Q. Do you recognize that picture?
A. Yes.
Q. That uniform?
A. Yes.
Q. What uniform is that?
A. That is the SA uniform, Sturmbannfuehrer.
A. There is no honorary title indicated there?
A. No, the uniform was the same.
Q. Will you look at that book for a moment?
A. Yes.
Q. Would you turn to the top of the page?
A. Yes. I ask your indulgence for a moment. I have to put on my glasses.
Q. Yes, please do. On page 473 -- this is the Edition of 1934-35 do you find the place in that book where you supplied the following information: "A party member in spite of official ban threatening discharge from office"? Do you find that?
A. Just a moment, please. Yes, I do find it.
Q. Do you have anything to say about that?
Well, yes. Objectively speaking it is correct. At that time I was a party member and, as I have already stated, today in 1947 I cannot remember clearly, but I have already stated before that there was a formal law which forbade the membership in the party.
Q. I know what you said before. Do you have anything to add to that? Do you have anything to add to what you said before?
A. To what? Add to what?
Q. About this general question about your being a party member although it was against the law to be one. Do you have anything more to add to what you already said on that question?
A. Not as far as I know. I don't know what you mean.
Q. All right. Let's go on to the next then. Do you find, right after yhat you have just read, that in 1932 you were a speaker of the NSDAP?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you find a little later on you were Sturmbannfuehrer in the SA, and just following that, party speaker? Do you find that?
A. No -- party speaker, yes.
Q. Look again. It is in there.
A. Yes, yes, I see it now, party speaker. Certainly, that is what it says here. That was not supposed to mean any more and does not mean any more than that occasionally I spoke on behalf of the party. Your sources of information will certainly confirm that; that from 1933 on I at the most -- quite frequently -- once in a while delivered a speech within the party. That is quite certainly true and if I wrote here "Party speaker", if I wrote it and stated it -
Q. You did write that, didn't you?
A. Well, yes.
Q. All right.
A. When I chose an expression which in any case misleads you, I understood it correctly as meaning that I wanted to say that I spoke for the party on behalf of the party, but as I said, this was not an office like a gauspeaker. A gauspeaker was a position, a party speaker.
THE PRESIDENT: Your explanation has gone far enough.
BY MR. KING:
Q. It wouldn't surprise you, would it, Mr. Steinacker, if I could in the next thirty seconds produce a witness who heard you address Nazi meetings in or around Hamm in 1933 and 1934? That wouldn't surprise you at all, would it?
A. No, no, no, not as a Nazi speaker, but as a speaker on bahalf of the party. I never was a Nazi.
Q. May I have that last sentence again?
A. By Nazi one means something bad. I said I was never a Nazi.
I am a party member -- I was a party member of the National Socialist Party but such an evil, ugly word as it is always used now in the bad, ugly meaning, as a Nazi who behaves bad and enriches himself and did injustice to others, I never was such a man and, therefore, I say I was not a Nazi.
MR. KING: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any redirect examination?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: No. Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: Call your next witness.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: May it please the Tribunal, may I call the witness Dr. Drescher as the next witness?
THE PRESIDENT: Hold up your right hand and repeat after me: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. WANDSCHNEIDER:
Q. Witness, first, would you please tell the Tribunal your personal data and your birthdate?
A. I was born the first of February, 1884. My name is Erich Heinrich Hugo Karl Drescher, Doctor of Laws, General Public Prosecutor, retired.
Q. For how long have you known Dr. Rothenberger?
A. In the twenties I once met Dr. Rothenberger briefly and then only in 1933 did I get to know him more closely,
Q. You said 1933, you got to know him better. On what occasion did this closer acquaintanceship take place?
A. Dr. Rothenberger was senator of the Administration of Justice in Hamburg and one day he called me to him and asked me -- at that time I was Oberlandesgerichtsrat -- whether I would like to take over the office of General Public Prosecutor and I agreed to do so.
Q. Were you at that tine a member of the party?
A. No.
Q. But you became one later?
A. Yes.
Q. When?
A. First of May 1933. I was absolutely unpolitical and as judge I did not belong to any party.
Q. Did you have any misgivings to belong to the party or to enter the party?
A. No.
Q. Were you a member of the Rotary Club?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the attitude of the party toward the Rotary Club?
A. The party didn't like it.
Q. In other words, it was undesirable?
A. Yes, undesirable. Later it was dissolved. I regretted that.
Q. Now, you know some details about Dr. Rothenberger's activity in Hamburg, especially about his contact with the Reichsstatthalter Kauffmann. Can you say anything about that?
A. Yes.
Q. Please tell it to the Tribunal.
A. Dr. Rothenberger enjoyed the reputation of a good judge in Hamburg and of a very well-informed jurist altogether. Among the Hamburg judiciary he had a great deal of authority and I know that Gauleiter Kauffmann soon recognized his outstanding abilities and took him into the closer circle of his advisers. The relationship between Rothenberger and Gauleiter Kauffmann was, as I know for certain, an absolutely friendly one and I believe that in legal matters, as also in other respects, probably Rothenberger exerted a great deal of influence upon the Gauleiter.
Q. Do you know that Dr. Rothenberger also was in Hamburg the chief of the NS Jurists League?
A. Yes.
Q. How did that combination in one person between the chief of the district Court of Appeals and the chief of the NS Lawyers League -what effects did it have on Hamburg?
A. Not from the very beginning, but very soon, Dr. Rothenberger became gauchief of the NS Lawyers League and also chief of the Gaulegal office and thus he combined in his own person the administration of Justice of the State and the legal interests of the party and the NS Lawyers League. This, of course, gave him an opportunity to have a great deal of insight into all these legal matters and put him in a position of being able to advise the Gauleiter on all points and to advise him well.
Q. Witness, do you know of the efforts of the defendant Dr. Rothenberger to use people as his assistants who wore legally well qualified people?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you make some statements about the efforts of the defendant in this regard?
A. Dr. Rothenberger preferred to employ young but very well-qualified jurists in his close environment and also saw to it that they were promoted out of turn.
Occasionally I was not quite in agreement with his personnel policies to that extent because by this practice he withdrew good people from my department but from his own point of view that absolutely was not to be disapproved.
Q Witness, already during the years before the war, as was discussed extensively, a number of attacks on the part of radical party circles, the SS, et cetera, were made against the administration of justice. The results of this were felt also in Hamburg. Did you in regard to the worry which Dr. Rothenberger had as Chief of the agencies get to know them and how did Dr. Rothenberger react?
A Both of us agreed absolutely in regard to this point. We were of one mind and we were anraged that the attacks on the administration of justice in the Schwarzo Corps at that time became more and more pronounced. In our situation reports both of us - I don't know whether that means anything to the Court.
Q Yes, that is a well known term.
A In these situation reports were pointed out that something had to be dome and both of us in our situation reports frequently made this extra ordinarily clear but the attacks did not cease, and then in January 1939, a meeting was scheduled in Berlin in the Ministry of Justice on one day for the General Public Prosecutor and the next day for the Presidents of the District Court of Appeals and both of us intended to have this affair with the schwarze korps, brought up at the meeting, each one of us at his meeting. I did that and everybody was silent, and Dr. Rothenberger, as far as I know did the same thing the next day, and delivered a lecture on it the next day.
Q Do you know the subject of that lecture?
A Just a moment please - On the evening of our meeting there was a small supper of those who participated in the meeting with Minsiter Guertner and on this occasion he took me to the side and told me in this conversation that we were absolutely right and something would have to be done and that he would speak to Himmler.
When we then retuned to Hamburg both of us called a meeting of the Hamburg Judges and Public Prosecutors in the large room of the investigating prison and there Dr. Rothenberger also on my behalf at the same time gave a speech and told about our efforts for having these abuses stopped and about the statement of the Minister that something would have to be done. This had an extra ordinarily calming effect upon the Hamburg jurists. Actually, the attacks in the schwarze korps did not immediately but gradually cease but the rest of the excesses and the correction of sentences pronounced by courts unfortunately continued. The bill that we had to pay for our acts against the SS I was presented to me later.
Q Will you please describe in that connection what this bill you had to pay was?
A I ask the indulgence of the Tribunal if perhaps I have to speak too much about myself, but I guess that can't be helped.
Q Witness, here we are concerned with Dr. Rothenberger after all. The description has a purpose and meaning only as the participation of Dr. Rothenberger is connected with it.
A Yes, when the large scale air attacks on the residential areas of Hamburg took place, when I had no connection with Berlin, I on my own initiative, for different reasons I had about 400 prisoners, who were in prison for investigation pending trial, released from imprisonment. Among these by mistake were unfortunately a number of communists who had been newly arrested. Of course, this should not have happened. As Obergruppenfuehrer Mueller in the RSHA later told me, this was a chain of unfortunate circumstances. In any case, soon thereafter on the open street during a business trip my car was stopped and I was arrested by the Gestapo and during the very same night when I was under the detention of the police, a messenger from the Gauleiter came who offered me that I could move to the Hotel Vier Jahreszeiten, I did that the next day and this intervention by the Gauleiter was due to a long distance call which Dr. Rothenberger made, who at that time for the inauguration of Joel was in Hamm and from there got in touch with Hamburg.
Q That is Dr. Rothenberger freed you from the SS arrest?
A Yes, one cannot say from the SS detention but he alleviated my arrest. He did not free me. For ten weeks I had to stay there first in Hamburg and then in Berlin.
Q Was there any trial against you?
A Yes, just a moment - just a moment. The gentlemen, from the Ministry have told me that he, that is Dr. Rothenberger, tried to free me as soon as possible from my detention, but them Minister Thierack forbade him to make any more efforts on his own therefore he could no longer do anything for me.
Q What happened subsequently? Was there a trial?
A Yes.
Q Please describe it briefly.
A I was indicted because of the careless freeing of prisoners. I was indicted before the Reich Supreme Court at Leipzig and there was sentenced to four months in jail.
Q One final question, Dr. Drescher, did you free the prisoners at that time for humane reasons?
A Yes.
Q Please describe a little more in detail why you did it? Because of the danger of air raids?
A Yes, the air raids continued and at first there were terrible conditions in the jail itself because we had no lights, no gas, no water and the physician was afraid a typhoid epidemic would break out. There were 1400 people in prison. Actually in front of the prison outside there were hundreds of people, women and other relatives were lying there who wanted to have their relatives out of jail so that they could help them get new lodgings and so forth.
Q Witness, after you were sentenced your services as General Public Prosecutor were ever?
A Yes.
Q How did Dr. Rothenberger act toward you after this?
A I returned from Leipzig and reported to him and I must say we are quite different characters and frequently we had small differences of opinion but on this occasion Dr. Rothenberger was so kind and understanding toward me that I shall never forget that.
Q Witness, in regard to the time when Dr. Rothenberger was undersecretary--can you say anything about that?
A Not much, no not much.
Q It is correct that you were a soldier during the war?
A Yes, in July 1939 I was drafted for maneuvers and remained a soldier until the end of May 1943. When Minister Thierack and the new under-secretary Rothenberger in October -- I believe it was in October 1942, held a meeting of the Presidents of the District Courts of Appeal and the General Public Prosecutors I received an invitation to go to Copenhagen and participate in this meeting and I went there. Then when I left I said good-bye to Dr. Rothenberger and told him not in the meaning of just trite phrase, but I really meant it, "I wish you good luck for your tasks, I believe that you need it." And Dr. Rothenberger replied: "You are right. I am facing years of fighting."
Q Do you know the further history of the dismissal?
A No.
Q If not, then we don't need to put any questions about it.
Was it a surprise to you that Rothenberger, at the end of 1943, had to leave the Ministry of Justice?
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess at this time for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: May I continue with my examination of this witness?
BY DR. WANDSCHNEIDER:
Q Witness, in the course of this trial the personality of Letz, Dr. Rothenberger's assistant, has played a part. Do you know him well and can you characterize him in brief?
A Letz was one of my best friends. He is an upright, truthful man, an intelligent man. He is a man who has insight into character of people, and that is think is important here, from the point of view of his political views he is moderate. He was appointed to Berlin as Chief of the Personnel Department, and those of us who knew him welcomed that, because we believed that the personnel policy of the Ministry had thereby been placed in the best and most reasonable hands. I believe that also those gentlemen who had not known Letz before later on arrived at the same opinion which we held from the beginning.
Q Witness, can you make some general statements as to the reaction among the public prosecutors and judges whom you knew to Rothenberger's appointment to be Under-Secretary?
AAs I have stated here before, at that time I was in the Wehrmacht and I was abroad. At that time I wrote to Rothenberger and told him I was very pleased because I hoped that now he would wage our old struggle against the Gestapo from his new post better and with more emphasis. I believe that at least among the Hamburg jurists my hope was shared.
Q We will not discuss the reform plans any longer. They have been discussed here in sufficient detail. All I wish to stress is that in the view of Dr. Rothenberger the independent personality of the judge was the center of the reform plans, or rather, to put it more cautiously, the endeavor to reach that goal. Can you con firm that in this general form without referring to any details?
--
A Yes.
Q -- Can you confirm that this was Dr. Rothenberger's main endeavor?
A Yes.
Q Now I want to turn to some concrete cases, and I would like to ask you, Dr. Drescher, whether Dr. Rothenberger protected old Party members if they had made themselves guilty of some offense? Can you give us your views, and can you recall any individual cases as to Dr. Rothenberger's attitude?
A One cannot say that Dr. Rothenberger protected old Party members. Like myself, Dr. Rothenberger was out to proceed in penal cases without any regard for the person concerned. Both of us together repeatedly called on the Gauleiter and discussed such difficult cases. Later on I very frequently called on the Gauleiter by myself. We always reached an understanding with Kauffman, and as far as I know, the Party never interfered with the interests of the Administration of Justice in Hamburg. In that respect we were very well off. As for individual cases
Q Can you remember any such cases?
A Yes, I have remembered one case. A Jew by the name of Mangold, had filed denunciations with Herr Eiffe who will be called as a witness later on and who was the Hamburg representative in Berlin, denunciations -against a Party member of some years' standing -- that man's name was Dr. Fauth - for defrauding insurance money, and, I believe, for a patent fraud. That case had gone via the Hamburg representative and the Reichsstatthalter in Hamburg; and via Rothenberger , and finally had reached me through official channels, and the proceedings took place, although Party circles put up considerable opposition. That man Fauth was sentenced . That is all I can remember at the moment.
Q Thank you, that is enough. Now a last question, witness. Can you tell us something about Dr. Rothenberger's relationship with Frank and Freisler, what he said about those two?
A Rothenberger had no opinion, either of Frank or of Freisler. I believe that clashes between them did occur. At any rate, I do know that Rothenberger was always running the two down, and I did the same.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR. THIELE-FREDERSDORF ( Counsel for the defendant Joel): May it please the Court, I would ask you to permit me to address a few questions to the witness.
BY DR. THIELE-FREDERSDORF:
Q Dr. Drescher, during the years from 1933 to 1939 did you have an opportunity to form an opinion of Dr. Joel's work at the Prussian Ministry of Justice and later on at the Reich Ministry of Justice so that you are able to give your judgment on it?
AAs for Joel's work at the Prussian Ministry of Justice, I know nothing about it. I only made his acquaintance after the centralization of the Administration of Justice. He was in the central prosecution office, whose task it was to investigate difficult cases on the spot, that is to say, out in the province. That office in the Ministry had to deal with the more important penal cases which had to be reported to that office. It was in that connection that I made the acquaintance of Herr Joel. I liked his natural manner, and every time when I was in Berlin I called on him.
We became friends. I know that he encountered great difficulties with various Gauleiters and also with Under-Secretary Freisler. He always defended himself against interference from the Party, in spite of those difficulties. Those difficulties went so far that his position was frequently jeopardized. But I asked him in all circumstances to try to remain on his post in order to do good to the cause. My acquaintance with him continued until approximately the middle of 1939. After that time I only saw him briefly at the conference in the autumn of 1942, which I have already mentioned.
Q Dr. Drescher, may I ask you to give us a brief explanation as to why Dr. Joel, in his work at the Central Prosecution Office, encountered so many difficulties with the eminent Party personalities? You said that at the Central Prosecution Office, Dr. Joel had to deal with particularly important cases which the local prosecution office had to report to the Ministry. Would you tell us why those cases were so important that the Ministry dealt with them?
AA little earlier on, I described the happy and satisfactory conditions that existed in Hamburg, but unfortunately it was not like that everywhere, and the local offices very frequently had things made difficult for them by the Kreisleiter and Gauleiter, so that the Ministry protected them and supported them by either having the Central Prosecution offices at Berlin taking over the case altogether or by at least sending Joel and his colleagues to the spot.
Q Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other direct examination? It appears that there is none. You may cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. KING:
Q Dr. Drescher, may I clear up one part of your testimony - which perhaps may be my fault - but I didn't understand it too clearly.
You say you were called up in 1939, and I understood you to say that you remained continuously in service until 1943. Now is my understanding correct?
A Yes.
Q And than what position did you hold after 1943?
AAt the end of May of the beginning of June 1943. I returned to my old position as General Public Prosecutor at Hamburg.
Q And you maintained that position until the end of the war - until the capituation - did you?
A No. On the 16 of August 1943, I was arrested. I was in office only for about six weeks.
Q I see.
AAnd for a fortnight out of that time - I think it was for eight days - I was in Copenhagen on an official trip.
Q How the action which resulted in your arrest, which you have gone into in some detail, how long did that detain you? What was the total length of time? Were you freed of whatever charges that were brought against you? When were you freed of that?
A I was not freed. On the 16 of August 1943 I was arrested.
Q Yes.
AAnd I remained under arrest, first for a fortnight in Hamburg, and the rest of the time in Berlin at the RSHA in Prinz Albrecht Strasse. I was discharged when the trial in Leipzig opened. That was held on the 27th and 28th of October 1943.
Q As a result of that trial you were sentenced to four months?
A Yes.
Q And you got out of prison, or wherever you were incarcerated, then sometime in the middle of 1944?
A No. I didn't serve the term. The sentence was four months' imprisonment, and I have to add that two months of that term I had served through my detention pending trial.
But when I returned to Berlin, Herr Letz told me that there was no question of my having to serve my term. The fact that I had been sentenced seemed to be enough for Herr Himmler.
Q How did Mr. Letz fix that up so that you didn't have to serve your sentence? Did he ever talk to you about that?
A No.
Q He just told you that it was all right, that you could disregard the sentence, that you wouldn't have to serve it?
A He told me - now what was it? - "You need not worry. We do not intend to execute the sentence."
Q Was Letz in charge of any penal division so that he was in a position to say on his own account what sentences would or would not be served?
A No, no. Herr Letz had nothing to do with that. I regarded that as a friendly way of his telling me his opinion.
Q And you never learned then what the reasons were why you did not have to serve your sentence?
A No.
Q Now what is your subsequent history after the trial of Leipzig, and after you returned to Berlin, and Mr. Letz told you that it was all right, you didn't have to serve your sentence? What did you do after that?
A I then made an application for my transfer to the status of waiting period.
Q Excuse me, Dr. Drescher. I do not understand what is meant by the term "waiting period." Would you explain that for me, please?
A In the case of a number of political officials and in that of general and senior public prosecutors, under the German Civil Service Law, there was the possibility, if conflicts had arisen with the superior authority, or in cases like my own, that the officials concerned were relieved of their office while their salaries were paid out to 75 per cent until further notice.
That does not mean that the person concerned has been retired. But as far as I can recollect, the time of that status of waiting period was, I believe, limited to six months, and it was open to the civil servant concerned to ask for pensioning. That is what I did.
Q In other words, you asked to be given a permanent pension, and eventually that permanent pension came through?
A Yes, yes, on first of June 1944.
3 And you're still receiving that pension, or you were rather, until the capitulation?
A Yes, and beyond that. My pension was stopped at the end of 1945. My proceedings before the Denazification Court pardon me, before the Denazification Committee is still pending. I have not yet been given a decision.
Q Yes. Just one more question on this trial. The offense which you were charged with was actually committed by you in Hamburg, was it not?
A Yes.
Q Yes, and you were tried in Leipzig, were you not?
A Yes.
Q What is the explanation of that?
A I have to revert to my arrest. I was told by the Gestapo officials in Berlin that Himmler originally demanded that I was to be kept in prison until the last of those communists who had been discharged by mistake had been caught again. Then as far as I know, negotiations started on the Thierack and Himmler level, and Himmler then demanded that if I got out of police arrest, the Administration of Justice would arrest me. Naturally, that was refused because it was merely an offense, at the best, and a legal reason for the issuance by a judge of an arrest warrant could not be found, because the facts had been established and there was no suspicion of an attempt to escape. Finally, they agreed -- that is what I was told--that the matters was to be brought before the special penal senate of the Reich Supreme Court. There was a law saying that a case of any particular significance, instead of being tried by the judge of local competence, had to be tried before the special penal senate of the Reich Supreme Court, under the President of the Reich Supreme Court, and that happened.
Q I take it that you knew that Mr. Letz fairly well, did you not?
A Yes, very well.
Q Let's see, he was a member of the SA, was he not, on Dr. Rothenberger's recommendation?
A Letz was a member of the SS.
Q Yes, of the SS.
A Yes.
Q You were legal adviser to the SA, were you not?
A I think that I misunderstood the gentleman. I understood him to ask about Letz. Letz was a member of the SS.
Q Yes. Now, I am asking about you.
A Yes.
Q You were legal adviser to the SA, were you not?
A Yes.
Q And how long did you act as legal adviser to the SA?
AActually from approximately 1937 until the middle of 1939. Then, I joined the Wehrmacht, and when I retuned very soon the matter of my arrest occured.
Q Yes.
AAnd from that moment onwards, in effect, I was out of things.
Q Yes, I understand. Now, I want to go back briefly to that day in August, 1943, when you were arrested. You testified that Dr. Rothenberger called the Gauleader in Hamburg from Berlin and -
A No.
AAm I incorrect in that? If that is incorrect, what did happen?
A Rothenberger was in Hamm, in Westphalia, when Joel was introduced to his office as general public prosecutor. He was rung up there from Berlin and he from Hamm rang up Hamburg.
Q Then, I will make that incorrection. Dr. Rothenberger called the Gauleader of Hamburg from Hamm where he was making a speech in honor of Dr. Joel's appointment; and the Gauleader then in Hamburg arranged to have you transferred from the jail to a suite in the Four Seasons Hotel; is that right?
A I was not in jail, but the Gestapo having been bombed out too; had provisional quarters in a villa, Rotenbauchaussee. In that villa there were some of the offices, as well as some rooms which were equipped with field beds for Gestapo officials who had also been bombed out of their homes, and who had no home. It was in one of those rooms that I spent the first night, together with public prosecutor Vogel who had inadvertently carried cut those mistaken discharges; and, during that first night I was awakened and an official told me that the Gauleiter suggested to me that I move into the Hotel Four Seasons.
Q Do you recall that Gauleiter's name at the moment?-- At that time?
A In Hamburg?
Q Yes.
A Kauffmann, naturally.
Q And in the middle of the first night you moved to the Four Seasons Hotel where you had more comfortable quarters?
A No. No, I had asked that official whether that permission to move into the Four Seasons Hotel extended to Herr Vogel as well. He said he knew nothing about him. Then, I said I am going to say here too. At noon next day I asked the head if the Gestapo in Hamburg whether that offer still held good and also applied to Vogel, and, if it did in that case, I would be pleased to accept, and would undertake not to leave the Four Seasons Hotel without permission -- and not use the telephone either. I assumed that it was a case of custodia honesta, honorable custody, and that is what was done.
Q Yes. Now, you testified that in October, 1942 you were recalled from the service to attend a meeting of court presidents.
A Yes.
Q Is that right? Is the date right?
A Yes.
Q Where was that meeting held?
A That meeting was held in October, 1942, at the Ministry of Justice in Wilhelmstrasse, where those meetings were always held.
Q What did you say in connection with Copenhagen earlier. Did I misunderstood you?
A I was in Copenhagen on duty with the armed forces.