City of Washington )
) ss:
District of Columbia J
Gerhart H. Seger being first duly sworn deposes and says:
1. I was born in Leipzig, Germany, in 1896 and lived there until my induction into the German Army in 1915. I was successively attached to the Cavalry, Infantry and Air Force, and concluded my military service as a pilot in the German Air Force. I experienced a considerable amount of combat flying duty, was shot down over France in August 1918. I received several decorations, one of which was the highest medal awarded by the Austrian government. Following my demobilization from the Army I attended Leipzig University where I received a degree in journalism in March 1920. Thereafter, I became editor of a newspaper in Berlin in the period 1920-1923. After' that I held a position with the German Peace Society until 1928, edited a paper in Dessau during the period 1928-1933, and was elected to the Reichstag in 1930.
859
2. During the period after World War I, up until my commitment to the Leipzig jail and Oranienburg concentration camp in the spring of 1933 following the Nazis' accession to power in January of that year, my business and political affiliations exposed me to the full impact of the Nazi theories and practice of violent regimentation and terroristic tactics. My conflicts with the Nazis by virtue of my identification with the peace movement, and as a duly elected member of the Reichstag representing a political faith (Social Democratic Party) hostile to National Socialism, clearly demonstrated that, even in the period prior to 1933, the Nazis considered crimes and terrorism a necessary and desirable weapon in overcoming democratic opposition. The knowledge acquired as a result of these personal experiences during the period eventuating in successful culmination of the Nazis' efforts to seize power led me to a realization of some of the fundamental purposes and objectives which that group sought to accomplish by the systematic adoption of these tactics. The lapse of time attested the validity of that realization. While rarely openly articulated during the period embraced by my personal knowledge, the overt actions and studied practices of the Nazis could be directed to only one goal; namely, the perfection of rigid control over Germany as a preliminary step to dominance in Europe, and, possibly, eventual world hegemony. At that time the basic pattern was in process of formulation. The following aspects of that pattern were evidenced by the actions of the Nazis which came within the scope of my personal experience :
(a) Destruction of political resistance to the Nazi ideology by terrorizing, confining, and destroying democratic opposition elements.
(b) Division of German citizenry on a racial basis and discrimination against those who were adjudged not to be of German blood.
(c) Unlawful appropriation, spoliation, and forced sale of property for the personal enrichment of Nazis and for the purpose of establishing, solidifying, and maintaining internal control in Nazi hands.
(d) Destruction of racial minorities and political opponents through systematic underfeeding, deprivation of a livelihood, clothing, shelter, food and medical care; deportation of forced labor; work under inhumane conditions.
While the attainment of power was a necessary condition to the full flowering of the Nazi criminal and terroristic methodology, the outcroppings of such a policy were visible in the years
L—83
preceding 1933. Specific overt acts, within the scope of my personal knowledge, which evidence the Nazis' belief at that time that the use of force, regimentation, and terrorism was necessary to the accomplishment of their purposes, are included in this statement.
3. In 1923 my interest in the German peace movement induced me to accept the position of Secretary General of the Deutsche Friedensgesellschaft which was the leading organization within Germany advocating compliance with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles on the part of Germany. At that time the important policy issue before the German public was whether Germany should conscientiously fulfill its obligations under the Treaty of Versailles with a view to obtaining its gradual revision in a peaceful manner or whether there should be a concerted, albeit clandestine, effort to sabotage the Treaty. The Peace Society with which I became affiliated advocated adherence on the part of Germany to the Treaty of Versailles and a policy of reconciliation with former allies. Espousal of these principles enabled this organization to make a substantial contribution to the cause of peace. Its president, Dr. Ludwig Quidde, the Historian of Munich University, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1925. In its opposition to clandestine militarism the tenets of this organization were diametrically opposed to the principles and practices of the National Socialist Party. The latter party and sympathetic militaristic interests evolved the theory of the "unreality of defeat" and that "our armies were not beaten" as a basis for the doctrine that since the conclusion of the war a shame and disgrace had befallen Germany which could only be rectified by a great sacrifice, eventually, a war. Thus, the ideological predicate was laid for a vehement militarism on the part of these groups.
4. The antagonism of the followers of Hitler to my organization was dramatically demonstrated on numerous occasions when meetings of the Peace Society were broken up and terrorized by shock-troops and SA units. A number of examples are given below:
(a) One such occasion relates to a meeting in Essen in May 1923. At that time France had occupied the Ruhr Basin as a result of Germany's default on her Treaty obligations. While the German government had instructed the population of that territory to refrain from any acts of violence, the Nazi Party organized groups of saboteurs to create unrest and stimulate violence. The best known leader of the saboteurs was a soldier of fortune by the name of Leo Schlageter who subsequently was sentenced to death by a French military court and executed. In its program
«93260—46— '5
861 '
L-83
of supporting the government the German Peace Society arranged for a number of meetings in that territory to impress upon the population the necessity for an attitude of understandings. I was scheduled as the principal speaker at one of these meetings which was held in Essen during the month of May, 1923, attended by an audience of several thousands of persons. Before the meeting got underway an organized Nazi group strong-armed their way to the platform with the announced purpose of attacking me, but were prevented from reaching the stage by local police. However, they assaulted a number of participants of that meeting and succeeded in creating such a disturbance that the meeting had to be adjourned.
(b) Another such occurrence took place in the spring of 1925, at Siegen, Westphalia, where a meeting was scheduled to take place at the municipal auditorium. Shortly before the meeting a large group of the SA gained entrance to the building and occupied the front part of the auditorium. The presiding officer of the meeting was to be the chairman of the local branch of the German Peace Society who was a war veteran having lost both of his legs. While I was accompanying him slowly from the railroad depot toward the municipal auditorium, we were overtaken by storm troopers who were discussing their plans to prevent this meeting from being carried out. We also heard that both the chairman of the meeting and I, as the speaker, were to be beaten up and forced out of town. Nevertheless, we proceeded to the auditorium and I began my address which was constantly interrupted by cat calls and insulting remarks. Finally the Nazis arose as a group and tried to storm the stage. However, they were prevented from doing so by Prussian State Police who had appeared in sufficient numbers to thwart the attempt. This rowdyism necessitated premature adjournment of the meeting by the Chief of Police. The chairman of the meeting was escorted to his house by the police and a guard accompanied me to the railroad depot.
(c) On one occasion during the period of my association with -the German Peace Society I wrote and caused to be published a pamphlet or monograph on the subject of the "Black Reichswehr." This was a commentary on the methods pursued by the Reichswehr in seeking to evade the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. Shortly after this document was distributed the Nazi press, including Hitler's own newspaper, "Voelkischer Beobachter," demanded my indictment for treason. Prior to the publication of this pamphlet the Pact of the Locarno had been signed and the allied forces withdrew their Army of Occupation, thus leav-
862
L-83
ing to Germany the fulfillment of the Versailles Treaty without formal Allied supervision. The violent criticism to which this document was subjected evidenced the open hostility of the Nazis to any program contemplating the revision of the Treaty of Versailles by peaceful or legal methods.
(d) The foregoing represents examples of the tactics and attitude of the Nazis with reference to the German Peace Society. It, of course, exemplified their attitude toward any person or organization which stood for adherence to the Treaty of Versailles and the restraint of German militarism. It is not necessary for me to relate further specific examples of the terroristic methods to which I was exposed during the period of my connection with this Society. The foregoing instances were repeated many times. These events made it apparent that the Peace Society would thereafter be ineffective in combatting the militaristic trend which had the silent support of the Reichswehr and the open espousal of the Nazis as well as the Conservative-Nationalist Party led by Dr. Hugenberg. Therefore, I left my position with the German Peace Society and returned to my journalistic profession. I became the editor of a daily social democratic newspaper, the "Volksblatt", published in Dessau, Anhalt.
5. The former Dukedom of Anhalt was part of the Reichstag Constituency No. 10, Magdeburg-Anhalt. I was selected by the Social Democratic Party of the Constituency as one of its candidates for membership in the Reichstag, and ran for election which took place on the 14th of September 1930. I was elected at that time. This was the first election in which the Nazis made substantial gains, having increased their number of representatives in the Reichstag from 13 to 107. During the campaign Nazi terrorism was prevalent in those Constituencies in which they were desirous of making a showing or where they thought they had a chance of winning. In this election Himmler was one of my competitors; also General von Seeckt, who, although not a candidate of the Nazi Party, had earned the support of the Nazis by virtue of his militaristic views. These leaders received sufficient votes for election under the system of proportional representation. Himmler's candidacy made the result of the election in this district a question of party prestige. One of the means employed by the Nazis to insure a particular success in that district was to bring in prominent outside speakers of their Party together with an imposing detachment of storm troopers. They not only followed this strategy in meetings arranged for their own speakers where storm troopers prevented anyone connected with the opposition from taking the floor, but they also sent speakers
863
L-83
into meetings of other political parties accompanied by many storm troopers, often physically taking over the meeting. One particular meeting which the Nazis tried to take over physically was held during that campaign in the city of Raguhn in Anhalt. The meeting was called by the Social Democratic Party and I was the principal speaker. The Nazis brought with them, as speaker, the leading SA officer and Gauleiter of the Province of Silesia, Edmund Heines. As soon as Heines was given the floor to reply to my address, the storm troopers advanced toward the stage and made preparations to take the meeting over. The State Police of Anhalt, however, was represented in sufficient strength to forestall that audacious attempt.
6. Another meeting during that campaign took place in the City of Aschersleben where the Nazis brought in as their speaker Roland Freisler who later became the Minister of Justice in the Nazi government of Prussia. Freisler brought with him such a large detachment of storm troopers, some of whom were armed with pistols and clubs, that they succeeded in forcibly excluding everybody not in sympathy with their views, and thus concluded as their own meeting the one which had been called by the Social Democratic Party.
7. As in the case of terroristic tactics manifested in connection with meetings of the Peace Society, the foregoing incidents are representative of the systematic practices of the Nazis with reference to their political opponents. These violent tactics, repeated many times, are thus demonstrated to have constituted an integral aspect of their political creed. Always the first endeavor of this method was to transmute political dispute into physical combat, and thus to rely on superior fighting technique and brutality as a method of achieving' success in the public forum.
8. Even in the actual deliberations of the Reichstag the Nazis resorted to the same ruthless procedures. Here again they sought to destroy parliamentary government and attain their ends by a display of aggression and the use of oppressive methods. Illustrative of their actions within the halls of the Reichstag are the following:
(a) On the 14th of September 1980, 107 Nazi members of the Reichstag were elected out of a total membership of 524. This group of 107 Nazi members conducted themselves like a storm troop unit. Whenever representatives of the government or the democratic parties spoke the Nazi members marched out in a body in studied contempt of the speaker, or entered in a body to interrupt the speaker, thus making it physically impossible for the Reichstag President to maintain order.
864
(b) According to the rules of the Reichstag a limited speaking time was accorded to each speaker depending upon his place in the debate. The speaker of the house was charged with maintaining that schedule. It was one of the favorite tactics of the Nazis to disrupt the schedule by a noisy demonstration whenever one of their own speakers ran overtime and was cut off by the Reichstag President. On su'ch occasions, the Nazis created such a bedlam that the President could not make himself heard. Similarly, in the case of speakers of opposition parties, the Nazi members constantly interrupted, often resorting to lengthy and spurious parliamentary maneuvers, with the result that the schedule of the session was thrown out of gear.
(c) The tactics of disturbance of parliamentary proceedings employed by the Nazis finally culminated in physical attacks upon members of the house as well as visitors. At one time in 1932 a visitor, Helmuth Klotz, who came to call on a democratic member of the house was physically attacked by the Nazis. Klotz had been a well-known submarine commander in the German Navy in World War I and, as an ardent supporter of the republic, had publicly opposed a policy of secretly rearming Germany thus incurring the wrath of the Nazi Party. He was attacked in a corridor of the Reichstag Building by Heines and other Nazi members of the house, and, when democratic members of the house came to his rescue, the Nazis called more of their members to press the assault until the Reichstag President found it necessary to call the police to restore order.
(d) The Nazi members who were the greatest offenders in disrupting the proceedings and in employing oppressive tactics were Joseph Goebbels, Robert Ley, Alfred Rosenberg, Erich Koch, Edmund Heines, Hans Frank, Fritz Terboven and others whose names I do not recall. .
(e) That the Nazis had already conceived the device of the concentration camp as a means of suppressing and regimenting opposition elements was forcefully brought to my attention during the course of a conversation which I had with Dr. Wilhelm Frick in December 1932. Frick at that time was Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Reichstag of which I was a member. When I gave an emphatic answer to Frick concerning the particular matter discussed, he replied, "Don't worry, when we are in power we shall put all of you guys into concentration camps." When the Nazis came into power Frick was appointed Reichsminister of Interior and promptly carried out his threat in collaboration with Goering, as Chief of the Prussian State Police. and Himmler.
(/) Early in July 1932 the Reichstag was dissolved and elections scheduled for the 31st of July. Again the Nazis manifested their contempt for democratic processes by the increased use of force during the course of the campaign. Interruption of meetings, heckling and beating of democratic speakers, and general terroristic practises were resorted to in full measure during that campaign. I was again re-elected to the Reichstag at the conclusion of the campaign. It was far more difficult at that time to obtain adequate protection from the Prussian State Police for the reason that the Papen-Putsch of 20 July 1932 resulted in the declaration of martial law in Prussia. The Reichwehr, under the command of Generali Gerd von Rundstedt, did little to maintain order at political meetings.
(g) After Hitler was appointed Chancellor on 30 January 1933 the Reichstag was again dissolved and an election scheduled for the 5th of March. Nazi methods of terror reached a peak in this campaign. During the period immediately preceding the scheduled election date, I was campaigning in my home district where the Nazis had taken a dominant part in the election. On the 2nd of March between the hours of 2:00 and 3:00 a. m. my wife and I were awakened by a disturbance in the street. Five storm troopers appeared in front of the apartment house calling my name. My wife stepped out of our bedroom onto the balcony to ascertain the cause of the disturbance. As she did so one of the storm troopers fired a revolver and the shot went over her head into the ceiling of our bedroom. The next day I took my wife and daughter to the home of my mother in the city of Leipzig intending to stay there until the Reichstag reconvened. On Sunday, March 12, while my wife was taking our child out for a walk the door bell at my mother's apartment rang. Three local policemen and four SA men appeared at the door and requested me to identify myself which I did. Thereupon, they took me in an automobile to a police jail in the City of Leipzig where I was kept in solitary confinement for two days. On March 14 I was transferred to the county jail of Dessau where I was again kept in solitary confinement for three months. During the period of my incarceration in these prisons I was given relative freedom in the use of my time and was, in general, treated properly. From time to time I was interrogated by Dessau police officers in a manner indicating that they would like to establish that I was connected in some way with the Reichstag fire. This was an obvious "red-herring" which the police, on orders of the Gestapo, resorted to for the purpose of suggesting some justification, however tenu-L-83
ous, for my continued detention. The transparent absurdity of this tactic finally induced the police to abandon it.
9. During my imprisonment I made every attempt within my power to bring about my release or, at least, to have charges filed in the desperate hope that they might be the subject of a judicial hearing. Among other things, I wrote a letter to the President of the German Supreme Court, Dr. Erwin Bumke, pointing out that my arrest constituted an infringement of my parliamentary immunity, as a member of the Reichstag Foreign Affairs Committee, which continued in effect until the New Reichstag convened. Also, in oral and written communications to various officials, I insisted on the protection afforded to citizens of Germany under the Weimar Constitution. My lawyer demanded that charges against me be filed or otherwise made known to me. These efforts were wholly ineffective. Charges were never filed nor did I receive a single coherent statement from any Nazi or police official, high or low, which informed me of the legal or, indeed, the political basis for my incarceration; Evidently, my only sin was my refusal to subscribe to the principles and methods of the Nazi Party. That refusal was reflected in my public and parliamentary statements and in my writings. Such disagreement was consistently peaceful and never implemented by physical aggression or by my association with any group which sponsored the use of physical force. However, under the regime which came into power on 30 January 1933, mere disagreement involved, inexorably, jeopardy of the heretic's life.
10. On 14 June 1933 I was transferred to the concentration camp at Oranienburg. I remained in Oranienburg until the 4th of December 1933 when I escaped from that institution and was fortunate enough to get across the German-Czechoslovakian border. My experiences in that camp have heretofore been documented in my book entitled, "A Nation Terrorized" which was published by the Reilly & Lee Company, Chicago, in 1935.
[signed] Gerhart H. Seger
Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 21st day of July 1945.
[signed] EDWARD L. DAVIS
Notary Public.
867