That was not accounted for by natural death from illness in the camp. Furthermore, I heard from Frau Heuss--that is the wife of the gentleman who rescued us, and who was there until the end--that as the allied troops were approaching, thousands of women were done away with. She saw it herself and told me herself. They were moved into the woods and into places where mines had been laid, and those places were blown up.
Furthermore, I have a personal friend who sat in the Cottbus prison for six years and who, after those six years, was taken back by the Gestapo and was moved to Ravensbrueck at Christmas 1944. Her husband never heard about her and when, in February of 1945, he asked about her again, he was simply told that she had been transferred to Belsen. I had investigations made to help the husband, and owing, to the kindness of the British Red Cross I made inquiries, but she was one of those who was exterminated without name or number.
Q. Are there any other indications, from your personal observations while you were in Ravensbrueck, of exterminations which went on there? Did you hear or see any other evidence which may have led you to believe that exterminations were being conducted?
A. I personally did not see anything, and I cannot say anything about it. I can only give information about the torture to which my friends were subjected.
MR. KING: With one exception, Your Honor, this concludes the direct examination on the part of the Prosecution of the witness Solf. That exception is in the form of a document which only come to our attention this morning. It is a series of the Fuehrer Information Bulletins, the original of which is dated July 18, 1934. We have not, because of the lateness of its coming to our attention, been able to process this document. We have only succeeded in having a translation made which at the moment is not ready for official presentation to the Court. However, because of certain statements which appear in this document I would line to ask the Court's permission for the following procedure: I would like to submit this document to the witness and have her read it to the court, and after reading it to comment as she wishes upon what it contains. I will tell the Court now that it involves the testimony which she has made this afternoon. Will that procedure be agreeable with the court? We will later have both the original German and an official translation.
THE PRESIDENT: Which particular defendant does it affect?
MR. KING: It affects, in the first place, all of them, and in the second place it affects particularly the defendant Lautz.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Grube, have you any comment to make on that?
DR. GRUBE (Counsel for Defendant Lautz): I have no objection against the introduction of the document at this moment, but I would like to reserve the right to myself to summon the witness once again and possibly to ask her for cross examination, and I then do not want to cross examine her as a witness for the defense, but as a witness for the prosecution on the direct examination.
MR. KING: We have a German copy of that available, which we would be glad to make available to counsel for the defendant Lautz. And I assume from the statement made that after seeing the document -- it is very short-- that he could proceed immediately with his cross examination.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, may we confer a minute?
DR. GRUBE: May it please the Court, I do not intend to delay the proceedings here unnecessarily in any way. I would therefore ask you to let me have the document for my perusal and to allow me to hand the document on to the defendant Lautz, and after a discussion with the defendant Lautz, if it is possible then to have cross examination on the document, in that case I would not ask for the witness to be summoned again, but I would cross examine her today on this document. It would probably be helpful if a short recess were taken for that purpose.
MR. KING: We have the document available, or will have it available here very shortly in German and will be glad to, as I said before, make it available to counsel. It is perfectly agreeable to us if the counsel for the defendant Lautz wishes to recall the witness tomorrow morning if we finish, otherwise this afternoon.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I just want to make this observation. I just came in, and as I gather, all that we seek to do is to place before this witness the statement in a Fuehrer report which refers to her and ask her whether or not the facts stated in there apply to her case. In that event, she simply is identifying the authenticity of that Fuehrer report, and anything that the counsel would like to ask her, he can ask her right now as to her identifying it.
We are not offering the document. We are simply identifying it when we offer it.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness has not yet seen the document you refer to?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: No, not as far as I know she *******
THE PRESIDENT: There is no reason in the world ****** you can't show it to her now that I can see, even ******** it has not yet been shown to counsel, since they are ***** insisting on it. The rights of counsel for cross examination must be properly observed, and they will be.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: We find that Mr. Burger left with German translation. I will go and try to find him. Your Honor, it will be very simple, if will indulge us for a minute while we get this.
MR. KING: I have here the English translation, but for purpose of Mrs. Solf's reading of it, I think we should have the German before that begins. I will, however, with a short explanation, hand tne English translation now to Mrs. Solf.
THE PRESIDENT: English? Does she read English?
MR. KING: Very well.
THE WITNESS: Shall I read it by myself, or ---
MR. KING: Will you please read it to yourself now and ascertain the truthfulness of the statements therein. Later we may ask you to read it aloud.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
MR. KING: The document, when introduced in evidence, will be NG1249. I now hand the German original of Document NG1249 to the translators to be read simultaneously with the reading of the English, which Mrs. Solf will now do. This is the Fuehrer Information Bulletin, 1944 No. 181.
BY MR. KING:
Q. Mrs. Solf, would you read the document which you have.?
A. Which one? The English?
Q. If you would prefer to read the German you may.
A. I don't mind.
Q. Will you proceed, please.
A. Reich Minister for Justice. Information for the Fuehrer, 1944. No. 181. On July 1 -- I can't understand a word. What shall I do?
Q. Take your earphones off when you read.
A. On July 1, 1944, the people's Court sentence ***** Minister Dr. Otto Kiep to death for seditious undermining of the German defense strength. He was, prior to this criminal procedure, foreign policy expert in the OKW as a major of the reserve. At a tea party on 10 September 1943 on day after the treason by Badoglio, given by Elizabeth von Thadden, who was also sentenced to death, Kiep in the course of a longer discussion voiced the opinion that, barring a miracle, the war was lost. Kiep furthermore stated that the time had come to look out for new men, since one had to come to terms with England and America. Thereupon the condemned Elizabeth von Thadden, through a physician, Dr. Reckzeh, got in touch with Professor Sigmund Schultze, whom she had known before, and who in the meantime had emigrated to Switzerland. This Professor Sigmund Schultze arranged Reckzeh's contact with former Reich Chancellor Joseph Wirth, who also lives in Switzerland and occupies himself with the formation of a government in readiness for Germany's expected collapse. Legationsrat Dr. Hilger von Scherpenberg, son-in-law of the former Minister Dr. Schacht, also attended the above-mentioned tea party.
"Van Sherpenberg, who was a member of the SPD until 1933, contradicted Kiep's statements, but since he did not report the incident, he also was sentenced to two years imprisonment.
"Co-defendant was Frau Solf, the wife of the former German Ambassador in Tokyo. She too is charged with having made ******** hostile to the State on this occasion. Proceedings against ****** Solf, however, were detached from the case because investigation** that were conducted in the meantime, produced new evidence ******* her. In the opinion of the Chief Reich Prosecutor of ************ Court, the death penalty is to be taken into consideration ******* in the case of Frau Solf. Her defense counsel raised the question if for foreign policy reasons proceedings against Frau Solf are advisable since the deceased Ambassador Solf was a particularly successful and respected representative of German interests with the Japanese Government."
Q Before asking you to comment, generally, on this, I ask you this question. The original of this Information Bulletin is dated 18 July, 1944. That was some 17 days after your first trial had been concluded. Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q You have not seen it until today, perhaps not at all until the last few minutes, the Fuehrer Information Bulletin from which you have just read?
A No.
Q What do you have to say generally as to the facts reproduced in this Fuehrer Information Bulletin by the Reich Ministry of Justice and sent to Hitler for his edification?
A I was always of the opinion that my arrest, as a result of that tea party was merely a cause, not a reason. At that tea party, I exposed myself comparatively slightly. My attitude toward the National Socialist Government, however, was clear. The attitude of my husband toward the world was well known. My efforts to help persecuted persons were well-known.
So it seemed to me that an arrest was a welcome cause. The name of my husband still stood very high. I had the feeling that they did not like to lay their hands on me, in particular, because they did not wish to injure the feelings of the Japanese because in Japan, there was a large movement against the militarists and against those who started the war without any cause. The interrogations to which I was subjected, about the subject of the tea party, had brought to light comparatively few points actually; only my own attitude, but not the previous history. When the interrogations were concluded, the interrogations about that tea party, at the end of April and May, my most difficult interrogations came. They were mainly connected with my activities connected with those friends who were in my trial proper, Branstock, Cooper, Dr. Metzger, Harnak and many others, none of whom are alive today.
Q Mrs, Solf, may I interrupt you here, once again to ask you this question? During the course of your testimony this afternoon, you have made certain statements which would appear to be in conflict in some respects with this official Information Bulletin. Do you say now that the testimony you have given so far as far as facts are concerned, is correct, and any deviation indicated in this Fuehrer Information Bulletin is not the fact?
A It does correspond to the facts.
Q My question, which perhaps was not clear, is this: There are deviations in the Fuehrer Information Bulletin from which I have read, deviations in fact, from the statements which you have given this afternoon. Now, where those deviations occur, it is your position, is it not, that your testimony as to the facts is accurate, and that the Fuehrer Information Bulletin is incorrect?
A I did not quite understand that.
Q Let me try again. You have made this afternoon, numerous factual references to the Trial and your treatment before the People's Court?
A Yes.
Q In this bulletin, from which you have read, the Fuehrer Information Bulletin, supposedly sent to the Fuehrer to inform him correctly of certain facts, were the facts, the alleged facts in the Fuehrer Information Bulletin different from your testimony? You wish us do you not to regard your testimony as correct?
A Naturally, my testimony was correct.
MR. KING: That is all of the direct examination. The defense may begin their cross examination.
DR. GRUBER: (Counsel for the defendant Lautz) May it please the Tribunal, I would ask you to permit me to discuss briefly with the Defendant Lautz the document which has been introduced so that I can deal with it in my cross-examination. I will waive the 24hour rule.
THE PRESIDENT: How much time do you think you would like for that interview.
DR. GRUBER: I should think at the utmost, five minutes.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take a ten minute recess at this time to afford you that opportunity.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess for ten minutes.
(A short recess was taken.)
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. GRUBE:
Q May it please the Court, I would ask you to permit me to begin with the cross examination. First of all, Your Excellency, I would like to apologize to you for being compelled to refer to facts which naturally meant great difficulties for you, but unfortunately I cannot avoid it. Your Excellency, you said that your husband until 1928 was in the service of the German Reich?
A Yes.
Q May I ask you, did he held any position after '28 in the service of the German Reich?
A No.
Q Further, you said you entertained a great many people, and at your homes all nationalities were represented. May I ask you what nationalities were represented there?
AAll the ambassadors and ministers who were accredited in Berlin. It is difficult to enumerate them.
Q Were Russians among them?
A No.
Q Is it right that concerning the whole matter one must distinguish between two different sets: one is your set and then von Tadden's set?
A Miss von Tadden did not have a set of her own, as far as I know. She was the head mistress of a school at Heidelberg until the beginning of the war, and later she only lived in Berlin for a few months in a two room apartment where she could not entertain properly -not entertain in the technical meaning of the word. She came and went for a time. She was a teacher at Tautzenberg. Her school was taken away from her. Even at that time she had been interrogated several times, and then she stayed in Partenkirchen for a few months where I met her. I didn't know her very well. It was through Under-Secretary Staden that I came to meet her.
Q You said just now and you said it before under direct examination that she was prohibited from continuing to run a school of her own. You said just now that she was repeatedly interrogated. May I ask who interrogated her?
A I cannot tell you who interrogated her. She only told me -I believe it was in Munich -- that she was interrogated and was asked whether she had anything to do with the Oxford Group and other church matters. She comes from a family which is very interested in church matters and she, herself, was very much interested in them. I only know a few casual things about that.
Q Do you know that she had previously been interrogated by the Gestapo?
A Yes, she told me that once -- I believe it was in Munich -that she was interrogated on the matters which I mentioned just now. But nothing further happened.
Q Miss von Tadden at Partenkirchen gave tea parties regularly?
A No.
Q When was that tea party given which became the cause for your arrest?
A On the tenth of September 1943.
Q May I ask you whether it was correct, as you stated before, that you were asked to come to this tea party by telephone?
A Yes. I had not been invited, and in the afternoon while the tea party had started, at about five o'clock, I was rung up and was asked whether I would not like to come because friends had met there to celebrate the 50th birthday of her sister. Therefore I came much later and Mr. von Scherpenberg left when I came, and the party had been going for an hour and a half, and consequently I was only about half an hour with Dr. Reckzeh.
Q Had you previously been repeatedly invited to her tea parties?
A She had no proper home of her own and she only stayed for weeks or months at the home of a friend.
Q But you had known her previously?
A I had known her for some years but only casually. She was not one of my regular visitors. I had only met her at the house of Under-Secretary Staden.
Q On that day, on the 10th of September, 1943, as you said just now, people had met at a tea party to celebrate the 50th birthday of her sister?
A No, for her brother.
Q Do you know Frau Braune?
A No, I don't know her at all.
Q Did it not strike you perculiar that as you didn't know Frau Braune at all you should suddenly after the tea party had started be invited to go by telephone?
A Miss von Tadden had told me, she told me that she had rung me up a few days before but there was no answer to the telephone, but I did not think it peculiar because I was alone at the time.
Q During the visit was Dr. Reckzeh introduced to you?
A It was he who opened the door to me, and at first I did not know who he was and only afterwards when we sat down and our conversation continued; and when I was offered tea as the late arrival; and at that moment I had a whispered conversation with Miss von Tadden about who is this young man; she said to me he is a doctor, Dr. Reckzeh who had come to her with the recommendation and who occasionally, for medical and scientific reasons, went to Switzerland.
Q Your Excellency, did Fraulein Tadden not tell you that Dr. Reckzeh had introduced himself to Miss von Tadden a few days earlier as, saying he was a refugee, but considered it necessary to be in Germany because at last something had to be done in Germany?
A Frau von Tadden did not say that to me; she said to me that Dr. Reckzeh had to take a certain serum to Switzerland which was only produced in Germany, and which was needed in Switzerland, and which he personally was taking over occasionally by air.
Q At that tea party was Dr. Kiep present?
A Yes.
Q What was Dr. Kiep's function at the OKW?
A I believe that he was on the staff for economic affairs, but I would like to commit myself as far as that expression is concerned.
Q What did you say; may I put this Fuehrer Bulletin to you; in that bulletin it states Dr. Kiep was the expert on foreign politics at the OKW.
A Yes, Foreign Department, that is correct.
Q Furthermore, an under secretary was present at the tea party.
A Yes, Dr. Staden.
Q And under whom did he serve as under secretary?
A He was Under Secretary at the Reich Ministry of Finance.
Q As to Staden, had he formerly been associated with Count Schwerin Crosigk?
A Yes.
Q Did he entertain relations with Dr. Staden?
A I don't know anything about that; but I don't believe so.
Q Did Frau Tadden's circle of relations include Dr. Goerdeler?
A No.
Q Did it include Dr. Wirth?
A I knew nothing of that until I heard what it says in the document, and until I heard what was said to me at my interrogation, but I didn't know about it beforehand.
Q Your Excellency, is it correct that the son-in-law of Dr. Schacht, Scherpenberg, in the course of the tea party left because he was afraid, because Dr. Kiep held conversation which were expressing sentiments against the State?
A I don't know why he left; as I said before he left as I arrived, and apologized to me, but he could only say how do you do, and then had to say goodbye immediately; I don't know anything more.
Q Do you know that at that tea party Dr. Kiep stated the only saving would be in the literary?
A I cannot tell you anything about the conversations of Dr. Kiep. I never saw Dr. Kiep again at liberty after that tea party. The conversations during the tea party, which were held at the beginning of the tea party, I wasn't there; I only heard about those conversations at my interrogations.
Q What conversations were conducted during the time when you were present?
A Well, I was asked about that at my interrogations, and I can only reply that I know very little about those conversations, for I was talking to my right and to my left, and we were only talking about the hopeless state of affairs, of the situation; the comments which I made, I mentioned in my direct examination, and I don't remember anything more.
Q You said before, Dr. Kiep at that tea party stated something would have to be done to end the war; that was about the meaning of it?
A Yes, he is supposed to have said that; he was supposed to have said that; I wasn't present at the time.
Q Why did you join the discussion; what did you mean by the hopelessness of the war, the troubles and failure of the secret workers to appear?
A That was part of the general discussions on the situation that was caused by the secession of Italy which occurred one or two days before.
Q And this was in your presence?
A Well, the talk about the secession of Italy, that is the first topic which I remember.
Q At any rate, it was said that things couldn't go on as they were going.
A Yes, but I took very little part in the discussion, and the discussion in general was really maintained by Dr. Kiep and Dr. Goerdeler.
Q And what was the topic the three gentlemen were discussing?
A I don't remember properly, because I was talking to the people first on this side and then I mainly talked to Dr. Kiep about letters, about the letters, which he said he might take to Switzerland, and then we talked about other things which did not concern politics.
MR. KING: If the Court please, it seems to me that Defense Counsel is requiring the witness to repeat verbatim the conversation that took place at the tea party. Perhaps it would be in order if he served tea along with the question. It seems to me that she should not be required to repeat all of these bits of information which he is eliciting. I wonder if he cannot be instructed to limit the extent to which this witness can be made to relive an event which in later years had become a tragic one.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will not interfere with the cross examination so far conducted.
BY DR. GRUBE:
Q You gave Dr. Reckzeh three letters for Switzerland. Now may I ask, your Excellency, to whom those letters were addressed?
A Yes, one letter was to a friend, Mrs. Oppenhein, the second to the Danish Charge of Affairs, and the third to the Roumanian Minister, Mrs. Bossig.
Q Thank you. Shortly after that tea party, you were arrested?
A No. After that party I went away, and ten days later my daughter told me that through the intervension of Grap Moltke, who collaborated with Kiep that Dr. Reckzeh was a Gestapo agent, and that he was going to denounce all of us.
Q When were you arrested?
A We were arrested three or four months later, on 12 January 1944.
Q You said before, one of your sons had given authority to an attorney to take care of your case.
A Only I could give that power of attorney, but my oldest son, when he heard that I was to come before a court, had asked Dr. Dix and Dr. Dix had agreed then, as I explained before. I was only able to send that power of attorney through a woman friend.
Q In March, or the beginning of April, did not an attorney at law come to see you at Ravensbrueck?
A That was -
MR. KING: The question which is about to be answered involves a personal and confidential matter, about which the witness has been instructed not to speak unless pressed by the Defense Counsel. I only say this because it may involve the embarrassment of Defense Counsel here. Now, if Defense Counsel insists on asking the question and getting the answer, we of the Prosecution will not object.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has no reason to object.
BY DR. GRUBE:
Q Did a person whom your son had instructed to look after your affairs, did he in March or the beginning of April, did he discuss the case with you, that you were charged with, for three hours?
A It can't have been three hours. He was a friend of my youngest son who was greatly worried about me, and who had tried to get in contact with me through a third persons because the Gestapo wouldn't let him come to see me. I can't say exactly, but it can't have been three hours because the Gestapo never allowed a visit of that time.
Q But it is correct that man at the end of March or the beginning of April, 1944 did come to see you at Ravensbrueck?
A Yes, yes. A friend of my youngest son did come to see me there.
Q And you discussed your case with that friend?
AActually my case could not be discussed, because Gestapo agents were present and we could only discuss the matter in low tones and by implications; on the whole we discussed personal and business matters.
And above all, my son did want to get some personal news from me.
Q Can you remember what time, concerning your son's friend, when you gave him power of attorney to appear as defense counsel in your case?
A I did not at that time, I was to come before the Peoples Court. Both my sons, my younger son and my older son, took all steps to try and send me help, and for that reason I asked that man to take my signature along with him because my eldest son had ask Dr. Dix to act as my defense counsel.
Q But who did get the power of attorney?
A The power of attorney without giving a name because I hoped it would reach Dr. Dix.
Q You mean a blank power of attorney?
A Yes.
Q Where you talking to your son's friend when you actually were, informed about the counts of which you were being charged?
A The interrogation for the first trials were concluded. They were concluded at the end of March, if I remember correctly. I knew the counts on which I had been charged, but nothing had been proven. There was no one that could give prove against me.
Q Then, you went to Berlin for your trial?
A Yes.
Q You said further that on 30 July 1944, in the evening, you had the first opportunity to take up conference with defense counsel, Dr. Dix?
A Yes.
Q Did you hear later that Dr. Dix had previously been informed about the case?
A Dr. Dix as far as I know had been informed in May. I do not want to commit myself with regard to the date, but my son had informed him my eldest son; he had sent a letter to Ravensbrueck in which he naturally placed himself at my disposal in case I should need a defense counsel before the People's Court. That letter had not reached me and only three weeks later it was found among my files quite by accident.
Q You have said that and there is no need to repeat it, Do you know that Dr. Dix before the trial was scheduled had received the agreement of the Oberreichsanwalt to see your files?
A No, I did not know that.
Q In the course of the trial -- by the way, I must interpolate another question. When was the trial?
A 1 July 1944.
Q Could it not have been on 2 July?
A No, it was on 1 July.
Q Did Dr. Dix at the beginning or in the course of the trial, put forward the motion that the trial should be adjourned?
A I do not know anything about that.
Q Did Dr. Dix make any other motions during the trial?
A I only know of the letter which was mentioned in Thierack's report to Hitler.
Q Did one of the other defense counsel make a motion for an adjournment?
A I do not know.
Q You have said that in the course of the trial -- your trial, you had been separated from the the others. Is it correct that your trial began only on 1 July?
A Yes, the sentence was only passed in the evening, but it is possible that I was outside of the room. Dr. Dix said goodbye to me, he had to take a train to a suburb and it was impossible for him to stay with me. I could not give you the exact time.
Q Can you say at what time your trial was separated?
A At the time the pleas were made. I do not know what plea it was when I was moved back. I was brought to the anti-chamber because they did not know where to take me. The doer was opened and I heard Dr. Sack's plea who was defense counsel for Dr. Kiep, and I assumed that the pleas were in full swing.
Q May I ask your excellency what facts were at the first trial, stated in the indictment. Did the indictment mention high treason in regard to your contacts with Switzerland?
A Yes, Yes, as I mentioned before the witness for the prosecution, Reckzeh said that I had requested him to make context with neutrals or refugees during his trips to Switzerland, to take up peace negotiations or to discuss them.
Q Is this right; after your trial had been separated, that the Gestapo moved you away from Berlin?
A Yes.
Q Concerning your interrogation, may I ask you during the discussion which took place in your drawing room, was the topic discussed peacefully as to whether the harbors on the German north sea were to be opened to the British Navy?
A That fact or that suggestion, I only learned of that from my second indictment. Previously I did not know about it. That had never been discussed in my presence, but I only learned about it from my second indictment. It is possible that the subject -- whether other friends of my family discussed the matter I do not know, but I think it is possible.
Q The latter proceedings against you, I will leave out. And, now coming to the point which you mentioned earlier on. The fact that Dr Mund and Schelia liberated you -
A The name of that gentleman is Dr. Heuss. He is the son of the Minister of State Heuss, and is probably known to you gentlemen. I was not in Brandenburg but in Moabit.
Q Is it correct that Dr. Heuss came at the request of the Reich Minister of Justice?
A He did not come at the Reich Minister of Justice request, but he had contact with a gentleman in the Reich Ministry of Justice, whose name unfortunately I cannot remember at the moment. He had explained that contact because he was a friend of the Elass family and he had talked to that gentleman and asked, in my case if I was in danger, and I was. He had talked to that gentleman, and he had told him Berlin is in a state of siege. We could no longer get food supplies. Where can we get bread, and then Dr. Heuss said to him, you are in charge of the prison.