SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes. BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE:
Q Would you like to look at that, defendant? It is No. 3945 PS, a letter of the 14th of July, 1943, signed "K":
"When I went into the matter of the Private Fund, the competent people in the Reich Chancellery showed an entirely understanding attitude to this matter, and asked for a written application from Your Excellency. When I replied that I did not wish to bring about such an application before success was announced, they asked for a little linger for a further exchange of views. After a few days I received an intimation that I could bring about the application without hesitation, upon which I handed over the letter whic I had previously withheld. The amount requested has been handed to me today and I have duly entered this sum in my special cashbook as a Credit".
Q Does that help you? Can you tell the Tribunal what were the special outlays for the obtaining of diplomatic information for which you received this money?
A I am sorry; I just cannot recall this matter at all. At the remarkable part is that this letter is dated the 14th of July, 1943, when I had no activity whatsoever any more. At this moment, I cannot tell you.
Q That is very strange, you know. In a further letter, in 3953 PS, on 8 January 1943, and in succeeding letters on the 4th of March and the 20th of April, the end of your occupation of the premises of 23 Rheinbarben Allee is explained there and when your expenses ceased when you went to live in the country. I was just going to ask you a little about that house. If you will just look at the affidavit of Mr. Geist, the American consul -- My Lord, that is 1759 PS, USA Exhibit 420 -- I referred to this this morning -the passage I want to tell you about is in the middle of a paragraph English version.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you have the separate document?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes, My Lord, it is at the foot of Page 11. The paragraph begins: "Another instance of the same nature occurred with regard to my landlord --".
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, if your Lordship will go on another ten lines, after explaining about his landlord's having to give up his house to the SS, he says:
"I know that on many occasions whore it was thought necessary to increase the pressure, a prospective purchaser or his agent would be accompanied by a uniformed SA or SS man. I know because I lived in the immediate neighborhood and knew the individuals concerned, that Baron von Neurath, one time Foreign Minister of German got his house from a Jew in this manner. Indeed, he was my next door neighbor in Dahlem. Von Neurath's house was worth approximately 250,000 dollars." BY SIR. DAVID MAXWELL FYFE:
Q Was that 23 Rheinbarben Allee? non-existent secret cabinet council could have it as an official resident? Who acquired it?
A I did not quite follow you. Who did what?
Q Who acquired 23 Rheinbarben Allee? Who get it?
A That is something I cannot tell you about. In the year 1937, when Hitler tried to put up the large buildings for his Reich Channcellery, one day he told me that I would have to move from my flat, which is right behind the Foreign Office, for he, Hitler, need ed the garden for his Reich Chancellery. He told me that the house would be torn down. Building Administration so that they would find other living quar ters for me.
That agency then suggested several places to me. The had expropriated Jewish mansions. But I turned all of them down. my personal physician, to whom I mentioned this matter on occasion, and he told me that he knew of a place, No. 23, where he was the house physician to the owner. The owner of this property at 23 was Oberstleutnant Glotz, who was the brother of a close friend of mine I told the Reich Construction Administration about this, and told the officers to get in touch with the gentlemen involved. In the course of the negotiations, which were managed by the Reich agency, a contract of sale was brought about, and the price was in marks, not in dollars. cash, and on his wish this money was transferred to Switzerland. That is the way he wanted it, and I personally carried this through I do wish to state that I was foreign minister at the time. I did not find another one, and Mr. von Ribbentrop, my successor, moved into the old Reich President Mansion, Palais. Then in the year 1943, this house was destroyed. At the moment, I cannot explain to myself what the reason for these moneys was, whether they were official payments made by the Reich Chancellery. To the best of my knowledge, I cannot tell you. But the statements made by Mr. Geist here are completely wrong. I did not buy this house from a Jew, but I bought it from the Christian Oberstleutnant Glotz.
Q You tell us you passed the money on to Switzerland on 25 June A LJG 17-1 to his account?
A Yes, yes, or Mr. Geist went to Switzerland. I believe his wife was non-Aryan. will leave this document. "I know, too, that Alfred Rosenberg, who lived in the same street with me, acquired a house from a Jew in a similar fashion." Do you know anything of that?
A I do not know how Mr. Rosenberg acquired his house. 1938. Perhaps I con state this shortly if I have understood you correctly. You know that the prosecution complained about your reply to the British Ambassador with regard to the Anschluss As I understand you, you are not now suggesting that your reply was accurate but you are saying that that was the best of your information at the time; is that right?
A Yes, that is quite correct. That was an incorrect statement but I made it in good faith because I didn't know any better.
Q You say that you didn't hear that neither Hitler nor Goering told you a word about those ultimata which were given first of all to Herr von Schuschnigg and secondly to P resident Miklas; you were told nothing about that? Is that what you are telling?
A No, at that time I didn't know about these things. I heard about them later.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, I am going to leave that. I am not going into that incident in detail--we have been over that several times--in view of the way the defendant is not contesting the accuracy.
THE PRESIDENT: I should like to know when he heard of the true facts.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am much obliged. BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE:
Q When did you hear of the true facts of the Anschluss?
A The details here, when this report of Legation Councillor 25 June A LJG 17-2 Hewel was submitted to me, I heard, of course, prior to this time that there had been pressure exerted on Mr. Schuschnigg but I had nothing else.
As I said, the details of the fact, I learned here in Nurnberg.
Q I only want to get it quite clear. You say that between the 11th of March and your coming to Nurnberg, you never heard anything about the throat of marching into Austria, which had been made by the defendant Goering, or Keppler or Gener Muff, on his behalf? You never heard anything about that?
A No, no; I board nothing of those facts. you gave to Mr. Mastny, the Czechoslovakian minister in Berlin. I would like you to look at document 122 which you will find in document book 12, page 122 of document book 12. The passage that I want to ask you about is in the sixth paragraph. After dealing with the conversation with the defendant Goering about the Czechoslovakian mobilization, it goes on to say: "M. Mastny was in a position to give him definite and binding assurances on this subject" -- that is, the Czechoslovakian mobilization -"and today" --that is, the 12th of March -- "spoke with Baron von Neurath, who, among other things, assured him on behalf of Herr Hitler that Germany still considers herself bound by the German-Czechoslovak Arbitration Convention concluded at Locarne in October 1925." of Baroness von Ritter--that the meeting on the 5th of November had this very distrubing effect on you and in fact produced a bad heart attack. One of the matters that was discussed at that meeting was an attack not only on Austria but also on Czechoslovakia, to protect the German flank. Why did you think, on the 12th of March, that Hitler would ever consider himself bound by the German-Czechoslovakian Arbitration Treaty which meant that he would have to refer any dispute with Czecho slovakia to the Council of the League of Nations or the Inter-25 June A LJG 17-3 national Court of Justice?
Why on earth did you think that that was even possible, that Hitler would submit a dispute with Czechoslovakia to either of these bodies?
A I can tell you that quite exactly. I testified yesterday already that on the 11th, Hitler had me summoned to him for reasons that I could not explain up to this day and he told me that the marching into Austria was to take place during the night. In reply to my question or to my remark rather, that distrubance and unrest would be created In Czechoslovakia through this step, he said that he had no intentions of any kind at this time toward Czechoslovakia and he said he looped through the marching in and through the occupation of Austria, relations with Czechoslovakia would markedly improve. From this sentence and from his promise chat nothing would be done, I concluded that matters would remain as they were and that, of course, we were still bound to this treaty, this Arbitration Treaty of 192 5; therefore, I could give assurances of that kind in good faith to Mr. Mastny. March? Did you still believe the words that Hitler stated on the 12th of March 1938?
Q I thought von Fritsch was a friend of yours; wasn't he?
A Who was that?
Q Colonel General von Fritsch; he was a friend of yours?
A Yes, indeed; yes, he was.
Q You didn't believe that he had been guilty of homosexuality, did you?
Q Well, didn't you know that he had been subjected in J anuary 1938 to a framed-up charge?
THE PRESIDENT: Will you please answer instead of shaking your head.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I knew that, of course, and I learned of it and the fact that this was trumped-up and faked by the 25 June A LJG 17-4 Gestapo and not by Hitler.
BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE:
Q Well, didn't you know that those unsavory matters concerning Fieldmarshal von Blomberg and Colonel General von Fritsch had been faked up by members of the Nazi gang, who were your colleagues in the government? when you come back into activity for some time, President Bones did appeal to this German-Czechoslovak Arbitration Convention and Hitler brushed the appeal to one side. Do you remember that in September 1938 he brushed it to one side?
A No; that, I don't know, for at that time I was not in office any longer and I didn't even see these matters at all.
Q You don't know? Of course, it was in the German press and every other press that he appealed to about this treaty and Hitler refused to look at it; but you say that you honestly believed on the 12th of March that Hitler would stand by that Arbitration Treaty; that is your answer?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, that might be a convenient moment to break off.
(A recess was taken.)
BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE:
Q. Defendant, you spoke yesterday with regard to the memorandum of Lt. General Frederici. Do you remember in that memorandum he referred to a memorandum of yours on how to deal with Czechoslovakia?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, now, I would like you just to look at Document 3859, so that the Tribunal can see your attitude towards the Czechs from your own words.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, that is at Pare 107 of Document Book 12-A.
Q. (Continuing) I will read first your letter to Lammers of the 31st of August, 1940.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, that will be GB 520.
Q. (Continuing) You say: "Dear Herr Lammers: Englosed I send you the memorandum, which I mentioned in advance in my letter of the 13th July 1940, about the question of the future organization of the Bohemian-Moravian country. I enclose another memorandum on the same question, which my Secretary of State K. H. Frank, has drawn up independently of me and which, in its train of thoughts, leads to the same result" -- I ask you to note the next words -"and with which I fully agree. Please present both memoranda to the Fuehrer and arrange a date for a personal interview for myself and Secretary of State Frank. As I have heard from a private source that individual Party and other Offices intend to submit proposals to the Fuehrer for separating various parts of the Protectorate under my authority, without my knowing these projects in detail, I should be grateful to you if you would arrange the date for my interview early enought for me, as the competent Reich Protector and one who understands the Czech problem, to have an opportunity, together with my State Secretary, to place our opinions before the Fuehrer before all sorts of plans are suggested to him by other people." memorandum. If you will turn it over -- this is your memorandum. Take the first paragraph, Section 1: "Any considerations about the future organization of Bohemia and Moravia must be based on the goal which is to be laid down for that territory from a political and national-political point of view.
From a State-political standpoint there can be but one aim; total incorporation into the Greater German Reich; from a national-political standpoint to fill this territory with Germans." And then you point to the program, and if you go on to Section 2, in the middle of Paragraph 2, you will find a sub-paragraph beginning -
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, it is the top of Page 109, Your Lordship's copy.
Q. (Continuing) "These 7.2 million Czechs, of whom 3.4 millions live in towns and communities of over 2000 ibhabitants and 3.8 millions in communities of under 2000 inhabitants and in the country, are led and influenced by an intelligentsia which is unduly puffed up in proportion to the size of the country. This part of the population also tried, after the alteration of the constitutional situation of this area, more or less openly to sabotage or at any rate postpone necessary measures which were intended to fit the circumstances of the country to the new state of affairs. The remainder of the population, i.e. small craftsmen, peasants and workmen, adapted themselves better to the new conditions."
Then, if you will go on to Paragraph 3, you say: "But it would be a fatal mistake to conclude from this that the government and population behaved in this correct manner because they had accepted inwardly the loss of their independent state and incorporation into Greater Germany. The Germans continue to be looked upon as unwelcome intruders and there is a widespread longing for a return to the old state of affairs, even if the people do not express it openly. By and large, the population submits to the new conditions but they only do so because they either have the necessary rational insight or else because they fear the consequences of disobedience. They certainly do not do so from conviction. This will be the state of affairs for some time to come."
Go on to Section 3: "But as things are like that, a decision will have to be taken as to what is to be done with the Czech people in order to attain the objective of incorporating the country and filling it with Gentians as quickly as possible and as thoroughtly as possible. 1) The most radical and theoritically complete solution to the problem would be to evacuate all Czechs completely from this country and replace them by Germans."
Then you say that that is not possible because there are not sufficient Germans to fill it immediately.
Then, if you go on to Paragraph 2 on the second half, you say: -
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, that is the last six lines of Page 110.
Q. (Continuing) "It will, where the Czechs are concerned, rather be a case of the one hand, of keeping thos Czechs who are suitable for Germanization by individual selevtive breeding whilst on the other hand, expelling those who are not useful from a racial standpoint or are enemies of the Reich, that is, the intelligentsia which has developed in the last twenty years. If we use such a procedure, Germanization can be carried out successfully." Now, Defendant, you know that in the indictment in this trial we are charging you and your fellow defendants, among many other things, with genecide, which we say is the extermination of racial and national groups or, as it has been put in the well-known book of Professor Lemkin, "a coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups with the aim of anihilating the groups themselves." What you wanted to do was to get rid of the teachers and writers and singers of Czechoslovakia, whom you call the intelligentsia, the people who would hand down the history and traditions of the Czech people to other generations. These were the people that you wanted to destroy by what you say in that memorandum, were they not?
A. Not quite.
Q. But just before you answer, what did you mean by saying, in the last passage that I read to you: "expelling those who are not useful from a racial standpoint or are enemies of the Reich; that is, the intelligentsia which has develiped in the last twenty years"? Did you mean what you said? Were you speaking the truth when you said it was necessary to expell the intelligentsia?
A. To that I can only say one thing, yes and no. First of all, I should like to say that from this report it becomes apparent that the memorandum was written by Frank. I joined my name to it and this was on the 31st of August, 1940.
The memorandum which is referred to in the Frederici report is dated later I think, although I don't know offhand.
Q. I think you will find -- I will give you, in a moment, the letter from Siemke, who transmits Hitler's view, and I think you will find that it is this memorandum that Hitler is dealing with. I will show you Frank's memorandum in a moment. I am suggesting to you now, as you say, to Lammers, that you enclose your memorandum and you enclose another memorandum, of which I will read you the essential part in a moment, which is the memorandum of Karl Hermann Frank. But this is a -
A. They are both Frank's memoranda.
Q. No, but look at your own letter of the 31st of August: "Enclosed I send you the memorandum", and you go on: "I enclose another memorandum --which my Secretary of State K.H. Frank has drawn up independently of me --with which I fully agree." I am suggesting to you now that this is your memorandum referred to in the Frederici document, -
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, that is Page 131 of Document Book 12.
Q. (Continuing) -- where General Frederici says: "After ample deliberation the Reich Protector expressed his view about the various plans in a memorandum." I am suggesting to you that this is your memorandum which you sent on to Lammers for submission to the Fuehrer. Are you really going to tell the Tribunal that this isn't your memorandum?
A No, I don't want to say that at all. At the moment I really don't know. I didn't write it, but I obviously agreed with its contents. The letter to Lammers says so. saying that you would have to expel the intelligentsia, except that you were going to break down the Czechs as a national entity and expel the people who would keep going that history and tradition and language? Isn't that why you wanted to expel the intelligentsia?
A I never mentioned the word "destroy".
Q I said "expel" -cooperation. For that reason, if you were to achieve your target, the target of our policy, then the intelligentsia would have to be reduced and their influence would have to be diminished in same way or other, and that was the aim of my explanation.
Q Yes, you said you achieved your policy, but by "achieving your policy you meant to destroy the Czech people as a national entity with their own language, history and traditions, and assimilate them into the Greater German Reich. That was your policy, wasn't it? Czechs, as far as possible. They would have assimilated themselves too, quite automatically, but that was an aim which could only be achieved after generations. First of all, the Immediate aim was to create cooperation and collaboration, so asto have quiet and order. entirely agree, would you look at paragraph 7 of your own memorandum.
SIR DAVID MAXWELLFYFE: My Lord, it is page 113 of Document Book 12-A Q (Continuing): In Section VII you say:
"If one considers the gigantic tasks facing the German nation after a victorious war, the necessity for a careful and rational utilization of Germans will be apparent to everyone. There are so many tasks that have to be tackled at once and simultaneously that a careful, Well thought out utilization of the Germans who are suitable for carrying out these tasks is necessary.
The Greater German Reich will have to make use of the help of foreigners on a large scale in all spheres and must confine itself to appointing Germans to the key positions and to taking over the reins of public administration where the interests of the Reich make it absolutely necessary." Czechs after the war on the basis of the German victory, that is, that they should disappear as a nation and become assimilated to the German Reich. Wasn't that what was in your mind? That wasn't possible at all. But they were to be assimilated as far as possible, and that is what I mean when I use the word "assimilate". the fact that from the racial point of view -- if you want to use that unpleasant expression -- there are a large number of German elements within Czechoslovakia also.
Q Well new, just turn over and see how your State Secretary's memorandum with which you entirely agree, runs.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, your Lordship will find the beginning of that is Enclosure No. 2 on page 115.
Q (Continuing): The State Secretary states his problem. No says, in the second sentence:
"The question as to whether the Protectorate, with a Reich Protector as its head, is suitable for settling the Czech problem and should therefore be retain or whether it should give place to some other form of government is being raised by various people and is the cause of this memorandum. It will briefly "(a) Indicate the nature of the Czech problem;"(b) Analyze the present way in which it is being dealt with;"(c) Examine the proposed alterations from the point of view of their "(d) Express an independent opinion on the whole question."
Well now, I would like you just to look at your State Secretary's independent opinion with which you entirely agree.
THE PRESIDENT: Oughtn't you to read the last two lines?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Oh yes, my Lord, I'm sorry.
"On a correct decision depends the solution of the Czech problem. We thus bear the responsibility for centuries to come."
Now, my Lord, Frank's own opinion starts on page 121 in Section D of the memorandum, and he begins by saying:
"The aim of Reich policy in Bohemia and Moravia must be the complete Germanization of area and people. In order to attain this, there are two possibilities:
"I. The total evacuation of the Czechs from Bohemia and Moravia to a territory outside the Reich and settling Germans in the freed territory, or "II.
If one leaves the majority of the Czechs in Bohemia and Moravia the simultaneous application of a great variety of methods working towards Germanization, in accordance with a plan containing a target year.
"Such a Germanization provides for:
"1. The changing of the nationality of racially suitable Czechs;
"2. The expulsion of racially unassimilable Czechs and of the intelligentsia who are enemies of the Reich, or 'special treatment' for these and all destructive elements;
"3. The recolonizing of the territory thus freed with fresh German blood." BY SIR DAVID MAXWELLFYFE: to concrete suggestions as to this policy of Germanization. Remember that you entirely agree, in your letter to Lammers.
SIR DAVID MAXWELLFYFE: If your Lordship will turn to page 123, there is a heading "Yough".
Q (Continuing): "Fundamental change in education - Extermination of th Czech historical myth."
That is the first poing: Destroy any idea they might have of their great history, from the time of St. Wenceslaus, nearly a thousand years ago. That your first point.
"Education towards the Reich idea - No getting on without perfect knowledge of the German language - First doing away with the secondary schools, later also with the elementary schools - Never again any Czech universities, only transitionally the 'Collegium Bohemicus' at the German university in Prague two years compulsory labor service.
"Lange scale land policy, creation of German strongpoints and German bridges of land, in particular pushing forward of the German national soil from the north as far as the suburbs of Prague.
"Campaign against the Czech language, which is to become merely a dialect as in the 17th and 18th centuries, and which is to disappear completely as an official language.
"Marriage policy after previous racial examination.
"In attempts at assimilation in the Reich proper, the frontier Gaus must be excluded.
"Apart from continuous propaganda for Germanism and the granting of advantages as an inducement, severest police methods, with exile and 'special treatment' for all saboteurs. Principle: 'Pastry and whip'."
What is that? "Zucker, Brot, und Peitsche".
"The employment of all these methods has a chance of success only if a single central Reich authority wish one man at its head controls its planning, guiding, and carrying out. The direct subordination of the 'master in Bohemia' to the Fuehrer clarifies the political character of the office and the task, and prevents the political problem from sinking down to an administrative problem." your job as Reich Protector and Frank should keep his as State Secretary, and the Gauleiter of the Lower Danube shouldn't be able to interfere and take away Braunau as the capital of his Gau.
Defendant, do you tell this High Tribunal, as you told Dr. Lammers, that you entirely agree with what I suggest to you were dreadful, callous, and unprincipled proposals? Do you agree with these proposals?
Q Well, why did you tell Lammers you did? Why, when things were goin well, did you tell Lammers that you did agree with them?
statements which you just made show quite clearly that this first memorandum was written by Frank, who then added the second memorandum to it, and if you say, as you said at the end just now, that to achieve this it was my purpose to remain in office as Reich Protector, then I can only tell you that the purpose in this connection was that Frank was trying to become Reich Protector. certainly no longer identify myself with them today, and on the occasion when I reported to the Fuehrer I didn't identify myself with those contents either, which becomes clear from the testimony which I gave yesterday, because that is just the -
Q (Interposing): I am concerned with what you wrote in 1940 when you wrote -- and I will read the words again; I have read them three times:
"I enclose another memorandum on the same subject question which my Secretary of State, K. H. Frank, has drawn up independently of me" -- "independ ently of me" -- "and which in its train of thought loads to the same result, an with which I fully agree."
A (Interposing): I have just now told you that I can no longer agree with the contents today, and that at the time when I verbally reported to the Fuehrer, I did not adhere to these statements either, but to the contrary, I made a statement as I explained yesterday, to which I received his agreement. Those were my proposals which I made further at the time.
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, are these documents correctly copied? You see what in the letter of the 31st of August 1940 there is a reference in the margin, "Enclosure 1; Enclosure 2".
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes, my Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Therefore, the letter identifies the document.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes, my Lord, that is so. The one is, as I am suggesting, the defendant's; the other is Frank's.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE:
wise to the Fuehrer. I suggest to you that that is not true, that is not true that you dealt with them otherwise to the Fuehrer. I am putting it quite bluntly that it is not true.
A In that case I must regret to say that you are lying. I must know whether I talked to the Fuehrer and what I personally, orally reported to him and without Frank.
Q Well now, let us just look at the report, at your report. Your Lordship will find it on page 7.
THE PRESIDENT: Page what?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Page 7. It is document 379 of the same book, GB 521. of October. BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE:
Q You will remember your letter was the 31st of August. It says: "Regarding the reception of the Reich protector and Secretary of State Frank by the Fuehrer, I have learnt the following from authentic sources:
"To begin with, the Minister of Justice, Gurtner, gave a report on the Czech resistance movement, during the course of which he maintained that the first trial of the four chief ring leaders would shortly take place before the People's Court.
"The Fuehrer objected to this procedure and declared that execution squads were good enough for Czech insurgents and rebels. It was a mistake to create martyrs through legal sentences, as was proved in the case of Andreas Hofer and Schlageter. As/ matter had already entered the path of legal procedure it was to be continued within this form. The trials were to be postponed until after the war, and then amidst the din of the victory celebrations, the proceedi ng would pass unnoticed. Only death sentences could be pronounced, but would be commuted later on to life imprisonment or deportation.
"Regarding the question of the future of the protectorate, the Fuehrer touched on the following three possibilities:
"1. Continuation of Czech autonomy in which the Germans would live in the protectorate as co-citizens with equal rights. This possibility was, however, out of the question as one had always to reckon with Czech intrigues.
"2. The deportation of the Czechs and the Germanization of the Bohemian and Moravian area by German settlers. This possibility was cut of the question too, as its execution would take a hundred years.
"3. The Germanization of the Bohemian and Moravian area by Germanizing the Czechs, that is, by their assimilation. The latter would be possible with the greater part of the Czech people. Those Czechs against whom there were racial objections or who were anti-German were to be excepted from this assimilation. This category was to be weeded out.
"The Fuehrer decided in favor of the third possibility; he gave orders via Reich Minister Lammers, to put a stop to the multitude of plans regarding partition of the protectorate. The Fuehrer further decided that, in the interests of a uniform policy with regard to the Czechs, a central Reich authority for the whole of the Bohemian and Moravian area should remain at Prague.
"The present status of the protectorate thus continues."
And look at the last sentence:
"The Fuehrer's decision followed the linesof the memoranda submitted by the Protector and Secretary of State Frank." document says that after the reception of the Reich Protector and the Secretary of State, the representative of the Foreign Office in your office says that the decision of the Fuehrer followed the lines of the memoranda put forward by you and your State Secretary Frank. Why do you say that I am wrong in saying it is untrue: that a different line was followed by the Fuehrer? It is set out in that document.
A To that I have to give the following reply: following three questions with reference to the protectorate and they are the three possibilities which I had mentioned and proposed. The document also shows, though not directly, that the cause for this Fuehrer conference had been quite a different one originally than only the protectorate.
The Minister of Justice was present and a legal question referring to the members of the resistance movement was the cause for the discussion and Frank went to join it. the memorandum, which I had in my hand, but about the general tendencies and the future of our policy in the protectorate. I had reported to him those proposals which are contained here under one, two and three. At the end it says:
"The Fuehrer's decision followed the lines of the memoranda submitted by the Protector and Secretary of State Frank."
That remark was added by Dr. Ziemke or whoever had written the document but what I said yesterday about the policy that is what is true and even if I have to admit that in the letter of Lammers I did identify myself with the points, it was nevertheless dropped. to last in your memorandum, as opposed to that of Frank, you were putting forward the organization of the Greater German Reich. I take it in this way, that you envisaged yourself that in the event of a German victory in the war the Czech part of Czechoslovakia would remain part of a Greater G erman Reich.
A No, I beg your pardon. It had already been included and it says specifically here that it should remain in that condition as a protectorate but as a separate structure. this was in the autumn of 1940 -- that your policy towards the Czechs was movements in the area. discussion of the handling and treatment of all questions about the German Czech problem? Why did you forbid their discussion? were the causes for this memorandum, namely the problem of individual parts of the protectorate being torn away, the Sudeten country.
That was the purpose of the report to the Fuehrer, as I explained yesterday, so as to put a stop to that discussion once and for all. statements addressed to the Czech population? Let us look at the document. document book 12a. My lord it is GB 522.
It is for distribution through your various office and you say:
"For the motive stated, I order that in future, when arrangements and publications of any kind concerning the German Czech problem are made, the views of the whole population are more than ever to be directed to the war and its requirements while the duty of the Czech nation to carry out the war tasks imposed on it jointly with the Greater Reich is to be stressed.
"Other questions concerning the German Czech problem are not suitable subjects for public discussion at the present time. I wish to point out that, without detriment to my orders, administrative handling and treatment of all questions about the German Czech problem are to be in no way alluded to."
Then the last paragraph:
"Requisite public statements bout the political questions of the protectorate and in particular those addressed to the Czech population are my business and mine alone and will be published in due time." statements to the Czech population? German, particularly because there was some special event which I can no linger remember and it says here -- for causes and for the reason for which this has arisen.
Once again the future of the protectorate was spoken about. Your proposals and Frank's speak for themselves. I want you to help me on one other matter. arose what was to happen to the students? There were about eighteen thousand students who were, of course, out of work because they could not -