She was one of those five. Then she was in prison until the end, and she was charged with high treason and would have been sentenced for high treason.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the real sentence against her on the trial?
THE WITNESS: As I have said yesterday, it never came to the second trial, firstly on account of Freisler's death, and then, of course, by our liberation on the 23rd of April. The trial was scheduled for the 28th of April.
THE PRESIDENT: I am referring to the first trial. Did she come to a trial on the first indictment, and if so, what was the verdict?
THE WITNESS: In the first trial on the first of July, 1944, she was not included. She was there only as a witness and as a hostage.
THE PRESIDENT: I have no further questions.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KING:Q One short question only.
Defense counsel for defendants Klemm and Mettgenberg asked you a few moments ago about the execution of von Mumm. You replied that he was, so far as you knew, under sentence of death, but his execution had been delayed so that he could testify against you. So far as you know, what promise was made to him if he would testify against you?
A What promises were made to him I, of course, could not say, at least not literally. But he was tortured, severely tortured, and signs of these tortures were seen by coincidence by my daughter when for a short time he was brought to Ravensbrueck for interrogations. One can only assumed that he may have been promised pardon, because my daughter was asked the same questions. She was told that her mother would be sentenced to death, but that she may have a chance to improve her situation and possibly mine if she would finally agree to testify against our friends. My daughter's answer was probably surprising for the interrogating Gestapo officials. She said, "I am sorry; then you have to execute my mother."
Q Mrs. Solf, it is true, it is not, that your daughter, the Countess Ballestrem, accompanied you to Nuremberg from London and has been a spectator to your testimony, both yesterday and this morning, and would, if the Court wishes or defense counsel insist, be available as a witness in this case?
A My daughter came with me from London and is present here. She had been here yesterday and she is here today as a visitor. I am sure that in the interest of the cause, she will be ready to testify as to what she knows.
MR. KING: The prosecution has no further questions on redirect.
THE PRESIDENT: If there are no further questions to this witness, she may be excused.
MR. KING: In connection with the testimony of this witness, the prosecution will offer as a formal exhibit, the document NG-1249 at the earliest possible moment.
THE PRESIDENT: What exhibit number are you assigning to that?
MR. KING: Perhaps, Your Honor, we should wait until we formally offer it before we assign it an exhibit number.
May we ask the Court to turn again to Document Book 1-B. The Court will recall yesterday when I started to introduce the document NG-199that after some preliminary discussion of it, it developed that copies of certain portions of the document NG-199 had not been included in the German Document Book. Since then, that deficiency has been remedied and we would like at this time to proceed with the introduction of NG-199. I have some additional copies of the document in German for the benefit of defense counsel if per chance they didn't bring the ones which were distributed yesterday with them.
At the possible risk of repetition, I would like to begin again with the reading of the letter which appears on Page 126 of the English text. That is dated Berlin, 20 October 1942. I should like to read the first two paragraphs, and also point out two errors which appear in the English text. The inside address is in error in that it should read: "The Reichminister and Chief of the Reich Chancery" instead of "The Reichminister of Justice." Also, at the end of the third paragraph, the initials: "TH" in Thierach's handwriting should appear. The end of the third paragraph is the end of it, not as is evident from the original sent and signed by Thierach.
THE PRESIDENT: That is on the second page?
MR. KING: That is on Page 126. The initials should go opposite the words: "Page 6 of the Original" which appears in parenthesis.
"To the Reichminister and Chief of the Reich Chancery; and Head of the Party Chancery.
"The task assigned to me by the Fuehrer of establishing a National Socialistic Justice requires that I be not hampered by present legal dispositions in the enforcement of measures affecting personnel. On the one hand it may involve officials of my ministry who on grounds of their personality are not suited for the new tasks and will need to be transferred to other more suitable positions. On the other hand, the possibility may arise that directors of offices and leading officials of the higher grades of service which do not fit into the new set-up, may have to be used elsewhere or be retired. Finally it may become necessary, in some particular cases to transfer or to retire such judges as cannot be kept on in their present positions.
"The authority given me by the Fuehrer on the 20 August '42 provides the legal basis for the execution of such individual measures. I therefore ask for your approval, so that in urgent cases judges and officials of the Reich Administration of Justice may by me be transferred to other positions with the same rate of salary, or to positions with a scheduled lower salary--but allowing them to keep the titles and the salary rate of their former positions--or may by me be retired."
That is all of that portion which we will read at this time. We turn now to Page 128 in the English text, which is a short note signed: M. Bormann, and dated the Fuehrer's Headquarters, 3 March 1942. I will read just the body of that note which says:
"The desired approval is given herewith in general terms. Insofar as Reich Minister Dr. Lammers proposes to reserve to the Fuehrer the pensioning of a Justice official to the same extent as before, I approve this change.
"Heil Hitler!
"M. Bormann."
We turn now to the next page 129. That is a letter dated Berlin, 11 November 1942. It is addressed to the Reich Minister of Justice, and refers to the letter of October 20, 1942, which is the first letter I read. It says:
"I have taken note of the fact that in order to carry out the task assigned to you by the Fuehrer of organizing a national socialist system for the administration of justice, you consider it unavoidable in certain cases to utilize elsewhere judges or officials of the Reich Administration of Justice. In consideration of your statements, I agree in general terms with the fact that in cases of emergency you transfer judges and officials of the Reich Administration of Justice to another office on the same salary scale or, retaining the titles and salaries of their former office, to an office of the same nature but theoretically on a lower salary scale. I base this on the assumption that you will make sure in the first place of the existing legal possibilities of organization, especially of the measures laid down in article 1 of the second ordinance about measures in the sphere of the Civil Service Law of 9 October 1942 (Reich Law Gazette I, P. 580). According to your statement, the general regulation proposed by you excludes the Presidents of the Reich Court and of the People's Court, the Chief Reich Prosecutors of the Reich Court and of the People's Court, the Chief Presidents of the Courts of Appeal and the Attorneys General of the Courts of Appeal, for whom my approval or that of the Leader of the Party Chancery must be obtained in individual cases."
That is all of that letter we care to read. It is signed by Dr. Lammers.
We turn now to Page 131. That is a note signed on the original by one, Letz. That name does not appear on this mimeographed copy, but it is an inadverdent omission on the part of the Translating Division.
THE PRESIDENT: Where does that name appear?
MR. KING: That name appears under Berlin, 14 November 1942. The name is Letz.
"Point 1. The Secretary of State has informed me that the Reich Chancery has approved the assignment of officials to equivalent or lower posts or their transfer with the same title and salary. The Reich Chancery considers, however, that pensioning off can only be effected through the Fuehrer."
"The Reich Chancery will shortly send a reply to that effect. Please prepare:
"(a) a list of the transfers necessary so far in the separate offices (here for instance Sauer and Creutzfeldt).
"(b) a list of the cases known so far in which final retirement is necessary. This list will be submitted to the Fuehrer as a collective list."
And then there is another sentence: "Please inform the district offices accordingly. Signed: Berlin, 14 November 1942". There is an additional letter in Document NG-199and from that we wish to read only the first tow paragraphs. This appears on page 132 in the English, and is to "The Reich Minister of Justice, from Lammers: dated Berlin 21 May 1942." The headnote indicates that it "Concerns Measures with regard to personnel for the purpose of building up a National-Socialist organization for the administration of justice."
JUDGE BRAND: Mr. Prosecutor, you are referring to page 132?
MR. KING: Yes.
JUDGE BRAND: You said 1942.
MR. KING: I am sorry; it is 1943. There are other headnotes which I will not read. Beginning with the first paragraph:
"In accordance with your proposal I agreed, on the grounds of the Fuehrer decree of 20 August 1942 (Government Journal 1, page 535)" -- I venture to say that is the Reichsgesetzblatt -- "among other things, that in urgent cases you transfer judges and officials of the Reich Administration of Justice to an office affording the same career at a lower salary scale, allowing them to retain the official designation and salary of their present office. The Reich Minister of the Interior has expressed to me his fears that the entire civil service administrative code might be endangered by this possibility, which is modeled altogether on paragraph 5 of the law for the reorganization of the professional civil service, of 7 April 1933, especially if other Department Chiefs wished to carry out far-reaching reforms based on powers such as you received, to be requested from the Fuehrer.
He therefore believes it necessary, taking into consideration the effect on civil servants generally, that you, together with himself and the Reich Minister of Finance, should thoroughly clear up all questions of civil service and budgetary rights in connection with this."
That is all of the Document NG-199 that we wish to read into the record at this time. However, in connection with NG-199, as the Court will recall, from what was said yesterday, we also wish to introduce the Document NG-199-A which is the list referred to which appears on page 131 of the English book. So far as the numbering of 199-A is concerned, may I suggest that the first page be called 134-1 and so on through, and the last page in the English be called 134-32.
JUDGE BRAND: I am sorry to interrupt on this small a matter. 134 is the first page of NG-560; wouldn't you prefer that it be 133?
MR. KING: You are entirely right; it should be 133-1. I don't wish to read any extensive portions of NG-199-A. I do, however, call attention to a few examples as they appear in the pages of the document NG-199-A. Each case is numbered, and I will refer both to the number of the case and the number of the page. First on page 1 of the document, as circulated, let us look briefly to case 1:
"Case 1. Judge of the Local Court Berthold Altmann, Charlettenburg, born 21 August, 1896; married, two children"-- and the handwritten note: "at present not unfit for work." In the other colum: "Person of mixed race second degree, pronounced Jewish appearance, British wife. State of health slightly impaired by rheumatism of the joints, good average."
Turn to case 7 on page 2: "Judge of the Local Court Kurt Michael, Leipzig; born 28 March 1886; married, two children," and the handwritten note: "is to be realized for the organization of judges." On the opposite column: "Not a party member. Republican Judges Association 1923 to 1933. Stahlhelm (Steel helmet) from 1 April 1933 to its dissolution. Front line fighter during World War. Prisoner of war with the French. Little interest in official work, not very sure of his aim and lacking discipline, incomplete professional knowledge, small capacity of judgment. Depends on his staff and has great difficulty in entering into the spirit of the National-Socialist conception of law. As Public Prosecutor, before 1933, he gave offense in party circles, by his attitude in political criminal proceedings and after the taking over of political power, he was transferred to leipzig as Judge of the District Court. Disciplinary proceedings in which he was charged with having made hateful statements on the party and its leaders, did not result in sentence, owing to lack of evidence."
Case 8, on Page 3: "Judge of the District Court; Erich Paul; Dresden; born 21 September 1885; married, three children; is to be released from the Reich organization of Judges." The opposite column states: "Not a party member, Republican Judges Association 1922 to 1927. Front-line fighter of the World War. Iron Cross second class. President of the Appellate Court and the Gauleiter do not consider him politically reliable. In 1938 disciplinary action for disparagement of the German salute. Acquitted through lack of evidence. Criminal Proceedings (1940) for hateful remark about Reich Minister Goebbels (Special Court Dresden) were discontinued in accordance with the law concerning exemption from penal law, since the penalty could not be expected to amount to more than three months imprisonment.
No penalty imposed, except disapprobation in accordance with the decree for pardon for state officials of 21 October 1939."
Case 11 on page 4: "Judge of the District Court; Kurt Schille; leipzig; born 29 July 1886; married, one child; handwritten: To be released for the Reich organization of judges." In the opposite column: "Not a party member. Front-line fighter of the first World War, twice wounded. Iron Cross second class. Person of mixed race in the first degree. Lieutenant on the retired list. Employed in the work of transfers in the Land Register. Average gifts, moderate knowledge."
Case 15, 16, and 17, "wife Jewish."
Turning to page 8 of the document, as circulated, case 29: "Judge of the Local Court; Anton Rheinlander; born 11 August, 1895; married. Wife Jewess. Combat veteran of the first World War. Thirty per cent war disability (bullet wound through chest). Passed final state examination satisfactorily at second attempt. Proved himself an efficient judge in practice. Not a party member."
And we turn to Case 52, on page 22. "Judge of the District Court; Dr. Beyersdorff in Oldenburg; born 17 February 1885; handwritten note: married, two children;" The Opposite column: "Half Jew of the first degree; took part in World War. Average worker. At present not dispensible without replacement. A few years ago rescued a child in a manner worthy of acknowledgment."
Case 64, on page 27: "Judge of the Local Court; Bach in Stuttgart; born 6 July 1887; married, two children". In the opposite column: "Does not belong to the party or any of its affiliations. Member of NS public Welfare Association and German Air Raid Protection League.
Has not been a soldier. Has repeatedly been noticed for his pro-Jewisn attitude. Repeated mistakes in dealing with people. Soft, political reliability doubtful. In principle agrees to superannuation."
That is all the excerpts from NG-199 that we wish to read into the record at this time. We, therefore, offer as Exhibit 143, that exhibit number having been given to it yesterday -
JUDGE BRAND: 243.
MR. KING: Excuse me, I seem to be one hundred off. We offer as Exibit 243 the Document NG-199 and NG-199-A.
THE PRESIDENT: The documents may be admitted in evidence.
MR. KING: Your Honor, the next document is quite long, and it will take approximately half an hour to introduce it. I wonder if this would not be a good time to recess.
THE PRESIDENT: This is oar usual time for recess, and we will not take a fifteen minutes recess.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Court will find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Before we begin the session, I would like to ask Mr. LaFollette a question. Inasmuch as we will adjourn at the adjournment time, and not have a session this afternoon, and not have another session until tomorrow; having in mind the suggestion that you made to me during the recess, about needing a little time tomorrow; if you want that time in the morning, we should fix a definite time as to when we will meet tomorrow morning.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I am hoping the witnesses I have in mind will get in this afternoon. If they are not tired, I can interview one witness, at least, tonight. If I can get two I won't need any time at all, but otherwise I might prefer to have, say an hour or two between the time this witness leaves the stand and the next witness comes on.
THE PRESIDENT: As far as you know now the adjournment will be until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Yes, until the regular time tomorrow morning.
MR. KING: May we turn first to document book 3-G. Document NG-153 which appears as the last item in the index of document bock 3-G, and starts on page 115 in the document book itself, will be when formally offered in evidence exhibit 246. There has been an error insofar as the continuity of pages are concerned in the document that appeared in the original document book, as it was distributed. We therefore, have circulated another copy correctly assembled of the document NG 153, and will present certain excerpts from the document in the order in which they were recently distributed. If my memory serves me correctly, the documents are in proper order in the German text.
THE PRESIDENT: What about document NG 414? What status does that have?
MR. KING: Document NG 414 was the one introduced yesterday by Mr. LaFollette, and I will ask him to tell the Court about that.
THE PRESIDENT: I am merely considering the exhibit number.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: That, if Your Honor will recall, was completely withdrawn, so it carried no exhibit number. I am waiting to hear from Dr. Schilf before offering it again.
THE PRESIDENT: Was NG 249 given an exhibit number?
MR. KING: I think we had better wait until it is actually offered before we give it an exhibit number because there may be from now until the time it is processed and ready to be introduced, several exhibits introduced.
I suggest that the document NG 153 which has just been handed to the Court be numbered as follows: On the first page, page 1, be given the number 115, and thereafter consecutively, and the last page will be 127. The first letter as a part of this document appears on page 115. It is dated Munich, 23 April 1944, and is addressed to the Reichchsminister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery. It reads as follows:
"Subject: Issuance cf certificates of good conduct or recommendation of applications for pardons for "public enemies."
"Dear Dr. Lammers:
"As an enclosure you will find a copy of my decree 73/44 of 30 March 1944 through which by order of the Fuehrer I forbade all party members to issue certificates of good conduct or recommendations of applications for pardon concerning public enemies. I would be obliged if you would issue corresponding instructions to the highest Reich authorities.
"Heil Hitler!
"Very truly yours, "M. Bormann."
The next document is the decree to which Bermann referred to in the letter which I just read. It begins on page 116, and I would like to read nearly all of that at this time. It reads as follows:
"Re.: Issuance of certificates of good conduct, recommendations and judgments by party members.
"The attitude of the German people is admirable in spite of the severity of the war and the deprivations connected with it. Our enemies try in vain to disrupt the unity of the German people's community because they know that they can defeat the German people not through military measures but only through undermining the morale.
"Public enemies, people who spread the lies of foreign radio stations and above all defeatists are aiding the enemy, and must be eliminated from the community of the German people without any regard to the individual concerned. Unfortunately it could be observed in many cases that such public enemies approach men of influence either directly or through acquaintances and relatives, and that subsequently certificates of good conduct are issued more or less carelessly and without examination of the facts which were the basis of the indictment or of the sentencing. All kinds of accomplishments of the defendant or his family are listed in order to achieve a more lenient judgment of the defendant. In other cases the impression is created that the German people under no circumstances should or could do without the professional qualifications of the defendant. Professional and expert performances or relations to prominent people are not mitigating or exonerating circumstances for criminal actions against the people and the Reich.
By order of the Fuehrer I therefore forbid all party members to issue certificates of good conduct or recommendations for applications for pardons for public enemies.
"Certificates of good conduct and opinions in regard to applications for pardon are to be given only by the competent authorities.
"Signed: M. Bormann" The next letter is on page 113, and is dated, Berlin, 14 May 1944, and it reads as follows:
"Subject: Issuance of certificates of good conduct or recommendation of applications for pardons for public enemies.
"With reference to the conference of 2 May 1944.
"Dear Herr Bermann!
"I consider to phrase the circular letter to the supreme Reich authorities concerning the issuance of certificates of good conduct or support to applications for pardons for public enemies in accordance with the attached draft and would appreciate your letting me know whether you approve of this version, and whether you consider it necessary to ask the Reich Minister of Justice for his consent to this circular."
There fellows a draft of a circular which we will not read. We do want to read, however, the letter which appears on page 121, addressed to the Reich Minister of Justice, Dr. Thierack. It is dated Munich, 23 April 1944, and which says:
"Dear Dr. Thierack!
"As an enclosure you will find a copy of my decree 73/44 of 30 March 1944 through which, by order of the Fuehrer, I forbade all party members to issue certificates of good conduct or recommendations for applications for pardon concerning public enemies. I requested Dr. Lammers today to issue a corresponding regulation for the jurisdiction of the supreme authorities of the Reich.
"I would be obliged to you if you would inform the justice authorities about my decree and the according circular of the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery with the remark that the courts and the offices of the public prosecutors too have to refrain from requesting such certificates of good conduct and recommendations.
"Heil Hitler "Yours "M. Bormann" Also we would like to read the letter on page 122, which is dated Berlin, 6 June 1944.
It is addressed to Dr. Lammers, and signed by Thierack. It relates to the same subject and it reads as follows:
"Dear Dr. Lammers!
"I agree to the draft of a circular to the supreme authorities of the Reich concerning the issuance of certificates of good conduct or recommendations of applications for pardon for public enemies which was sent to me with the letter of 2 June 1944.
"Thierack."
MR. KING: We turn now to page 124, to the letter dated Munich, 29 May 1944, addressed to Dr. Lammers, signed by Bormann and I want to read only a part of that short letter beginning with the sentence in the middle of the page that is underscored:
"I do not consider it correct for official certificates of good conduct for criminals who committed crimes against the people to be issued without request and my opinion is that the request for such recommendations should, as far as possible not be made.
It seems necessary to me to reach an agreement with the Reich Minister of Justice on that circular. On 23 April I already sent him a letter, a copy of which is enclosed"
MR. KING: That is all of this document that we care to read at this time. We therefore offer it as Exhibit 246, the Document NG-153.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
MR. KING: May we turn now again to the Document Book 3-F. The Document NG-481 which will become Exhibit 247 when formally offered appears on page 33. However, the document starting on that page is incomplete, at least in the English text and we now circulate for the benefit of the Court a copy of that document which is complete.
THE PRESIDENT: And the first one will be eliminated.
MR. KING: The first one will be eliminated and the one which you have now will replace it. This is a case of double jeopardy heard originally before the Nurnberg Special Court. As was the practice there was first a trial, then a consideration of the verdict, a plea of nullification and then another trial. I will read first from this document excerpts from the first trial before the Nurnberg Special Court.
I might say as to the manner in which the document should be numbered, starting with page 32-A as the first page, the next page being 33 and from there running consecutively through the last page which will become 53. I am sorry there is one additional fact that should be called to your attention there. They run consecutively through page 8 of the document as circulated, page 8 being page 40 and the next page should be 40-A, the next 40-B and so on through. I should spell this out more specifically. Starting following page 40 the pages should be numbered a,b,c,d, and e. Then beginning with the page 9 of the document as circulated, that page should be 41. The number consecutively, then 44, 44 being page 12 of the document as circulated, than the next page is 44-A, page 13 of the document as circulated is 45.
THE PRESIDENT: That is numbered in the document itself.
MR. KING: Has it been numbered in your document?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. KING: If they are someone has done us a great favor. I have been talking bout of turn. I have a more efficient secretary than I thought. May we turn first then to page 33. May I withdraw that? I may refer to it later. For continuity I think first we will begin with page 35. This is from the indictment in the case of Therese Mueller and I read beginning with the first full paragraph approximately in the middle of the page:
"The son of the defendant, Ernst, served in the army at the Eastern front. In December 1941 the defendant wrote a letter to him to the front. In this letter she said that no German soldier would return from there because of the great cold, and he would also freeze to death.
If he would like to save his life and to free her from anxiety for his life, he should do something to get home. If this should not be possible he should become a prisoner of the Russians. In a letter of 20 February 1942 (this letter did, however, not reach the addressee) the defendant referred to the first letter and wrote: "Dear Ernst, I can only repeat my advice. There is simply no other possibility for you. Either the one thing or the other. Well, go ahead. I am looking forward to it with joy......go ahead, what I told you already." That the attitude of the defendant is hostile to the state, and communistic as can be seen easily from her letters. In a letter of 27 February 1942 the defendant wrote amongst other things: "Now, your comrade Sernau has been here again. He is still in Wuerzburg. He does understand how one can become unfit for the front. This is worthy of recognition."
MR. KING: Continuing with the indictment on page 35-A:
"This deed is a crime according to Sec. 5, Par. 1, subpar. 2 of the Ordinance of the Extraordinary War Penal Law.
"According to Arts. 7 and 8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Par. 14 of the Competence Ordinance of 21 February 1940, Reichsgesetzblatt 1, 1940, p. 405. The Special Court for the area of the Nurnberg Appelate Court is competent to try the case."
MR. KING: There follows other matters pertaining to the pending trial. We now turn to page 36 of the English where we note that Dr. Ferber was the Presiding Judge and the associate Justices were Dr. Hoffmann and Groben. Returning further in the minutes of the first trial we note on page 38 that after a closed session the following sentence in the presence of the public prosecutor and of the defendant by reading the form of judgment by giving essentials of reasoning:
"In the name of the German People:
Mueller, Therese, nee Burger, born 27 Nov. 1885 in Konnersreuth, widow, living on a pension, guilty of a crime of undermining the fighting morale is sentenced to five years penitentiary, to forfeiture of civil rights for five years, and to costs. One month of detention remand has to be deducted from the sentence."
MR. KING: For information of the translators, do you have the section entitled "Minutes?"
THE INTERPRETER: I am afraid we havn't.
MR. KING: The portion which I have just read appears later as the very last part of the section entitled