l x x i i I N T R O D U C T I O N T O V O L U M E 1 5 für europäische Verständigung. The appeal argued that in the wake of the Locarno Treaties, not only the politicians but also the people had a responsibility to foster understanding and reconciliation among the European nations (Doc. 232). Momentous steps toward rapprochement in the European scientific community were taken during this period. Following the lifting of the ban of Germans from of- ficial involvement in the Solvay Institute, Einstein was offered an appointment to the administrative committee of the institute in April 1926. In reaction, Einstein ex- pressed his admiration that the Belgians had overcome their resentment against the Germans in favor of reconciliation (Docs. 254 and 272). A significant development in the participation of Germans in the Conseil international de recherches took place the same month. After strong opposition among conservative German academics had been overcome, Einstein reported to Lorentz that the Prussian Academy was no longer opposed to Germany’s joining the council (Doc. 255). Einstein continued to support pacifist causes during this period. In August 1926, he backed the “International Manifesto against Compulsory Military Service,” ini- tiated by conscientious objectors. In light of the ongoing disarmament in Europe, the appeal called for a “moral disarmament” and demanded that the League of Na- tions endorse the abolition of conscription (Doc. 357). The issue of capital punishment was one that occupied an important place in the public discourse of the Weimar Republic.[39] In January 1927, Einstein was asked to contribute to a full-page spread in the Berliner Tageblatt on the abolition of the death penalty. Perhaps surprisingly in light of Einstein’s long-established public image as a committed humanist, his contribution was one of three arguing against the abolition of capital punishment. The issue of the death penalty was a particu- larly controversial one at the time and had garnered heightened attention in the press as a result of two high-profile capital cases—the train massacre at Leiferde near Hanover, and a Dresden murder case. In his brief piece, Einstein argued that “in principle, I cannot understand why society should not be allowed to weed out individuals who have proven themselves to be vermin of society.”[40] He also main- tained that it was wrong to argue that the death penalty had “a brutalizing effect on the survivors,” as this would only occur if punishment were misunderstood “as an act of retribution instead of an expression of society’s striving for perfection” (Doc. 462). In the past, Einstein had appealed for specific death sentences to be avoided or repealed.[41] Intriguingly, merely two weeks after he had argued in favor of capital punish- ment in general, he cosigned an appeal for clemency for those sentenced to death for the train massacre that had, in part, led to Einstein’s statement in the first place (Doc. 476). He thus continued to oppose specific instances of the death penalty. He did so, for example, in the case of the murder trial against the Italian-American