abbazia. In the meanwhile, the Jews were housed for weeks in cargo storerooms. But there was a further twist to the story. Other Jews reached the port seeking to be included in the passengers’ list. And to make things worse, some of them were offered a place on board in exchange of money or valuables. Before long the situation had spiralled out of control. Against this background, Palatucci, who was in charge of the Ufficio stranieri [149] was called in to work out a solution, also because his superiors were already pushing back some of the Jews. He had to talk to all parties and his task was made all the more difficult by the fact that the ship wasn’t big enough for the all the Jews gathered on the pier. At the end though, Palatucci somehow managed to salvage a situation that had looked desperate, and the Aghia Zoni could finally set sail on 17 March 1939, past the deadline set by Mussolini. In recent times, Palatucci action has been considered ‘marginal’, practically insignificant. But for those who made it to Palestine, the memory of Palatucci has remained vivid and not been forgotten.

Palatucci was later awarded in 1955 a gold medal by the Italian Union of Jewish Communities. In that same year, the Jewish antifascist, the Florence-born Antonio Luksich Jamini (1902-1988),[150]  wrote an article entitled “The rescue of the Jews of Fiume during the nazifascist persecution”[151] where he mentions the former acting chief of the Questura of Fiume. The title of Righteous Among the Nations was successively conferred to Palatucci in 1990 by the Yad Vashem memorial to the victims of the Holocaust. Other initiatives and studies by Jewish authors have followed.[152]

Information disclosed in 2013

In 2013, Centro ‘Primo Levi’ informed the media – not historians – that «Giovanni Palatucci was a willing executor of the racial legislation». The information was disclosed by Natalia Indrimi, director of the Centro but not a Palatucci scholar, in a letter written in 2013 to the New York Times. «After taking the oath to Mussolini’s Social Republic, [Palatucci] collaborated with the Nazis», the Centro revealed, adding that his deportation was not related to saving Jews but to German accusations of treason for passing plans to the British for the post-war independence of Fiume. As for Giovanni’s uncle, the bishop mons. Giuseppe Maria Palatucci (1892-1961; conventual Franciscan), who with his nephew protected Jews, the judgement is even harsher. Indrimi and her Centro claim that it was indeed the bishop himself who in 1952 constructed the “the myth” surrounding Palatucci when he used the story “to persuade the Italian government to provide a pension for Giovanni Palatucci’s parents.».

Reaction to the allegations  

The claims made by Centro ‘Primo Levi’ surprised many even in Israel, and for many reasons.

1. Historical research on Fiume and Palatucci’s actions were not commissioned by the Centro but by Italian scholars (1995). The initiative received a lukewarm response and little echo on the media, therefore someone in New York decided to return on the subject, this time more forcefully.

2. The significant number of ‘unpublished’ documents were, in fact, well known to historians. The principal source of information continues to be to this day the online data base of the Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, where the records of the over four-hundred Jewish victims in Fiume are kept. The Nazis all but destroyed the community, which was made up of some five-hundred individuals. By entering ‘Fiume’ in the space reserved to their place of residence, the names of the people who were brutally murdered appear, with their age and other personal data. Many of these documents have also been studied by the Rijeka Archive.

3. It is well known that those who operated in favour of the Jews did all they could to avoid attracting suspicion or attention and to avert controls, censure and informants, leaving nothing on record. For this reason, the research on the Palatucci has not highlighted his merits.

4. His humanitarian initiatives were never carried out on his own. He always relied on third parties. Therefore, an investigation on his character and actions without taking account of the humanitarian network he worked with would not be a historically accurate method.

5. While some of the humanitarian initiatives were successful, others succeeded only partially or even failed as testified in the document the author of this work discovered with the help of the prefect of Trieste and the head of the State Archives of Trieste.[153] Now, this has all been documented. Researchers are also well aware of the distressing activity of those who speculated on the misfortunes of others (sea and border crossings), and of those, namely mountain guides, who made murderous pacts with the Nazi authorities.

6. It is not possible to calculate the number of people – and there were several – Palatucci saved [154]. Some scholars have tried to do it with the help of archivists, historians, exponents of the Jewish community and witnesses of the time. Research carried out in this area has brought to light the concurrent presence of variables. Considering also that the conclusion of a number of events are uncertain, it is best to be very prudent in calculating the exact number of Jews saved.

7. The oaths taken to state organisms at the time of an all-out conflict did not necessarily imply full ideological compliance. Often, but not always, taking an oath was more simply a ploy allowing one to continue working overtly or covertly in specific places.

8. Documents kept in various archives (London and Washington) show that the British were aware of the autonomist movement that was based in Fiume. Claims concerning Palatucci’s key role in questions concerning the autonomy of the local territory would therefore appear to be weak.

9. Palatucci’s use of non-authorised channels concerned, in reality, various institutions, as revealed in the diaries of survivors. In particular, Kappler’s telex of 10 January 1945), as recalled by the police chief of the time Eugenio Cerruti, who was in turn informed by the prefect Spalatin, [155] referred to «contacts with the enemy information service». No mention is made of issues connected to the local demands for autonomy. The Nazis were not investigating the autonomists – who were instead a priority for Tito – but the network of informants that was also targeting the persecuted, as it would clearly emerge from successive events.

10. Mons. Palatucci, bishop of Campagna (province of Salerno), had flagged his nephew in various circumstances. But not in 1945. Only after. The first initiative in favour of Palatucci was carried out by members of the Jewish community.

11. There operated at Campagna an internment camp consisting of two army barracks, the San Bartolomeo (formerly a Dominican convent) and the Immacolata Concezione (formerly the cloister of the Order of Friars Minor). It was here that the Palatuccis tried to transfer a number of Jews. [156] The local archives, as well as the museum, show the differences that existed between this camp and other internment centres in the north. On 29 October 1941, the secretary of the Fascist National Party (Partito Nazionale Fascista – PNF) Adelchi Serena (1895-1970) wrote a letter to the then police chief lamenting the «excess of freedom given to the Jewish internees held at the Campagna concentration camp» demanding, consequently, that «measures be taken on the part of the police».

12. The documents in the Fiume Archives relating to the period after 8 September 1943 are missing. Key documents in Palatucci’s personal file have glaringly been removed. The file contains all the bureaucratic records of his service, including various applications for transfer and leave, the positive assessment of his «excellent moral, political and social conduct, PNF member since 23 March 1928» and the letter of 28 July 1940 announcing his promotion to the rank of vice commissario aggiunto effective 16 May.

13. There is only one document dated after 8 September 1943 in the Fiume archive. It is a letter of 29 February 1944 written by the acting head of the Questura Roberto Tommaselli to Carlo Paknek, German counsellor for the Carnaro province, and copied to the prefect (the letter that was consulted was the one sent to the prefettura, which was protocolled on 3 March). The latter is a complaint where it is pointed out that on 26 February Palatucci had been convened by the German commissariat and interrogated about the possession of a radio set belonging to a Jewish woman (Weisz). In the meantime, a German civilian and agent had gone to his residence to find out more about the radio from the landlady. The police officer was protesting against the disrespectful manner in which a high-ranking functionary of the Italian police had been treated.

An unacceptable conduct

What caused puzzlement about the disclosures of Centro ‘Primo Levi’ was Indrimi’s line of conduct. She initially gave out information in the name of the Institute that morally harmed the figure of Giovanni Palatucci. She then sent a very strong letter to the New York Times. She wrote to the Shoah Museum of Washington, besides giving interviews and releasing statements on the web. In some cases, she claimed to be speaking personally in others as expressing the official position of the Centro. When historians requested to view the documents considered by the Centro to be essential in the case against Palatucci, Indrimi first said that anyone could consult them in the public archives. Then she declared such documents could not be released yet because they were still being studied and translated. Also, she said, the accompanying essays had not been completed and that they dealt with other figures besides Palatucci. Following an initial exchange of messages, Indrimi interrupted all communication with the author of this work. 

14. Some historians believe the documents that are missing from the Fiume archives may be at the military archive in Belgrade, where other documents of the Questura and Prefettura of Fiume, as well as part of the SIM files, are kept. It should be observed that over the years Belgrade has not been too keen about conducting research on Palatucci.

15. From a cursory investigation by the Fiume historian Lijubinka Karpowicz[157] of the collections in the Belgrade archive that are accessible to researchers, it would appear that only one consultation request has ever been made, specifically on 25 November 1946, one year and nine months after the death of Palatucci. The antifascist Committee of the 259^th POW battalion in fact requested Belgrade to find out «if comrade Palatucci Giovanni, son of Felice, is a prisoner in Yugoslavia, in which camp or if he has been returned ». A handwritten note dated 2 December gave this order: «Satisfy the request from this antifascist committee and then respond.».

Taking distance

In the light of this new situation, a significant number of Shoah scholars (Di Francesco, Doino jr., Giusti, Guiducci, Malini, Napolitano, Picariello, Preziosi, Viroli, and others) intervened to re-examine the sources, while Jewish researchers (de Canino, Foa, Murmelstein and others) wrote books and articles defending the memory of Giovanni Palatucci. It was widely felt that Centro Primo Levi shouldn’t have accused a person who died in a concentration camp at the age of 36 without having at the same time published all related-documents. To this day, the Centro has not published in a comprehensive way the hundreds of documents it claims to possess. What has also clearly emerged is Indrimi’s agitated conduct. Her words describing Palatucci were violent and defamatory, contrary therefore to the balanced approach of the Jewish scholar prof. Marco Coslovich[158] and the historian prof Michele Sarfatti, director of the Milan-based Center of Contemporary Jewish Documentation –Cdec Onlus).[159]

An page from a memo written by Antonio Luksich Jamini which was discovered by prof Guiducci:  “(…) The Jews who were actively part of our freedom struggle and have for this reason lost their lives have been recorded in our lists. the Milchs, father and son, who were in hiding, protected by dottor Palatucci, fell in the hands of the SS of Fiume after a dispute with the son of the correspondent of the Trieste daily Il Piccolo Lucifero Mastini, who was still a fascist, regarding the apartment of the Milchs that Mastini wanted to occupy because it belonged to Jews».

Research by Jews

The most serious allegation against Palatucci was in connection of his denunciation, following a request cabled by the Questura of Ravenna on 23 May 1944, of a Jewish family hiding under a false name. According to Centro Primo Levi, Palatucci should have responded by saying the family did not reside in Fiume and that it was not known by his office and therefore unlisted in his office’s registry. Instead this was how the response was drafted: «They are stateless Fiume Jews who are untraceable here and identified with the names of…». The note containing the personal data of each family member was signed «On behalf of the acting chief of the Questura Palatucci».

On 23 May 1944, Palatucci had been appointed acting chief of the Questura for under two months. It was not difficult to see that he was under surveillance, and just over three months later he was arrested. The telegram received by the Questura of Fiume was not addressed ‘reserved-personal’ to Palatucci. As the cable had consequently been seen by others, the acting chief could not lie by denying that the names of the Jewish family were listed in the police records and in the registry. Consequently, an answer given “On behalf of the acting chief” inevitably contained the personal data that was available in the records. In addition, the only apparently “urgent” message was dated 23 May 1944, while the family had already been arrested on 4 May. But there was also another fact that should be considered. To declare someone as “untraceable” at that time meant complicating investigations even further. At a time when Fiume was surrounded by hostile forces and in desperate shortage of investigating officers, it was difficult to imagine how anyone could be pursued with any degree of thoroughness.

The help from non-resident Jews

There is then another point the Centro Primo Levi downplays. Giovanni Palatucci was in charge of the foreign nationals’ department and therefore interacted principally with non-resident Jews. Operations concerning local residents were assigned to personally who got their information from the registry office. The work was methodical and based on gathering information, on checks, on complicities and fear. Key tools for an accurate historical research would be the database of the Questura file of the Fiume State Archive as well as other archives, such as that of Trieste.

Unreliable witnesses?

Another aspect too shouldn’t be neglected. Centro Primo Levi members rejected all testimonies in favour of Palatucci, including the findings of the research Commissions that was set up in Milan.[160] Some interesting witnesses have emerged. Among whom:

˗ Franco Avallone, son of Raffaele Avallone (1900-1945). Raffaele, born at Vietri sul Mare (Salerno), was a police agent who met Palatucci in Genoa and worked with him in Fiume. Avallone, who aided Palatucci in running covert operations in favour of Jews, was thrown in a foiba at the age of 45.[161]

- Americo Cucciniello (1920-2004), police agent born in Avellino, was Palatucci’s driver. He collaborated in running “non-official” operations in favour of Jews. [162] In his testimony, he recalled aiding the families of Alberto Dragoner and Umberto Herzoch. Another operation involved the Sachs. The family comprised signora Lilli, her brother Borio and the son of a daughter of hers who had married Igor, a Polish airman with the RAF. Cucciniello testified that Palatucci ordered him to drive the Sachs to Cavaglià, near Vercelli. He also spoke of an operation involving another Jewish family who had gone underground in Ravenna. It was Cucciniello who took the family to Bergamo, where a trusted person, the commissario Carmelo Mario Scarpa,[163] was waiting for them.

The information provided by Cucciniello is significant and currently still being studied because it provides news about the contacts between Palatucci and Otto Deutsch, the rabbi of the Jewish community at Sušak, about the forging of documents and about Lieutenant Wagner of the SS in Fiume, who would commit suicide in prison.

˗ Alberino Palumbo (1924-2007), police agent born at Neviano (Lecce), who was Palatucci’s attendant. In his testimony, he vividly recalled the marescialli Lenzi, Atzori, Chiavalli, the brigadier Capuozzo, the deputy brigadier Buricchi and dottor Tommaselli. He took part in ‘non-official’ operations to help Jews. He helped Jews who were on the run by taking them to Borgomarina, Santa Lucia, Tersatto, Buccari-Buccarizza, Mattuglie, Laurana. He delivered a box containing compromising matter to the island of Lussinpiccolo (Lussino). He also mentioned that there was a significant number of forged documents going around and believed a clandestine network was active in the municipality. He recalled food being delivered to the persecuted and pointed out, significantly, to the existence of a committee of Jews that liaised with Palatucci in issuing Questura permits and organising escapes. [164]

- Miriana Tramontina, born in Fiume in 1934. She became aware of operations aimed at protecting Jews in which Palatucci was involved from her mother Paola Tramontina (née de Luca) and from her aunt Feliciana Tremari (née de Luca, born in 1912, director of ONMI). In her testimony, Miriana cited a number of cases: the Scherer family (seven persons), the Zupicic family (six persons), the Corner family (twelve persons), the Katalinić family (five persons), and others.[165]

- Alberto Remolino (1917-2006), born at Campagna (Salerno), was a conscripted soldier, enlisted in the 26^th infantry regiment in Fiume, where he stayed until June 1945. A tailor by profession, he facilitated the contacts between Giovanni Palatucci in Fiume and the latter’s uncle, the bishop in Campagna. It appears from existing evidence that Remolino put himself at risk during the war acting as an intermediary in several humanitarian actions.[166]

Other witnesses. Giuseppe Veneroso

Born near Pisciotta (Salerno), Giuseppe Veneroso (1921-2009) joined the Guardia di Finanza, and at eighteen was posted on the Italo-Yugoslav border, at Buccari. Enlisted in the Sušak Brigade from 1 May 1941 to 8 September 1943, he witnessed that fleeing Jews were helped locally.[167] «At both checkpoints – the main one at the port of Buccari and the secondary one at Buccarizia where the land border with Croatia is located – I perfectly recall seeing in those long nights police agents leading groups of civilians to the check-points to allow them to expatriate quietly. They were all carrying permits issued by the then commissario, and we all knew they were Jews on the run».[168] Veneroso’s testimony is important for two main reasons. Firstly, because it sheds light on the links between Palatucci and two of his superiors: “major Fortunato and captain Tatonetti”. Veneroso’s claims have been corroborated by the historic and museum department at the Guardia di Finanza headquarters, which confirms that, indeed, major Luigi Fortunato (born in 1892) and captain Alfonso Tatonetti (born in 1904) were in Fiume at that time.[169] There are additionally other details historians are still investigating concerning the guides of the escapees, the episode of two Jewish girls who were killed following an attempted act of violence on the part of two police agents who were successively arrested, and the action on the side of the partisans by agents of the Guardia di Finanza after 8 September 1943.

It should nevertheless be borne in mind that according to the historic and museum department of the Guardia di Finanza these documents should not be considered reliable.

The testimony of Rodolfo Grani

In 1952, a Jew told his story. His name was Rodolfo (Rezso) Grani (Granitz, born in 1885). He had a brother, Edmondo (1896-1945). From their birthplace in Gyor, Hungary, the two brothers moved to Fiume, which was at that time Hungarian. Rodolfo, who had trained as an accountant, was a sales representative.  In 1945, Rodolfo was in Lecce, and relocated to Israel where he founded Associazione di Riconoscenza per Giovanni Palatucci, an Association in recognition of Giovanni Palatucci’s commitment. As for his brother Edmondo, we know he had joined the 5^th US Army with Nicolò Grani, son of Rodolfo, a former Militia officer who had also been interned as a Jew up to 8 September. In early May 1945, wearing American combat fatigues, Nicolò went to Fiume with his uncle Edmondo, where they were arrested by Tito’s partisans, and executed as Italian spies.

To shed light on these events, historians have focused on some of Rodolfo writings published in Tel Aviv, [170] where the author recalls his detention at Campagna. Rodolfo recollects how the Palatuccis (nephew and bishop uncle) helped several Jews, and provides information on Giovanni Palatucci’s links with the bishop of Fiume, mons. Ugo Camozzo (1892-1977).[171]

The historical research on mons. Camozzo

The understanding between mons. Camozzo and dr Palatucci is outlined in the papers that are kept at the Diocesan archives of Rijeka, Pisa and Naples. Two letters written by Camozzo to bishop Palatucci are of particular interest.[172]

The first is dated 11 July 1945. We quote the following passage: «Excellency Most Reverend, I am able to give you news of Dottor Palatucci, Commissario of Police in Fiume. Alas, they are distressing. He was taken, I do not recall when exactly, to the concentration camp of Dachau (Bavaria). It is from there that I receive news of him. A few days ago, three men who were released from the camp came to me. I asked them news of our dear Dottore, and one of them was certain he had died at Dachau. It is something I cannot check or confirm, but can only be sure that the man knew him personally. I could not even ascertain the identity of the man who gave me the news, for he was just on his way to somewhere else and I had never seen him before. I know that the good Dottor Palatucci was interned because his good heart urged him to help whoever he could, especially if they were harassed by the racial laws. He has left of himself a good memory in Fiume, which will be grateful to him (…)».

In the second letter, written on 30 August 1945, Camozzo provides other data: « Excellency Most Reverend, as I informed you previously, Dottor Palatucci Giovanni has been interned by the Germans at Dachau, because, I believe, he tried to mitigate the harshness of the anti-Semitic measures. I received information of him from the concentration camp because we had excellent relations. Then silence. To provide you with a full picture, I must sadly add for Your Excellency’s information that some soldiers who had been released from the camp and were passing by here affirmed that Dottor Palatucci had died at Dachau. I have no other available information, nor am I acquainted with the person who makes this claim. Unfortunately, however, I feel there is truth in the news. Dottor Palatucci has left behind a good memory of himself in Fiume. At such a difficult time, he has been able to help many unfortunate people, and I too have witnessed[173] his human understanding for so much suffering, and his Christian pity (…)».

Nidels Sachs de Grič

There also is the testimony of a lawyer – of baron Niels Sachs de Grič (1892-1975), a Fiume Jew of Hungarian origin[174] who was the trusted attorney of the Fiume Curia. His office was located on via XXX Ottobre, 17. He confirmed that Giovanni Palatucci was in contact with bishop Camozzo. In a letter to bishop Giuseppe Maria Palatucci (25 September 1952), he cited a passage from Giovanni Palatucci: “They want to make us believe that the heart is but a muscle, and they want to prevent us from doing what our heart and religion demand from us”. [175]

An observation

A fact should be well borne in mind from what has been outlined so far. Any historical research requires careful assessment. All the witnesses above have shown a moral conduct that has not been contested by third parties. Nothing has come to them by testifying in favour of Palatucci. Putting their words in doubt may ultimately reveal a degree of mental rigidity if not altogether be indicative of intolerance. Additionally, we shouldn’t neglect the testimonies given by Jews in favour of Palatucci, namely those by Elia Sasson, Israeli ambassador to Italy (Rome, 1953); by the Union of Italian Jewish Communities (1955); by Adolfo Perugia[176], chairman of the Miriam Novitch association; by prof. Anna Foa[177], and others. In particular, this is what the lawyer Paolo Santarcangeli, who knew Palatucci (1987), wrote:

Evidence

Those who were involved with Paltucci in trying to save human lives agree on a number of key issues. For example, the testimonies of several Jews are on record.

˗ Elena Ashkenasy Dafner Rehov and relatives (Yad Vashem; case of Palatucci; Archive of the Righteous Department, file n. 4338). Signed testimony dated 10 July 1988, drafted in Tel Aviv.[179]

- Rozsi Neumann: her testimony was published on the review Israel. This woman and her husband – who had escaped from deportation to Dachau – were Austrians. The couple had attempted to clandestinely enter the Yugoslav territory but were captured by the gendarmerie and handed over to the Questura of Fiume. Incarcerated, they risked deportation to Austria where they faced death. Palatucci visited them in their cell. On Christmas, they were conducted to the Questura, where the commissario, taking all the necessary precautions, offered them lunch. Steps were successively taken allowing the couple to pass the dark hours of anti-Jewish persecutions. Mrs Neumann did not forget Giovanni Palatucci, and in a letter to bishop Palatucci expressed gratitude for the good that was done to her: «(…) my husband and I belong to those Jews who were helped so much by this very noble man». [180]

˗ Salvator Konforti (surname later changed in Italy to Conforty), Sephardi Jew with Spanish roots, and Olga Hamburger, Ashkenazi Jewish woman from Eastern Europe. They were the parents of Renata Conforty, born in Fiume in 1942, who in 2013, at the age of 71, repeated her testimony. After travelling from Zagreb to Ogulin – located at that time in the Italian-occupied zone – Salvator and Olga were illegally taken to Fiume by lieutenant colonel Antonio Bertone[181], who wanted to save them from persecution. Here Bertone entrusted the couple to Palatucci, who not only let them sleep in the Questura attic but also provided them with forged documents. In 1942, the commissario helped the Confortys a second time. He issued documents classifying them 'internati liberi', or free internment civilians, a status that allowed them to ultimately reach a locality near Modena, where they also took the grandparents. [182]

˗ Berger (a family of eight). Although aided, they were arrested at Cremenaga (Varese) on 4 May 1944 as they were making their way into Switzerland, betrayed, as many other Fiume Jews, by the so-called “runners”. The links between these people and Palatucci was the subject of a study carried out by the researcher Aldo Viroli. [183] 

˗ Elizabeth Ferber Quitt (cit.) and her sister Blanca. The following is Elizabeth’s story: «(…) to our surprise, he listed a series of localities we could reach as free internment civilians. We finally opted for Sarnico, on lake Iseo, and dottor Palatucci assured us we would get there. I don’t know how he managed to keep his word, but we just made our way to Sarnico and at the end got there safely. It was not only us he helped but scores of other people». [184]

˗ Carlo Selan, an engineer by profession, and his wife Lotte Eisner. In a letter dated 21 December 1940, Giovanni Palatucci entreated his bishop uncle to help several Jews whom the policeman said were under «my protection». Among them there was Carl Selan who, in 1991, wrote an article from New York in which he said: «My entire family and everyone else who escaped Hitler and the Ustashas found a safe haven in Fiume thanks entirely to the kindness and admirable character of Giovanni. If it hadn’t been for him, very few of us would be alive today». [185]

The Hungarian Shoah

Entering ‘Salerno’ or ‘Altavilla’ in the search engine of the Yad Vashem database, the names of 32 Jewish people appear. Other names appear in a number of documents also kept in the archives of the Memorial. The place of birth recorded in the files and documents is Altavilla Silentina. As the Shoah historian has shown, those persons were part of the Jewish community of Lenti, in Hungary. The community was made up of a total of 52 individuals. (The remaining members of the community were murdered in the Shoah; their names can be singled out by entering ‘Lenti’ in the database). As Pirozzi has discovered, it was Giovanni Palatucci and his bishop uncle who masterminded the rescue of the Jews of Lenti. With the help of Remolino (cit.), mons. Giuseppe Maria Palatucci sent to his nephew several certificates of birth and residence certificates – the exact number is not known – issued by the municipality of Altavilla Silentina (Salerno). Another courier then delivered the certificates to the Jews of Lenti, who in the spring of 1944 used them in a bid to escape to Fiume. The project failed, the Nazis arrested the Jews of Lenti, most of whom were murdered at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

Yad Vashem archive

The Yad Vashem archive also contains the files of Hungarian Jews who resided in other cities other than Lenti – Jews who were in possession of certificates that had been forged by Palatucci and who were tragically murdered in the Nazi death camps. Among them there were Izso Eppinger from Nagykanizsa; Arpad Deutsch from Zalaegerszeg; Jolan Rosenberger from Papa. Considering the operation ‘Altavilla Silentina’ took place in several Hungarian localities, the question arises if its outcome was as what the Palatuccis had expected [?]. One point though is certain. Several Hungarian Jews did make it to Altavilla Silentina, reaching their destination by way of the internment camp of Campagna, the seat of mons. Palatucci’s bishopric. These findings were made by the researcher Oreste Mottola in his book I paesi delle ombre,[186] which is based on the documents kept at the historical archive of the Altavilla Silentina public library. While several expatriation applications to South America and elsewhere were not successful, others allowed the Jews of Campagna and Altavilla to escape persecution. The Centro Primo Levi, too, has acknowledged that the picture emerging from the events at Altavilla Silentina is complex and requires additional investigation.

Bishop Giuseppe Maria Palatucci

The rejection on the part of Centro Primo Levi of Giovanni Palatucci’s action in favour of the Jews also delegitimises his uncle’s testimony. Nevertheless, the correspondence between mons. Palatucci and the authorities of the time (1,276 letters), alongside that with his nephew, testify that a number of Jews, helped by Giovanni Palatucci, reached Campagna, where they received aid for their journey to South America (letters of recommendation signed by the bishop). [187] In this light, a letter written by Giovanni Palatucci on 21 December 1940 is noteworthy.

«My dearest uncle, as usual I am writing to you with haste. I would greatly appreciate receiving news about my recall [?].  I am sending along shoes to be delivered home at the earliest convenience. As for the people under my protection, here is the situation: 1. Ermolli Adalberto has applied to be transferred in a town in the province of Perugia, Pesaro or Chieti. I believe his preferred destination is Chieti and he has already made contacts there. I think that in his case action is called only if you have the possibility to intervene as effectively as for the other people, otherwise we should not waste the available options. In this light, I would like to remind you of the following people: 2. Eisler Dragica (Carolina), née Braun, and her daughter, Eisler Maria: nephew Jurche Nak. The engineer Carlo Selan and spouse. Eisner Lotta with two daughters. They are aiming for the provinces of Perugia or Pesaro. I would prefer a destination in those provinces because I think you will be able in due time to get me a recommendation for the local bishop, or the person acting on his behalf, who may then help smooth things down with the Questura to ensure they get a good destination in the province or comfortable place to stay, maybe also with the help from the local parish priest. What is important for the time being is to back as solidly as we can their application, which is due to be presented in a few days.

I will inform you in time, and you will then get someone to alert the Questura in the most convenient way. Ermolli has already applied, and I have written today itself although the letter will be dispatched in a few days’ time. Now, regarding Ermolli, if you have the possibility of alerting a different person from the one you will alert for the others please do so; otherwise let us not cause harm to everyone in trying to help everyone else. I thank you for the assistance you will provide me in this work of good (…)».

Some of Mons. Palatucci’s key papers are kept at the Fra Landolfo Caracciolo Library, San Lorenzo Maggiore (Naples), and at the Secret Archive of the Vatican.

Arrest and deportation

In indicating the reason for Palatucci’s arrest, Centro Primo Levi has pointed to a telegram dispatched by colonel Herbert Kappler, where it is communicated that Palatucci had been arrested because of his contacts with enemy intelligence. At a closer look, the cable does not in any way provide additional details nor does it hint to other ‘secret’ documents. It should also be observed that after 3 September 1943 (signing of the Cassibile armistice and start of the German occupation), the Jews were defined in the Manifesto of Verona ‘foreigners and enemies’. In the R.S.I. period, Palatucci liaised with DELASEM (Sorani testimony). In the spring of 1944, he was expecting the Jews from Lenti, in Hungary, who had been provided with fake certificates in which they resulted being born at Altavilla Silentina). For those and other operations, the Fiume policeman was guilty from the point of view of the Nazis of having colluded with the enemy.

How many were saved?

Another issue raised by Centro Primo Levi is related to the number of Jews saved by Palatucci. To this end, various scholars, namely Ballarini, Bon, Coslovich, Pizzuti, have set out to determine, before all else, the number of resident and non-resident Jews in the area of Fiume at the time of the racial persecutions.

1938: when the race laws were enacted, there were 1,514 Jews, out of whom 300 were foreigners.[188] The Jews therefore amounted to approximately 2% of the population. The census of 22 August 1938 not only provided the foundation of the anti-Semitic campaign that was already underway but also represented a key passage in driving racial persecution.

1939: the historian prof Silva Bon (2004, 2005) has shown that Jews were being fired from their jobs already in 1939, so that as many as 350 people had left the Carnaro province. Those who stayed behind were committed to ensuring that local structures continued to function and to replacing those from which they had been barred, such as schools, with the enforcement of the race laws. At the Istituto Autonomo di Istruzione Media, a middle school, no classes, including vocational training, were discontinued in the 1938-1939 school year.

1940: on 22 June, prefect Temistocle Testa (cit.), alongside questore Vincenzo Genovese (cit.), ordered the arrest of the Jews who were considered foreigners.

1941: in Fiume, Abbazia and Laurana there remained 1,362 persons who were considered Jews.

1943: at the fall of Fascism (25 July), the Jews who were in central-southern Italy had hoped to return to their homes now that they had regained their freedom. But it would turn out to be just wishful thinking.

1944: The pogrom on the Jews of Fiume came with the destruction on 25 June of the Fiume Synagogue in via Pomerio 31, followed, two weeks later, by the action of the Guardia di Finanza aimed at ascertaining the presence as well as the property of those who had remained. 243 persons were deported, most of whom transited San Sabba before being taken to Auschwitz. Only 19 returned. A further 96 were arrested in other Italian provinces and sent to death camps. Of these only 16 survived, while seven died in detention. Accurate information is lacking with regard to over seventy Jews.

1945: The last death train departed from the German-controlled operational Zone of the Adriatic Littoral on 24 February 1945.

End of hostilities

The tragic although still not final count of the Shoah in Fiume is of 412 deported and 380 victims, including thirty children ranging from a few months of age to fourteen. The count of 380 victims was set by Amleto Ballarini, chairman of Società di Studi Fiumani, in his 1999 book entitled Il tributo fiumano all’Olocausto.

The variables

Concerning the above, severable variables should be taken into account. Some 1,200 Fiume Jews, not accounted among the internees in Italy, voluntarily left the territory between 1938 and 1943. On the other hand, between 1941 and 1943, there was a surge of migrants from the Balkans and Central Europe, territories occupied by the Germans where the race laws were enforced ironhandedly. Many Jews, for example, were escaping from Croatia and desperately trying to reach Fiume, for the most part by boat [189]. The city was also a ‘legal’ hub for Jewish internees on their way to Italy. According to Arminio Klein [190], chairman of the Jewish community of Fiume and Holocaust survivor, sixteen Jewish persons survived the war in Fiume. At the end of the war, the Jews of Fiume who had survived the tragedy of the Shoah, unlike what occurred elsewhere in other Jewish communities, were not able to return to their homes because the province of the Quarnaro had in the meanwhile been occupied by the troops of Marshall Tito and annexed to Yugoslavia. A few made their way back in an attempt to recover the possessions that had been left behind, but none came back and nothing more was ever heard of them again.

Against this backdrop, a fact emerges forcefully: from 1938 to 1943, besides the foreign refugees, a further 6,000 Italian Jews left the country individually or in families for friendlier destinations, including the United States, southern America and the Land of Israel. This occurred under the pressure exerted by a hostile bureaucracy and strong anti-Jewish propaganda waged by the press.
The final tally of the Jews who were helped to escape persecution – in various ways and by individuals and humanitarian organisations, some of which Jewish – could be calculated by considering:

- the migratory flows outlined above

- the movements that allowed a significant number of Jews to find safety in the Italian peninsula.

Giovanni Palatucci’s contribution

The testimonies given and published over the last decades would suggest that Giovanni Palatucci’s action in defence of the Jews of Fiume moved essentially along the following lines: 1] non-compliance in the enforcement of norms (for example, failure to update registers, for which he was officially reprimanded; delay in responding to the queries from other police headquarters about Jews on the wanted list; 2] disclosure of information to fleeing Jews to avoid dangerous situations; 3] introducing Jews to friends; 4] providing various kinds of support, including the issue of forged documents, namely permits and passports; 5] planning of escape routes with the support of third parties.

Number of Jews who were saved according to Sorani

Settimio Sorani (cit.) provided information about the Jews who were saved. He spoke of the ‘Fiume Canal’ and mentioned Giovanni Palatucci in the context of humanitarian action in favour of Jews. Sorani also added an information: five-thousand Jews were saved. It was the intention of the author to explicitly refer to Fiume and Palatucci because there were other contacts in Trieste as well.[191] Sorani, in this light, pointed out several aspects: 1] in the war period Fiume was a border town; 2] the number of rescues Sorani spoke about was principally in connection with the estimated number of Jews fleeing the Ustascha regime; 3] with regard to the 12,200 refugees who were ‘controlled’ and detained in camps located beyond the border where Italian troops were operating – refugees who had escaped persecution and been partly saved – Sorani wrote that «an unspecified number should be added of unregistered persons who had entered Italy illegally without entry visas»; 4] The gateway to Italy was  Fiume, where the head of the ufficio stranieri «ensured the foreign Jews were removed in small numbers at a time so as to avoid arrest and deportation».

A tally of those who were saved

Based on the research carried out so far, and also taking into consideration studies by several historians and individual authors who have under various titles tackled the issue, it is not quite possible to put an exact figure on the people saved directly and indirectly by Giovanni Palatucci. Indeed, people were save by him, as testified by not inconsequential accounts, but to insist on an exact figure would lead us astray. It is likely that the testimonies given by Raffaele Cantoni and Settimio Sorani were intended to provide an indication of the approximate number of people who were saved – ‘a large number’ of them – and not a figure that is the result of an exact summation of events.

Outlines of a short summary

1] Based on the information gathered from Italian and foreign archives, it is difficult to suggest that Giovanni Palatucci was not a ‘Righteous’. The Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial itself confirmed, in February 2015, the title bestowed on the former acting head of police in Fiume of ‘Righteous Among the Nations (communication by architect David Cassuto[192], member of the presidency).

2] Moreover, there are additional documents from the Central State Archive that should be borne in mind, namely several key reports Palatucci wrote to his superiors, some shortly before his arrest, where he shows a non-supine attitude. Interesting to this end, are his notes to the German Councillor for Carnaro province Carlo Paknek (9 May 1943), which was copied to the prefect of Fiume [193]; to the police chief Tullio Tamburini (10 May 1943; copied to headquarters at Maderno); [194] to the head of police Eugenio Cerruti (26 April 1944) and copied to the Interior Ministry (cit.), where a degree of alarm and disgust for current events can be read between the lines. Palatucci passes harsh judgements on the prefect and the Germans, showing real concern for the people under his command and a love of country.

3] Another remarkable document is the letter sent by Palatucci on 6 June 1944 to lieutenant colonel Giuseppe Porcù, commander of the Fiume territorial militia,[195] who had sent an inspection clearly aimed at embarrassing the acting chief of the Fiume Questura, appointed to the post since just two months.[196] In the letter, Palatucci reacted and defended himself: “As to moral rectitude, I am accountable to my conscience, which is the strictest judge imaginable, and if required to my superiors. And [to] no one else…”.[197] He showed in this letter firmness and ability to respond, point by point, the allegations that were levelled at him. In the dramatic context of the time, the letter showed that Palatucci was not scared of Porcù, the head of the Fascist militia who had launched a vicious campaign to undermine the reputation of carabinieri and policemen. After having seized secret police tasks in collaboration with the Gestapo, Porcù in fact aimed at acquiring from the Germans the monopoly of law enforcement activities. He had a dozen of policemen transferred to the militia and then arrested several carabinieri officers, [198] prior to the dissolution of the Carabinieri Corps in the summer of 1944.

Option for new research

Bearing in mind what has so far been outlined, there is ample room to pursue further research on:

1] refugee flows; clandestine political action in and around Fiume;

2] resistance networks created by opposition groups, including those who forged documents; [199]

3] solidarity networks in and around Fiume;

4] the number of people who were saved resulting from the information that is available today (information and details on clandestine and undocumented flows will continue to be very difficult to obtain);

5] the number of failed attempts at rescuing Jews;

6] the number of people who were eliminated because considered too close to the Jewish communities;

7] Intelligence set up by the Nazi, the RSI, the Allies and Tito’s partisans: specific informants and whistle-blowers.

But does it make sense today to discuss data that are incomplete, considering that not everything was recorded, that many documents were lost and many eyewitnesses long dead? Yes, it is, if this will lead to rejecting triumphalism, accentuation, rhetoric, mythicising – if it means setting aside particularism and upholding sound historical methodology.

But whatever the case may be there is a requirement that must be met: that of shifting away from a rationale of death (the persecution of totalitarian regimes) to one that embraces life (construction of a new world). Of embracing a perspective that can move towards projects of life that can break fences and barriers by taking into account the many voices arising from the Shoah. Set against this backdrop, the term resistance will always remain of currency. Because saying no to all violence – from wherever it comes – will continue to be a key aspiration.

----------------

 Sources, besides those listed in the footnotes

https://it.gariwo.net. “Giusti tra le nazioni di Yad Vashem”. Giovanni Palatucci 1909-1945. Approfondimenti su Gariwo. “Commissione di studio sulla figura e l’operato di Giovanni Palatucci 2 April 2015 [document].

Fresh testimonies

Elvio Bombonato, Riflessioni personali di un profugo giuliano in: ‘Alessandria news’, 16.2.2017. http://www.alessandrianews.it/opinioni/riflessioni-personali-profugo-giuliano-143392_p.html.

(in the writing handed to the newspaper of Alessandria, the Author recalls his father’s involvement with Palatucci in action in favour of Jews).

Thank you to

Prof. P. Peter Gumpel S.J., Church historian. Prof. Roberto Spazzali, scholar of the contemporary age in Venezia Giulia (Trieste). Dott. Nikica Barić, Croatian Institute of History (Zagreb, Croatia); Colonel Filippo Cappellano, head of the history department at the Army Staff, V Reparto Affari Generali (Rome). Dr Vignato, archivist and historian at the Historical Office of the Army (Rome). Prof. Franco Cecotti, past president of the Regional Institute for the History of the Liberation Movement (Friuli Venezia Giulia), vice-president of Aned Trieste (Trieste). Prof.ssa Annamaria Casavola, currently researcher at Museo della Liberazione of Roma and at the National Association of former internees in Nazi camps (Rome). Major Gerardo Severino, director of the Historical Museum and commander of the study centre and museum at the headquarters of Guardia di Finanza (Rome). Associazione Nazionale Partigiani d’Italia, Trieste section. Prof Marco Coslovich (Trieste). Prof Anna Pizzuti (Sora). Prof Rina Brumini (Fiume-Rijeka). Prof Carlo Spartaco Capogreco, professor of contemporary history at Università della Calabria and chairman of the Ferramonti Foundation (Lecce). Prof Michele Sarfatti, the Jewish Contemporary Documentation Centre Foundation (Milan). Prof Mihály Szentmártoni, Pontifical Università Gregoriana. Colonel Alessandro Della Nebbia, officer of the Historical Office of the Carabinieri.