Q And you also arranged for the currency conversation, did you not? by Hitler, didn't you?
A It is not a wrong and reprehensible act of Hitler. He didn't commit any such act but Hitler, in the way of contract, has received the Sudeten German area and, of course, the currency and the institute which issued the currency had to be amalgamated with German institutions. There is no possibility to speak of injustice. I cannot believe that the Allies would have put their signature to an injustice.
Q So you think that everything up to Munich was all right?
A No. I am certainly of different opinions; there was much injustice. Prague "the beautiful City of Prague"? Wehrmacht?
Q You didn't think that was right dealing, then?
Q Well, we found something we agree on, Doctor. You knew of the invasion of Poland?
Q As an unqualified act of aggression on Hitler's part?
Q The same was true of the invasion of Luxembourg?
Q And of Holland?
Q And of Denmark?
Q And of Norway?
Q And of Yugoslavia?
Q And of Russia?
AAbsolutely, sir; and Norway and Belgium, which you left out.
Q Yes; well, I got to the end of my paper. The entire course was a course of aggression? macht which you had so much to do with creating?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I intend to take up another subject. It is almost time to recess.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess now.
(A recess was taken) 6-1
THE MARSHAL: If it please the Tribunal, the report is made that defendant von Neurath is absent. BY MR. JUSTICE JACKSON:
Q Dr. Schacht, in your direct testimony you made reference to a film, which was taken an exhibited in Germany for propaganda purposes, of your demeanor on the occasion of Hitler's return after the fall of France.
A May I correct that? I did not speak about this film, but my counsel; and that it was used for propaganda purposes has not been mentioned here. My lawyer merely said that it had been displayed during a newreel presentation. There fore it probably ran for about one week.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask to exhibit that film to the Tribunal. It is a very brief film, and the movement in it is very rapid. There is very little of translation involved in it, but the speed of it is such that for myself I had to see it twice in order to really see what it is.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to put it on now?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I would like to put it on now. It will take only a moment, and Dr. Schacht should be placed where he can see it, for I want to ask him some questions], and particularly I may ask you to identify the persons in it, I will ask, if I may, to have it shown twice so that you may be able to see it nore.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly. (At this point the film referred to by Mr. Justice Jackson was shown.)
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that I, in mentioning this exhibit, which I wish to offer in evidence, spoke of it as a "propaganda film". That was not the language of Dr. Dix. Dr. Dix described it as a "weekly newsreel" and as a "weekly film." many of the defendants as you recognized present in that picture? was there. However, I should assume that almost all of them were present. That is from my memory, not from this film. Either following Hitler or among those who received him. action in taking over the Czechoslovakian Bank, you made a speech, did you not, on 29 November 1938?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It is document EC 611, US 622. I am advised that the film became USA Exhibit 835, and before I pass from it, I would like to offer the statement as to the personality of Hermann Goering, which is US document 3936 PS, as US Exhibit 836.
Q In this speech of 29 November 1938, Dr. Schacht, if I am correctly informed -- and by the way, it was a public speech was it not? public. If it passed the censorship. it probably was mentioned in the papers. It was public: anyone could have listened to me.
"It ispossible that no bank of issue in peace times carried on such a daring credit policy as the Reichsbank since the seizure of power by National Socialism. With the aid of this credit policy, however, Germany created an armament second to none, and this armament in turn made possible the results of our policy."
Is that correct?
A That is absolutely correct, and I was very much surprised. Please let me finish. I was very much surprised that it was necessary to do this in order to get justice in the world.
Q The taking over of Czechoslovakia representing your idea of justice?
but that that country was presented to Germany by the Allies on a trade. demning it? I can not get your position, Doctor. Will you just tell us were you for it; are you for it today, or against it?
A Will you please tellme again what I am for or what I am against? done.
A I can not answer your question forthis reason: That it was not a taking over; it was a present. If some one gives me a present, such as this, I accept it gratefully.
Q Even though it doesn't belong to them to give?
A Well, of course, that is up to the donor. They must judge that. the gift?
Q Well, we will pass on to your speech. Did you say also:
"Instead of a weak and vacillating government, a single, purposeful, energetic personality is ruling today. That is the great miracle which has actually happened in Germany and which has had it's effect on all field s of life and not least in that of economy and finance. There is no German financial miracle. There is only the miracle of the reawakening of German national consciousness and German discipline and we owe this miracle to our Fuehrer Adolf Hitler."
Did you say that?
A Certainly. That was my great surprise.
Q As Minister without Portfolio, what did your Ministry consist of?
Q What employees did you have?
Q What space did you occupy? office rooms.
Q So the government did not even furnish you an office? Portfolio?
A I do not understand. Whom was I supposed to have met?
Q Did you have any meetings? Did you have any official meetings to attend? from the Reichsbank, I never had a single meeting or conference at all, official or otherwise.
Q Did anybody report to you, or did you report to anybody? to anybody else. position? the time that Hitler came back from France, and you attended the reception for him at the railway station?
Q And went to the Reichstag to hear his speech? Reichsbank, the government continued to pay you your full salary until the end of 1942, did it not:
A I stated yesterday that that is not correct. I received my salary from the Reichsbank, which was due to me by contract. A ministerial salary was not paid to me. I believe that as Minister I received certain representative funds. However, I did not receive a salary as Minister. 1945 and ask you whether you gave these answers to these questions on that interrogation:
"Question: What salary did you receive as Minister without Portfolio?
"Answer: I could not tell you exactly. I think it was some 24,000 marks--20,000 or 24,000 marks. I can not tell you exactly, but it was accounted on the salary and afterwards on the pension I got from the Reichsbank so I was not paid twice.
"Question: In other words, the salary that you received as Minister without Portfolio during the period you were also President of the Reichsbank was deducted from the Reichsbank?
"Answer: yes.
"Question: However, after you severed your connection with the Reichsbank in January 1939, did you receive the whole salary?
"Answer: I received the whole salary because my contract was still running until the end of 1942.
"Question: So you received a full salary until the end of 1942?
"Answer: Full salary and no extra salary, but from the first of January 1942 I got my pension from the Reichsbank, and again the salary of the Ministry was deducted from that, or vice versa. Which was higher, I do not know; I got a 30,000 mark pension from the Reichsbank." answers as follows:
"Question: What was the date of your contract?
"Answer: 1937. From March 17, 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942. Four years. Four years contract.
"Question: You were really then given a four year appointment?
"Answer: That is what I told you. After 1942 I got a pension from the Reichsbank.
"Question: What was the amount of your salary and all other income from the Reichsbank?
"Answer: All the income from the Reichsbank, including my fees for representation, amount to 60,000 marks a year, and the pension is 24,000. Y ou see, I had a short contract but a high pension.
As Reichsminister without Portfolio, I had another, I think also 20,000 or 24,000 marks."
Now, is that correct?
A The salaries on paper are not correctly cited here. I have claimed there that I was only paid by one source. I have been asked, "What salary did you receive as Reich Minister?" I have stated that. However, I never received it. It was merely deducted from my Reichsbank salary. And a pension, as I see it here, is quoted wrongly. In one case I believe I had 24,000 marks pension, while it was said here that it was 30,000 marks. In my own money affairs I am not as correct as I am with my official money affars. However, I have been paid only once, and that is mainly by the Reichsbank, and that also has not been stated correctly, and that was not until the end of '42, the end of June of '42, that my contract was terminated. Then the pension began and this pension also was paid only once. How those two, that is the Ministry and Reichsbank, set off these amounts against each other is unknown to me. offset against the other; is that what you mean? regime?
A That is still in existence today. It has nothing to do with the regime. I hope that I will still receive my pension; how else could I pay my expenses?
Q Well, they may not be very heavy. Doctor.
When General Book resigned, he asked you to resign?
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute, it is quite unnecessary for anyone present in Court to show their amusement by laughter. BY MR. JUSTICE JACKSON:
Q (Continuing) Were you asked to resign when General Book resigned?
A No, he didn't say that.
Q Have you in mind the testimony given by Gisevius here?
A Yes. It was an error by Gisevius. sharply to your attention?
retirement. I assume that was about the end of August or the beginning of September of the year of 1938. should resign along with Beck?
A No, nothing was said about that. Beck saw me in my room and he never mentioned anything of this sort, and we never debated it. way of expressing your protest against these things which you now say you disapprove? put through those things which have to be done and I regretted it very much that Beck retired. Those things which happened were caused by an entirely false policy. This policy was partly forced upon us. We did not handle it properly. In February Neurath was dismissed. In fall Beck stopped out. In January, 1939, I was dismissed. It was alwaysone after the other who was thrown out, if it had been possible. In our group, if I may speak of a group, what we had hoped for and expected, that is to undertake a common action, would have been an excellent thing. However, these individual retirements had no use whatsoever; at least they had no success. to the head of state? the period until the fall of France to hold yourself out as a part of the government and a part of the regime, didn't you?
A "Well, I never have considered myself apart of the regime because I was against it. However, of course, I also, beginning in fall of 1938, worked towards my own retirement, as soon as I recognized that Hitler did not stop the rearmament but continued it, and my own inabilityto act against it
Q Well, when did you start working towards your own retirement?
A Pardon me; I did not get you. office? stropping of rearmament by Hitler was not to be expected by us, that we could not prevent a continuation of the rearmament, that is when we started within our circle of the directorate of the Reichsbank to talk about this question and to formulate plans that a course of continued rearmament was nothing for us to be connected with; that is the last quarter of the year 1938.
sufficient consequence to cause you to resign and withhold a further use of your name from this regime? towards the better and, consequently, I accepted all the disadvantages which were connected with my remaining in office, even the danger that some day I would be judged, as it is happening today. despite your disapproval, as you say, of the invasion of Poland? never given that permission. deal to this group at any time, and that you were one of the only men in that group who had any standing abroad? you as a compliment. The second, I believe, is not correct. I believe that several other members of the regime also had a standing in foreign countries, among whom also were a few who are sitting with me in the prisoner's dock. obtained the understanding that you were supporting the regime continuously until you were deprived of the office of minister without portfolio, would they not?
A That is absolutely incorrect. As I have stated yesterday repeatedly and also during my direct examination, I have always been mentioned in foreign broadcasts as a man who is an enemy of the system and all my friends and acquaintances in foreign countries, and there were very many of those, knew that I was against this system and worked against it. And if any journalist could be mentioned to me today who did not know this, then he does not know his business. banker Leon-diplomatic representative of the United States in Berlin, was there not?
and usually once a day with Washington?
A Yes. I didn't know it; but I assumed it. United States or with an official of the United States, you might have communicated through the regular channels? an American official. I merely desired to reestablish my connection with a friend who had invited me in January to come to the United States, and I make reference to this previous correspondence between him and me in January.
Now, Dr. Schacht, while you were minister without portfolio aggressive wars were instituted, according to your testimony, against Poland, against Denmark and Norway in April of 19140, against Holland and Belgium in May of 1940; in June there was the French armistice and surrender, in September of 1940, there was the German-Japanese-Italian Tripartite Pact; in April of 1941, there was an attack on Jugoslavia and Greece, which you were say were aggressive; in June of 1940 there was the invasion of Soviet Russia, which you say was aggressive; on December the 7th, 1941, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, and after the attack declared war on the United States; on the 8th of December, 1941, the United States declared on Japan, but not on Germany; on December the 11th, 1941, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States; and all these things happened in the foreign field and you kept your position as minister without portfolio under the Hitler Government, didn't you?
A Mr. Justice -
Q Isn't that a fact?
A Yes, and I wish to add something to this. Dozens of witnesses who have testified here, and from myself you have heard again and again that it was absolutely impossible unilaterally to retire from an office because, if I have been put in as a minister by the head of a government, I can only retire over his signature. You have also heard that at various times I attempted to rid myself of this ministerial office. Besides the witnesses' testimony, I can bring you testimony from others, including Americans, that it was well known that Hitler did not permit anyone to retire from an office without his permission.
And now you accuse me that I remained. I did not remain for my pleasure. I remained because there was no other possibility for me than with a tremendous crash to retire from the ministry, and this crash I tried to bring about almost every day until, finally in January 1943, I succeeded to do that and then to disappear from my office under certain danger to my life.
Q Well, I'll deal with your explanation later. I am now getting the facts.
You didn't have an open break with Hitler so that you were not entirely out of, office there after the German offensive broke down in Russia and the German armies were in retreat, and after the allies landed in Africa, didn't you? crash is dated November 30, 1942. The crash and its success is dated January 21, 1943, because Hitler and Goering and some other people who had to deal with it needed seven weeks to make up their minds about the consequence of my actions. the ship was sinking, wasn't it, or was lost? times have already shown this. You have also already spoken about this. I have mentioned my rights to Ribbentrop and Funk I have given a number of descriptions here which, prove that I never believed in the possibility of a German victory at any time. My disappearance from my office has nothing to do with these questions at all. without portfolio because you thought it might be dangerous to resign. You were encouraging the generals in the Army to commit treason against the head of the State, were you not? to this. It was not because of the threatening danger to my life. For myself I was not afraid of danger to my life because my life had been endangered since 1937 on I had been in constant danger of my life and I was exposed to the whim of the Party an of the head of the Party. treason against the head of the state I answer with the word yes.
Hitler, did you not? by me, I did not think of an assassination of Hitler. However, I must admit that later I said if it could be done any other way, we will have to kill him.
Q Did you say "I will have to kill him" or did you say "Somebody else will have to kill him?" myself. Yes. But, please don't accuse -- don't put me before a German court for attempted murder because in that case I am guilty. sufficiently open so that the foreign files in France, which you say were searched by the Gestapo, had a single bit of it?
A Yes, I couldn't announce it or it would have been in the newspapers. put you under arrest until the 20th of July attack on Hitler's life? if they had been a little smarter, but that seems to be a strange attribute of any police force. dismissed you? Until that time they apparently were in the belief that you were doing more good than harm?
A The thoughts which they had at that time I don't know.
Please don't question me about that. You will have to ask somebody from the regime, and you have plenty of those right here. attack on 20 July on Hitler's life?
Q You knew that Gisevius says you didn't know about it?
know, but also Goerdeler and General Lindemann. I was entirely informed about everything and Col. Grunan told me about it. I also stated that I did not inform my friends about this because this was a bi-lateral agreement and we did not want to talk to anyone about anything which could have gone to the Gestapo. three people who knew about that being wrought within military personnel? thing--about every detail, so naturally, he could not testify about it.
Q And so, Dr. Schacht, we are to appraise your testimony in the light of the fact that you personally, over a long period of time, pursued a course of sabotage of your government's policies under treason, against the head of the State, rather than openly resign your office completely?
A You constantly refer to my resignation. I have told you and proven to you that a resignation was not possible. Consequently your conclusion is a wrong one.
Q Let's see. In your interrogation on October 16, 1945. United States Exhibit, 636, some questions were asked you about the generals of the Army, and I ask you if you didn't -- if you weren't asked these questions and if you didn't give these answers.
Question: "I say, suppose you were chief of the general staff, and Hitler decided to attack Austria, would you say you had the right to withdraw?"
Answer: "I would have said, 'Withdraw me, sir'."
Question: "You would have said that?"
Answer: Yes.
Question: "So you take the position that any officer could, at any time, withdraw if he thought that the moral obligation was such that he felt that he could not go on?"
Answer: "Quite."
Question: "In other words, you feel that the members of the general staff of the Wehrmacht who were responsible for carrying into execution Hitler's plan are actually guilty with him?"
Answer: "That is a very difficult question you put to me, sir, and I answer yes."
You gave those answers, didn't you? to give an explanation. If Hitler, if Hitler, I say, ever had given me an immoral order, I would have refused to execute it. That is what I said about the generals also, and I stand to this testimony which you have just read.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am through with him, your Honor, except that I would like to note the exhibit numbers. The petition to Hinde referred to yesterday is 3901-PS, and will become USA Exhibit 837. The von Blomberg interrogation of October 1945, is United States Exhibit 838.
DR. LATERNSER (Counsel for the General Staff and the O.K.W.) Mr. President, I request that the testimony of the accused Schacht be stricken from the record as far as he was accused, and this became part of the protocol, the minutes. The question, as I understood it, was whether he considered the general staff as actually guilty as Hitler. This question was answered with "Yes by this accused. also the answer--because a witness cannot make judgment in this case. That is a task of the court. For this reason, I request that this testimony be stricken from the record.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: May it please the Tribunal, I do not offer this opinion of Schacht's as evidence against the General Staff or against any soldier on trial. The evidence, I think, was apparently used to the credibility of Schacht as to his position, and I do not think that his opinion on this matter is evidence against himself on the question of credibility.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Dix.
DR. DIX: The question by Justice Jackson was not phrased as to whether Schacht considered the General Staff guilty, but the question was whether it was correct that Schacht, in an interrogation during his previous examination, had given a certain answer to one question. In other words, it was a question about a fact which was in the past and it was not a question about an opinion or a judgement which he was expected to give here. stricken out, to the extent of these exact words: "I, Schacht, would not have executed an immoral order by Hitler; I refused." I request that those words remain in the record. So far as the rest of this answer of Schacht's is concerned, I, as his defense counsel, declare that it is a matter of indifference to me.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, after the declaration of Justice Jackson, I withdraw my objection.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, may I begin my cross-examination?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: your counsel you informed us as to the circumstances of your meeting for the first time with Hitler and Goering. You also recalled one detail, such a particular detail as the pea soup served for supper at Goering's place. relations with Hitler and Goering, Tell us, on whose initiative did the first meeting with Hitler and Goering take place? Strauss, had invited me to an evening in his home, and in his home I met Goering. The meeting with Hitler took place byway of Goering asking me to come to his home -- that is, Goering's home -- to meet Hitler. to meet Hitler and Goering? strongest parties within the Reichstag. They had 108 seats, and the National Socialist movement, throughout the country, was extremely lively. Consequently I had a general interest in making the acquaintance of the leading men of this movement of whom I had no knowledge, or at least whom I didn't know until then.
Q But then you said that you were invited by Goering. Why did Goering invite you?
A Please ask Mr. Goering that.
Q Didn't you ask him yourself?
A Mr. Goering had the desire to have me meet Hitler, or that Hitler meet me.
Q What for? With what aim in mind?
A That you must ask Mr. Goering.
Q Don't you think that Hitler and Goering intended, and not without success, to draw you into participation in the Fascist movement, since they knew you as a remarkable financier and as a man who was sharing their views? that time. However, I could imagine that it would be just as interesting for these gentlemen to meet Mr. Schacht as it was interesting to me to meet Mr. Hitler and Mr. Goering.
Q It was limited only by your interest? Am I correct in understanding that? Or did you have some other considerations of a political nature? You understood, of course, that your participation in the Fascist movement by itself would be quite profitable to Hitler, inasmuch as you were a well-known man? kind of people these men were. What interest these two gentlemen had, as I have already stated, is unknown to me. My collaboration in the Fascist movement was entirely out of the question, and I have never collaborated in this matter. As I have stated here, the acquaintance was made in January of 1931, which was one and a half years before these elections. Throughout these eighteen months a collaboration did not take place.