A No. If you would read through my statement on that point, you would see that I said that a number of reasons connected with Russia caused the Fuehrer to order a campaign but that he reserved to himself the last decision as to whether or not he would intervene and that after the Simovitch Putsch that decision was made, that now a political student would allow a military delay, and that arises clearly from thestrategic situation at the time.
the fact that it contained the War Office and a number of other important military organizations. I am trying to summarize it but that was the effect of your evidence, was it not?
Q Now, do you remember how it was put in Hitler's order which I have just been reading to you:
"The main task of the Air Force is to start as early as poss ble with the destruction of the Jugoslavian Air Force ground instal lations."
Now I ask you to note the next word:
"And" -- "And to destroy the capital of Belgrade in attacks by waves. Besides the Air Force has to support the defense of the Army." on Belgrade was just another of your exhibitions of terror attacks in order to attempt to subdue a population that would have difficulty in resisting them.
A No, that is not correct. The population did defend them selves. Belgrade was the center of all military installations or matters, more so than the capital of any other country, and I would like to draw your attention to that. or two points on which you gave evidence -- I think at the instance of counsel for the organizations. You remember you gave evidence in answer to Dr. Babel about the Waffen SS? Do you remember that-a few days ago? not got a number, but it is the Fuehrer's ideas about the Waffen SS, and see if you agree. Oh, it is D 665, and it will be Exhibit GB 280. It is a document from the High Command of the Army, Genera Staff of the Army, "Statements of the Fuehrer re Future State Military Police", and the preliminary of the document says, "Doubts have arisen as to whether when the Fuehrer's ideas on the Waffen SS were passed on some time ago, it was intended that they should be given wider publicity," and then, if you would pass to the document, perhaps you would follow it while I read it. I do not think it has been in before:
"On 6 August 1940 on the occasion of the order for the organization of the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler -- Adolf Hitler Bodyguard the existence of the Waffen-SS as sunned up below:
"The Greater German Reich in its final form will not include within its frontiers any but national entities who are, right from the beginning, well disposed towards the Reich. It is therefore necessary to maintain outside the core of the Reich a state military police capable of representing and imposing the authority of the Reich within the country in any situation.
"This task can be carried out only by a state police which has within its ranks men of the best German blood and which identifies itself unreservedly with the ideology at the base of the Greater German Reich. Only a formation composed in this way will resist disintegrating influence even in critical times. Such a formation, proud of its purity, will never fraternize with the proletariat and with the underworld which undermines the fundamental idea, but further, in our future Greater German Reich, a body of priests will only have the necessary authority over its compatriots if it is trained along military lines. Our people are so military-minded as a result of glorious events of a war-like natur and indoctrination by the National Socialist Party that a "sockknitting' police, as in 1848, or a bureaucratic police, as in 1918 no longer can prevail.
"It is therefore necessary for this state police to prove its worth and provide sacrifices of blood at the front, in closed formations in the same way as every unit of the armed forces. Having returned home in the ranks of the Army, after having proved themselves in the field, the units of the Waffen-SS will possess the authority to execute their tasks as state police.
"The utilization of the Waffen-SS in the interior is just as much in the interests of the Wehrmacht itself. We must never again tolerate in the future that the German Wehrmacht based on universal conscription should be used against its own compatriots, arm in hand, when critical situations arise in the interior.
Such a step is the beginning of the end. A state which has to resort to such methods is no longer in a position to use its armed forces against an enemy from without, and thereby surrenders itself.
Our history contains sad examples of this. The Wehrmacht in the future is intended for all time for use solely against the Reich' s foreign enemies.
"In order to ensure that the quality of the men in the unit of the Waffen-SS always remains high, the organization of the and must remain limited. The Fuehrer sees this limitation in the fact that the units of the Waffen-SS should in general not exceed five to ten percent of the peacetime strength of the Army".
Do you agree with that ? Is that a correct description of the purpose of the Waffen-SS ?
A.I am absolutely convinced that he did say that, but that does not contradict my statement.
Q. Now, I just want you, while we are on the SS, to look at a note which is Document D-729, which will be GB 281. It is on the conversation between you and the Duce in the P alazzo Venezia on 23 October 1942. At that time you were still in good standing with the Fuehrer and still retained your power; is that right ?
I will read it: It is page 35, paragraph 1.
"The Reichsmarshal then described Germany's method in fighting the partisans. To begin with, the entire live stock and all food stuff is taken away from the areas concerned so as to deny the partisans all sources of food."
A. Just a second please. Where is this ?
Q. It should be -- it is page 35, paragraph 1, but I will find it for you if you have any difficulty. I think it is marked and it begins "The Reichsmarshal --" Do you find it ?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. I will start again if I may.
"The Reichsmarshal then described Germany's method in fighting the partisans. To begin with the entire livestock and all foodstuff is taken away from the areas concerned, so as to deny the partisans all sources of food. Men and women are taken away to labor camps, the children to children's camps, and the village burnt down. Thus, for example had the railways in the vast woode* areas of Bialowiza been safeguarded. Should attacks occur, then the entire male population of villages would be lined up on one side and the women on the other side.
The women would be told that all the men would be shot, unless they (the women) indicated which of the men did not belong to the village. In order to save their men, the women always pointed out the stran ger . Germany had experienced that, generally speaking, soldiers were no use in carrying out such measures. Members of the Party discharged this task much more harshly and efficiently. For the same reason armies that were strengthened by a political creed such as the German (or the Russian) fought much more energetically than others. The SS, the guard of the old fighters of the Party, who have personal ties with the Fuehrer and who form a special on to, confirm this principle."
Q. Now, is that a correct description ?
A. Yes, certainly.
Q. And this expresses correctly your views on how war against partisans should be carried out ?
A. I have transmitted this.
Just one second please. May I ask what the number of this document is, please ?
Q. Yes, I will give it again, D-729, and it becomes GB-281 organisations. You will remember that in answer, I think to Dr. Servatius, you made some remarks about the leadership corps. Do you remember that ? I just want you to have them in mind.
A. Yes.
Q. Now , will you look at the document which will be present to you, which will be document D-728, GB-282. This is a document from the Gau Leadership in Hessen-Nassau. I am sorry; there is a reference to an order of the party Chancellery dated 10 February 1945, and its subject is "Action by the Party to Keep Germans in Check until the End of the War." It is signed by Sprenger, Gaulei ter a nd Commissar for Reich Defense.
A. The date is 15 March 1945, is that right ?
Q. I am grateful to you. I knew it was just after 10 March. I have not got it in my copy, but if you say it, I will take that.
Q Yes. "I request the Kreisleiters to discuss the following with the Ortsgruppenleiters at the next official discussion and simultaneously draw attention hereby to the need for secrecy and radical action in these measures.
"I. Every German must be subjected to strict supervision regarding his political firmness and will-power.
"2. If during this supervision weaklings are found, i.e. Germans who perhaps have or might have the idea that we are losing the war or that the best thing would be to stop fighting etc., these Germans are to be given fresh strength, and faith in Adolf Hitler is to be aroused in them again.
"3. If Germans are found who spread the story that we have lost the war and that we are on the brink, this rumour is to be countered with all available means. The Kreisleiters are to have these Germans reported to them and are to ask the Gestapo to arrest them, according to the position of the rumour.
"I consider an occasional arrest or the transfer of some Germans to concentration camps as the best method of eliminating such rumour-mongers.
"4. The Ortsgruppenleiter must without fail keep all Germans in check and must without fail see to it that they all keep a stiff upper lip to the and because if courage and anger against the enemy fail behind the front, we shall lose the war.
"5. It is clear to me that our enemies are crossing the Rhine and entering in our Gau too, but they will not conquer the whole of Greater Germany and above all not National Socialism.
"6. The Kreisleiters are given strict and secret orders to with draw, on the approach of the enemy in every area, to the centre of Greater Germany.
All files, particularly the secret ones, are to be destroyed completely. The secret files about post-war reconstruction, purges among party members, the administration, enlargement, installations and deterring work in the concentration camps must be destroyed at all costs. Also the extermination of some families, etc. These files must under no circumstances fall into the hands of the enemy, since they were after all secret orders by the Fuehrer. I also hereby give the order that Germans who do not defend themselves on the approach of the enemy or who wish to floe, are to be shot down ruthlessly, or, where suitable, hanged to frighten the population." discussion about measures to be carried out. The first deals with the people who got tubercolosis and heart diseases, about not producing families. I am not going to read that in full.
But I would just like you to look at 3 and 4:
"3. Legal proceedings. No Party member may be brought before a court. In case of criminal proceedings, these are to be conducted by the Kreisleitung Party members are to be got off under all circumstances, even when they are inculpated The good reputation of the Party must under no circumstances be stained publicly as the Party is and remains the model. It is always the Non-Party members who are to be inculpated. To the eyes of foreigners, one must always show a solid party which can never be split up and whose leadership corps and Party members are unity itself.
"4. Food supply. The Fuehrer has again pointed out that the special weekly food ration cards are to be used in strict secrecy and that the supplies are always to be bought at different places. The cards will in future be distributed by the Gauleiter.
"Further weekly increases for the Party leadership are coming into force shortly:
"Meat, approximately 1250 grams, and far approximately 500 grams.
"Ortsgruppenleiters who are not down as self-providers, can also send in requests to the Kreisleitungen. I again point out the need for strict secrecy.
DR. STAHMER (Counsel for Defendant Goering): I must object to the use of this document, since I cannot recognize that it is genuine. I have not seen the original, and the doubts regarding it, as to its being genuine, are due to the fact that expressions are used which are most unusual in the German language.
THE WITNESS: I was going to raise the same objection. It is not an original.
DR. STAHMER: It says at the top, "copy," and there is not original signature. There is the type written words at the bottom, "Sprenger, Gauleiter." For instance they are using the word, "Gerichlichkeiten," legal apparatus. That is a completely unknown and unusual expression in the German language, and I cannot imagine that an official document originating from a Gauleiter could contain such a word.
THE WITNESS: I can draw your attention to yet another point showing that this is apparently not an original document. As far as this increase of fat and meat rations is concerned, I should have learned something. Not a single word of those two documents is known to me. It is a rubber stamp, this whole thing, written with a typewriter, and that includes the signature. Thus I cannot recognize the genuine character of this document.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: This is a file copy which, to the best of my knowledge was captured at the office, as it says, of the Gau Leadership. It was sent to us by the British Army of the Rhine. I shall make inquiries about it, but it purports to be a file copy and I have put the original document which we have, which is a file copy, to the witness.
(A slight pause.)
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, I have the original document in my hands now, together with the certificate of an officer of the British Army stating that the document was delivered to him in the above capacity in the ordinary course of official business, as the original of a document found in German archives captured by military forces under the command of the Supreme Commander.
Under those circumstances it is in exactly the same position as all the other captured documents. The Defense, of course, can bring any evidence which it thinks right, to criticize the authenticity of the document. The document stands on exactly the same footing as the other captured documents, subject to any criticism which you may be able to bring evidence to support.
Q. Witness, I want you to deal with the sentence in paragraph 6, "the administration, enlargement, installations and deterring work in the concentration camps must be destroyed at all costs. Also the extermination of some families, etc. These files must under no circumstances fall into the hand of the enemy, since they were after all secret orders by the Fuehrer." of the Nazi Party, and it assumes they knew all about the running of concentration camps. Are you telling the Tribunal that you, who up to 1943 were the second man in the Reich, know nothing about concentration camps?
A. First of all, I want to say once more that I do not recognize this document and that I do not know it in its entirety and that phase appears quite impossible to me. As far as the decree and the events in concentration camps are concerned, I did not know anything about that.
Q. Let me remind you of the evidence that has been given before this Court, that as far as Auschwitz alone is concerned, 4,000 people were exterminated. Do you remember that?
A. That I merely had as a statement here, but I considered it in no way proved -- that figure, I mean.
Q. If you don't consider it proved, let me remind you of the affidavit of Hoettl, who was Deputy Group Leader of the Foreign Section, of the Security Section of Amt IV of the RSHA. He says that approximately 4,000,000 Jews have been killed in the concentration camps, while an additional 2,000,000 met death in other ways. Assume that these figures -- one is a Russian figure, the other a German -- assume they are even 50 per cent correct, assume it was 2,000,000 and 1,000,000, are you telling this Tribunal that a Minister with your power in the Reich could remain ignorant that that was going on?
A That is what I am stating, particularly because that is true; these things were kept a secret from me. I am even of the opinion that not even the Fuehrer did not know approximately the extent of the things that were going on. matters extremely secret. We never heard figures or any details of that kind.
Q But, Witness, haven't you accessto the foreign press, the press department in your Ministry, to foreign broadcasts? You see, there is evidence that altogether, when you take the Jews and other people, something like 10,000,000 people have been done to death in cold bleed, apart from those killed in battle. Something like 10,000,000 people. Do you say that you never saw or heard from the foreign press, in broadcasts, that this was going on? I am concerned. Secondly, during the entire period of the war I did not read any foreign press, since I considered that they would contain nothing but propaganda. Thirdly, I was actually entitled to listen to foreign broadcasting stations but never used then, because, again, I did not want to listen to that/propaganda. Nor did I listen to propaganda in the country. time -- and that is something that I can prove -- listen to a foreign broadcasting station.
Q You told Mr. Justice Jackson that there were various representatives in Eastern territories, and you have seen the films of the concentration camps, haven't you, since this trial started? You knew there were millions of garments, millions of shoes, 20,952 kilograms of gold wedding rings, 35 wagen-loads of furs -- all that stuff which those people who were exterminated at Maidanek or Auschwitz left behind them. Did nobody tell you, under the development of the four-year plan, or anyone else, that they were getting all these amounts of human material? Do you remember we heard from the Polish-Jewish Gentlemen who gave evidence that all he got back from his family, of his wife and mother and daughter, I think, were their identity cards?
His work was to gather up clothes. He told us that so thorough were the henchmen of your friend Himmler that the women took five minutes extra to kill because they had to have their out with which to make mattresses. Was nothing ever told to you about this accretion to German material, which came from the effects of these people who were murdered?
A No, and how do you imagine the situation? I was laying down a large scale directive for German economy and that did not mean that the manufacture of mattresses from women's hair on the use of old shoes came into my sphere of activity. I leave the figure as questionable. But I should like to object to the reference you used, my "friend Himmler."
Q Well, I will say, "your enemy Himmler", or simply "Himmler". You know when I mean, don't you?
Q Now, I just want to remind you of one other point: On the 14th of April, 1943, the Defendant Sauckel wrote to Hitler -- 407-VPS. U.S. Exhibit 228 "I have the honor to report to you that 3,638,056 new foreign workers have been added to the German war economy between April 1st last year and March 31st of this year. Besides the foreign civilian workers, another 16,022,892 prisoners of war are employed in the German economy." Now listen to this, "Out of 5,000,000 foreign workers who have arrived in Germany not even 200,000 came voluntarily."
That is from the minutes of the Central Planning Board on the 1st of March.
Do you say that you, in your position in the state and as the great architect of German economy, didn't know that you were getting for your economy 4,800,000 foreign workers who were forced to come? Do you tell the Tribunal that?
A I have never told the Tribunal that. I have said that I know exactly and for certain that these workmen were brought in not always voluntarily, but whether the figure 200,000 is correct, is something I don't know; but I don't believe it, either. There were more volunteers, which nevertheless doesn't alter the fact that workers were forced to come to the Reich. That is something I have not denied.
of workers were forced to come to the Reich and work there?
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, would you like to adjourn now?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFFE: Yes, sir.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours) BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE:
the Fuehrer? May I repeat your words:
"The Chief influence on the Fuehrer, if I may mention influence on the Fuehrer at all, was up until the end of 1941 or the beginning of 1942, and that influence was I. Then my influence gradually decreased up until 1943, and from 1943 on it decreased speedily. All in all, I do not believe any one had anywhere near the influence on the Fuehrer that I had beyond or outside of myself."
Thatis your view on the matter? loyalty to the Fuehrer was unshaken, is that right? the murder of these fifty young flying officers at Stalag Luft No. 3? I am here only to emphasize that I kept my loyalty and pledge to him even then, for I believe in keeping your oath in good days, but it is infinitely more hard to keep your pledge in hard days. the Fuehrer as strongly and as sharply as I did in this matter and told him my view. Then for months, no conversation took place between the Fuehrer and myself because of that. happening with regard to concentration camps, the treatment of Jews, and the treatment of people who were working, must he not?
know about these details in concentration camps as they were pictured here. As much as I know him, I do not believe that he was advised.
Q I am not asking about details; I am asking about the murder of four or five million people. Are you suggesting that nobody in Germany, except Himmler and perhaps Kaltenbrunner, knew about that? figures. I am of the opinion then and now.
Q Now, you remember how Mr. Dahlerus described the relations between you and Hitler on Page 53 of his book:
"From the very beginning of our conversation, I resented his manner toward Goering, his most intimate friend and comrade from the years of struggle. His desire to dominate was explicable, but to require such obsequious humility as Goering now exhibited from his closest collaborator seemed to me most repulsive and unprepossessing."
Is that how you had to behave with Hitler?
A I did not have to act that way. I did not act that way. Those are the utterances made by Dahlerus, made after the war. If Germany had won the war, this picture would certainly have been different.
Q Mr. Dahlerus was your witness, though.
A I did not ask him about his opinion in such matters. I asked him only about facts that existed between me and the British Government, in which capacity he served as a courier.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, on Tuesday of last week, the as to his character and reputation.
He therefore, in my character and reputation.
In accordance with the English practice, I make my submission and ask the Court's permission to pub it in.
DR. STAHMER: Attorney for the defendant Goering. Regarding the
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I have to put it in cross examination to give the defendant the chance of answering.
The defendant Raeder can
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to look at the document
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That is the English translation. I will show Dr. Stahmer the German.
DR. STAHMER: I would like to point out one further thing, Mr. President.
The document shows no date. We do not know when and
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It is signed by the defendant Raeder.
DR. STAHMER: When and where it was drawn up. The signature of
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: The date is in Raeder's handwriting, as is the signature; the 27th of July, I think it is, 1945. Each page of the document is signed by the defendant Raeder.
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, you said the defendant has put his character in evidence through Bodenschatz?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Your Lordship will remember he was asked by Doctor Stahmer, "Will you now tell me about the defendant's social relations?" and then he proceeded to give an account of his character and his kindness and other qualities at that time; and I notice that Doctor Stahmer has just included as an exhibit still further evidence as to character in the form of a statement by one Hermann Winter.
THE PRESIDENT: Wouldn't it have been appropriate if the document was to have been put in evidence to have put it to Bodenschatz, who was giving the evidence?
SIR DAVIDMAXWELL-FYFE; But, My Lord, the rule is that if the defendant puts his character in issue, he is entitled to be cross-examined on his character and his general reputation, and of course it as permissible to call a witness to speak as to his general reputation.
DR. STAHMER: May I make the following remark? I did not use Bodenschatz to clear the character of Goering. I wanted to question him about certain facts and incidents, and Bodenschatz may have drawn certain conclusions. According to my opinion, it would have been relevant to make all these reservations while Bodenschatz was present. If his testimony is to be used to show that Goering spoke an untruth, to prove that, the document should have been used during Bodenschatz's testimony, at which time we would have been able to question Bodenschatz.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: He may prefer that Bodenschatz be brought back and it be put to him, but I think I am entitled to put it to the defendant who called the evidence as to his character and reputation.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn.
(There was a recess.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal rules that at the present stage, this document cannot be used in cross examination.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFFE: If your Honor please, I understand that your Lordship will leave open the question for further argument, whether it can be used for the Defendant Raeder and the witnesses.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFFE: I am much obliged. BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFFE: in your opinion, did not know about-- broadly, or was ignorant about the question of concentration camps and the Jews. I would like you to look at Document D-736. That is an account of a discussion between the Fuehrer and the Hungarian Regent Horthy on the 17th of April 1943, and if you would look at page 4, do you see the passage just after " Nurnberg and Furth"?
A Just a moment: I should like to read through it very quickly to discover its identity.
Q Certainly.
Q Page 4 - GB 283. You say, "After the admission of Nurnberg and Fuerth, Hitler goes on to say the Jews did not ever possess organizational value. In spite of the fears which he, theFuehrer, had heard repeatedly in Germany, everything continued to go its normal way without the Jews. Where the Jews were left to themselves, as for instance in Poland, the most terrible demands prevailed. In Poland, this state of affairs had been formerly cleared up. If the Jews there did not want to work, they were shot. If they could not work, they had to be treated as one treats those who are affected with tuberculosis bacilli with which other healthy bodies would not associate. This was not true. If one remembers, even the creatures of nature who are affected must be eliminated so that no harm can be caused by them. Why should the beasts be spared more? Nations who do not rid themselves of Jews will perish. One of the most forceful examples of this is the Persians, who now lead a pitiful existence as Armenians." and which concerns a conference which you had on the 6th of August, 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: Before you part from this page, is there not a passage that is important? It is about 10 lines down, I think, in themiddle of the line . . .
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Your Honor is correct. This is in regard to Admiral Horthy's counter question as to what he should do with the Jews now that he could not kill them off, but to get rid of them by degrees or take them to concentration camps. Those who had no other jobs . . . I am very grateful, my lord.
THE WITNESS: I do not know this document. and on page 143, if you will turn to it, you get on to the question of butter. If you will look where it says:
"Reichsmarshal Goering: How much butter do you deliver? 30,000 tons?"
Do you see that?
A- Yes.
Q And then Lohse, who is in the conference, says, "Yes", and you say, "Do you also deliver to Wehrmacht units," and then Lohse says, "I can answer that too. There are only a few Jews left whereas tens of thousands have been disposed of, but I can tell you that the civilian population gets, on your orders, 15% less than the Germans." I call your attention to the statement that "there are only a few Jews left whereas tens of thousands have been disposed of." Do you still say, in the face of these documents, that neither Hitler or yourself knew that the Jews were being exterminated?
A This should be understood. From this you cannot conclude that they have been killed. It is not my remark, but the remark of Lohse. On that question I also answered. The Jews were only left in smaller numbers. From this remark you cannot conclude that they were killed. It could also mean that they were removed. what you meant by "there are only a few Jews left, whereas tens of thousands have been disposed of."
A They were still living there. That's how you should understand that. what Ribbentrop said, that the Jews must be exterminated or taken to concentration camps. Hitler said that the Jews must work or be shot. That was in April, 1943. Do you still say that neither Hitler or you knew of this policy to exterminate the Jews?
Q Will you please answer my question. Do you still say that neither Hitler or you knew of the policy to exterminate the Jews? As far as I am concerned, I have said that even approximately, I did not know to what degree this thing took place. that aimed at the extermination of the Jews?
A No, not liquidation of the Jews. I only knew that there had been cases in that respect and that certain perpetrations had taken place.