A I cannot tell you that today. It may be true. I do not want to deny it; I do not know anything about it.
Q But you did issue this order?
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: All right. I thank you, Mr. President. It is possible to adjourn now. I shall require thirty minutes more.
(The tribunal adjourned until Wednesday 26. June, 1946, at 1000 Hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will not sit on Thursday, tomorrow afternoon, in open session, but will sit in closed session. That is to say, we will sit tomorrow, Thursday, from 10:00 til 1:00 in open session, and we will sit in the afternoon in closed session.
On Saturday morning, the Tribunal will sit in open session from 10:00 til 1:00.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I am aware that yesterday when I submitted the document USSR 494, the necessary copies of this document were not submitted to the Tribunal. I am very sorry about this, and I would ask you to accept the necessary copies now which I am going to submit. BY MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: If I understood you correctly, you said here before the Tribunal that this statement was issued in connection with the military situation of the time: is that correct? at the time, in as much as in the meantime no political tension had developed at all; therefore, it was not directly in connection with the military situation.
Q It did not depend on the military situation? Do you acknowledge that by this order which you issued, or, let us say, warning, you determined on a system of hostages?
Q I am going to repeat this question. I am asking you, do you acknowledge that by means of this warning, or order, of August, 1939 -this document is being submitted as evidence under No. USSR 490 -- that through this order you set system of hostages?
Q Was it correctly translated to you just now? question, or rather the last sentence. I did not understand. to me. I did no understand it. it now. In this order of yours, in the penultimate paragraph, it is stated that the re sponsibility for all acts of sabotage will borne not only by individuals but by the entire Czechoslovakian population; this means not only those who are actually responsible for these acts of sabotage, but so to speak, a system of hostages is being set up, so that the people who are not actually guilty will also be punished. So with this order you inaugurated a massacre against the Czech population.
A. Not at all. It merely means that the moral repon-
sibility for the possible deed should be put into the hands of the Czech people.
Q. For instance, in Lidice, was this not applied in practice, this order of yours, wasn't it put through? Was it only a question of the moral responsibility there? In this order you state the following: "Those who will not fully understand the importance of these measures will be considered to be an enemy of the Reich". Were those enemies of the Reich who felt -- did they have only moral responsibility?
A. Yes, if someone didn't obey orders, then he would naturally be punished.
Q. That is exactly what I am trying to determine and that is,why I put this question to you, that just by this order of August 1939, you set up the be inning of a massacre and you started punishing people who were not actually responsible for crimes?
A. Well, I don't know how you can come to that conclusion on the basis of this warning.
Q. We are going now to the deductions which we can make out of this. In the report of the Czechoslovakian government, which was submitted as evidence, USSR 60, which is a report on investigations of the crimes committed by your collaborators, all this documentary evidence you just deny then. I am not going to argue with you regarding this document but I am going to read into the record some of the testimony by the Witnesses, and I would like you to reply whether you corroborate this evidence or whether you deny it. I am going to read into the record an excerpt from the testimony of the former minister of Finance, Josef Kalfus, of the 8th of November 1945.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: The Tribunal will find these excerpts on Page 12 of the British text, Document USS R 60.
Q (Continuing): Kalfus states: "All told, we may say that the economic system introduced thus by Neurath and after him by later German regimes, were nothing else than a systematic organized robbery.
As to the occupation of decisive positions in the Czech industry and finance, it may be pointed out that together with Neurath a vast economic machinery was installed, which immediately occupied the chief positions in industry (Skoda Works, Brno Armament works, Steel Works at Vitkovice) Important banks (Bohemian Discount Bank, Bohemian Union Bank, and Laender Bank), were occupied as well". Do you corroborate this evidence?
A. I talked about this matter in great detail yesterday, and I refer you to my statement I made yesterday. I have nothing to add.
Q. You don't corroborate this evidence. Very well.
A. Not in the least.
Q. The former President of Czechoslovakia, Richard Bienert, during the interrogation of the 8th November 1945, stated -
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, this excerpt is on page 13 of the English text of the document USSR 160.
Q. (Continuing): "When we got to know him more closely, we noticed that he was ruthless toward the Czechs, and that he would not be moved by any thoughts of the Czech people hurt in its national feelings. As Regional Prsident of Bohemia I knew that is was Neurath who subjected the political administration in Bohemia and Moravia to German control, both the state administration and the local government as well... I remember also that Neurath caused the abolition of the Regional School Councils, and the appointment of German School Inspectors in their place. Neurath violated the order of Hitler issued on March 16 1939. He ordered the dissolution of the regional representative bodies; he caused that the Czech workers were being sent to the Reich from April 1939 onwards, in order to work for the war machine of the Reich; he ordered the closing down of the Czech universaties and of many Czech secondary and elementary schools;
he abolished the Czech gymnastic units and associations, such as Sokol, Orel, FDTJ, ordered the confiscation of all the property of these gymnastic organizations; he abolished the organizations YMCA, NWCA and ordered the confiscation of their property; he abolished the Czech recreation homes and recreation camps for young workman and students, and ordered the confiscation of their property; he was guilty of persecution of Church Congregations as, for example, the Congregation of the Ursulines, which had an educational and humanitarian task.
I know that all the property of these organizations was handed over for the use of the German institutions SS, SA, Wehrmacht, Hitlerjugend, RAD (Reichsarbeitsdienst). All that is a matter of common knowledge. At the outbreak of the war on September 1 1939, mass arrests of socalled hostages took place all over the Protectorate. The greater part of them were higher officials, university teachers, Army officers and well-to-do Czech citizens. The Gestapo carried out she arrests, but on the order of the Reich Protector. I myself war arrested on September 1 1939, as well. I was taken away into the prison at Kanrac, and interrogated in Petschek palace. General Jazek, on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior intervened for my release. I was then released. The consent to the release by the order of the Reich Protector arrived four hours later. That showsthat the whole action was directed by him." Will you still deny this testimony?
A. No, no. About all the matters which are listed here I spoke yesterday in great detail. I do not prpose to repeat it all now. Apart from that, it seems peculiar to me that Mr. Bienert, of all people, who knew perfectly well what I had ordered and what my relations were to the Gestapo, and so forth, that Mr. Bienert of all people should say things like that.
Q. Very well. Let's look at some other testimony. The former Prime Minister of the so-called Protectorate, Dr. Krejci, during the interrogations on the 8th of November 1945, states -
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, this excerpt can be found on page 17 of the English text of the document USSR 160.
Q. (Continuing): "I know that the gymnastic associations have been disbanded and their property confiscated at the order of the Reich Protector, and their funds and equipment handed over to the used by German associations such as SS, SA, Hitler Youth and so on.
On the 1st September 1939, when Poland was attacked by the German army, arresting took place on a large scale, especially arresting of army officers, intelligentsia and important political personalities. The arresting was made by the Gestapo, but it could not be done without the approval of the Reich Protector".
On the following page there is an excerpt: "As far as the Jewish problem was concerned, the government of the Protectorate was forced by the Reich Protector to an action against the Jews and when this pressure had no result, the Germans or the Reich Protector's office started die persecution of the Jews according to the laws in the Reich. The result was that tens of thousands of Jews were persecuted and lost their lives and property". Are you going to deny this testimony, too?
A. With reference to the order which you mentioned at the beginning, concerning die physical training schools, I shall have to tell you that that was a police measure which I had not ordered; and I go on to repeat, as I said yesterday, that the arrests at the beginning of the war were carried out by the Gestapo, but on the strength of a direct order from Berlin, without me even having heard about the matt er. I didn't know about it until afterwards. Finally, with reference to the Jewish problem which is mentioned in the end, the statement which is contained in the indictment I think, namely, that I had attempted to get the government of Czechoslovakia to introduce anti-Jewish laws, is an incorrect statement. I myself, or rather my Secretary of State, Frank, talked to Dr. Krejci. I myself have never talked to him. I only talked to Mr. Hacha afterwards. When there was an attempt to introduce racial laws with reference to the Czechs, Mr. Hacha objected to this and I said that I would take responsibility for it, that he need not do so. The introduction of the anti-Jewish laws was carried out by a decree of mine, yes, because as early as the beginning of April 1939, I had received orders that I should introduce the anti-Jewish laws in the Protectorate, which was now a part of the Reich.
I delayed this step until July by means of all sorts of inquiries in Berlin, so as to give time to the Jews to prepare themselves in some way or other. That is the true picture.
Q Tell me, do you know Dr. Havelka?
A I know Mr. Havelka, yes.
Q He knew exactly about your conversations with Hacha?
A How much he knew about that, I don't know. He came to see me on one or two occasions. He was transport minister, I think.
Q Yes, that is quite correct. He was the Administrator of Transport, but before that, he was thehead of the chancellery of Hacha's office. gave the following testimony, which can be found on pages 18 and 19 of the English text of Exhibit USSR No. 60. I amquoting an excerpt.
"He" -- Neurath -- "was not interested in the Czech nation and interventions of cabinet members and Dr. Hacha pressing Czech demands were on the whole without any result. Neurath was responsible for all actions which were carried out in the territory of Bohemia and Moravia and to which his attention was being drawn by the members of the Government and by Dr. Hacha.
"There were especially the following actions:
"Arresting of Czechoslovak officers, intelligentsia, members of the Czechoslovak Legion of the First World War and politicians at the time of the attack on Poland by the German army.
"There were about six to eight thousand persons arrested. They were hostages. The Germans themselves called them 'prisoners d'honneur.' The majority of those hostages was never interrogated and all steps taken at the office of the Reich Protector in favor of those unfortunate men without any result.
"Neurath, as the only representative of the Reich Government in the territory of the protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia was responsible for the execution of nine students on November 17, 1939."
THE PRESIDENT: General Raginsky, wouldn't it be better and perhaps fairer to the defendant to ask him one question at a time? You are reading large passages of these documents which contain many questions. Perhaps you could take these two paragraphs you read now about the arrest of officers and ask him whether he says those are true or untrue, and then go on to the other paragraphs you want to. It is very difficult for him to answer a great number of questions at one time.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, he has these documents before him, but I will take into consideration what you have just told me, and I think I will speak about the students separately.
BY GENERAL RAGINSKY: read into the record regarding thehostages? Do you corroborate this evidence? beginning of September, 1939, I have spoken earlier, and I spoke in detail about thatyesterday. I will repeat it for you. my knowledge. Havelka'sstatement, that no steps had been taken in the interest of these people is untrue. He ought to know that I continuously fought for these people and that a large number of them were released upon my efforts.
Q Very well, lot's go over to another question. Here, before this Tribunal, there has already been introduced several times a certain document, under No. USSR-223.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: This is the diary of Frank, Mr. President. I have in view Karl Hermann Frank, who was sentenced to die for his crimes. I beg your pardon, it is the defendant Frank that I am speaking about. This excerpt has already been quoted here, but I should like to put a question to the defendant on it. I shall read it into the record:
"During an interview with a correspondent of the Voelkischer Beobachter in 1912, the defendant Frank stated that in Prague, for instance, there were put out some red placards that many Czechs were shot, and that if an order were issued that such placards be put up regarding every seven Poles who were shot, then there wouldn't be enough timber to manufacture enough paper for such placards." BY GENERAL RAGINSKY: in Prague regarding the people who were shot? poster where my signature was misused, and that I hadn't seen it. That is that red poster.
Q Well, if you haven't seen these posters, will you please look at one of them.
We are going to show it to you right now.
THE PRESIDENT: General Raginsky, he didn't say he hadn't seen it. He said it was put up without his knowledge.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I am going to come back to this, but I should like to determine that these were the red posters which were mentioned by Frank in his diary, andI should like to submit this poster under No. USSR-489.
I should like to readit into the record; it is very short and it won't take much time. The text is as follows:
"In spite of repeated serious warnings, a number of Czech intellectuals, in collaboration with arrogant circles abroad, are trying to upset peace and order by committing major or minor acts of resistance. It could be determined that the ringleaders of these resistance acts are especially to be found in the Czech high schools. Since, on the 28th of October and 15th of November, these elements have been mishandling individual Germans, the Czech high schools were closed for the duration of three years, nine of the perpetrators were shot, and a number of the accomplices arrested." BY GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q You state here that you never signed such a document, or let's call it a warning.
A Yes. I explained yesterday or the day before how this originated, and that it was compiled when I was absent. Hermann Frank of the 26th of November which can be found on pages 46 and 47 of the Russian text and the English text. Karl Hermann Frank, giving evidence regarding this poster, the text of which I have just read into the record, stated:
"This document was dated the 17th of November 1939 and was signed by von Neurath who did not speak against shootings of the students."
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: Mr. President, may I draw your attention to something connected with this document.
The document is neither dated nor is it signed, at least not the copy I have. It does not make it at all clear from whom the document originates, and I should like to take this opportunity to protest against the reading of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Luedinghausen, isn't there a certificate about the document?
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: Not my copy.
THE PRESIDENT: Well-
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, will you permit me to explain this misunderstanding. Dr. Luedinghausen has the full text of the USSR document. The English text was also submitted to the Tribunal, and the certificate regarding this reportis included therein. There was also the interrogation. We shall only read the document which the defense counsel has. document to the defense counsel, and it would be very easy to determine that there is a certificate regarding the authenticity of these statement which is dated the 17th of November 1939.
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: May I only say this. When I received the indictment from Colonel Ecer of the Czech delegation, the document had no additions, didnot have an appendix except the actual text. I then made another attempt to get them, because such appendices had been referred to, whereupon I received only an enclosure which was headed "No. 2". I received the other in the same condition as the one which I have here.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Luedinghausen, will you wait a minute Will you kindly tell us what document it is you are referring to?
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: It is USSR 60.
THE PRESIDENT: USSR 60 -- well, that is the Czech report which is about this thick (indicating) in German and then there are references contained therein, references to certain enclosures and these enclosures, I repeat, were not made available to me and I made efforts to get them but I only received one, which is not iden tical with this document and which I received much later and in the same condition as that which I hold in my hand now, that is to say without a heading, without a signature and without a date and most certainly without any certificate as to when, where and by whom this supposed statement of Frank's was taken down.
THE PRESIDENT: Let us hear what General Raginsky has got to say about it. cate identifying that document and what is being supplied to us is merely a copy, which may not have the date and may not have the certificate on it, but which is the same as the document which is certified.
Is that what you said, General Raginsky?
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you not show Dr. von Leudinghausen the certificate and the document which is certified?
GENERAL RAGINSKY: It is quite correct, Mr. President. This certificate can be found on page 44 of the Russian text in the appendix to document USSR 60 and it is signed by Seer and Colonel General Novack. This certificate was submitted, in due course, by us to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it necessary to take up the time of the Tribunal about this particular document? It seems to me we are was ing a lot of time.
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: After all, it is important. I cannot find out whether this is a true copy. I am entitled to that, it is my privilege, my right.
THE PRESIDENT: I was asking General Raginsky whether he wanted to persist in the use of the document. Is it worth while? I do not know what the document is or what it says.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, this document is extremely important and I think it should be submitted because it has already been submitted to the Tribunal a few months ago. This is document USSR 60, which was accepted by the Tribunal as evidence several months ago and I really do not understand the statements by Dr. von Luedinghausen.
THE PRESIDENT: Why do you not show Dr. von Luedinghausen that there is a certificate which applies to the document which you put in his hand?
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Yes, certainly Mr. President. I am holding in my hand the Russian text. I can show him the Russian text so that he could be convinced. The original document has been submitted to the Tribunal and is in the possession of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, is there not a German translation of the certificate and does not the certificate identify the document? Is there a German translation of the certificate?
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Just at the moment I do not have it but during the intermission I shall be glad to produce the German text of the certificate.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Luedinghausen, the Tribunal is told that this document was put in before and the certificate of General Ecer was put in at the same time, certifying that this document is a part of the Czech report. In those circumstances, the Tribunal will allow the document to be used.
DR. VON LUEDINGHAUSEN: Mr. President, then I have another objection to the use of this document. tion records or affidavits from witnesses are presented, they are entitled to call these witnesses for the purpose of examining them. The former Secretary of State, Frank, who has made this statement, is, however, no longer alive as is known and I therefore object for that reason too, against the use of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Luedinghausen, this document was offered and accepted in evidence during the lifetime of this man, K. H. Frank. That is one reason for accepting it. was admitted under that Article and there is no such rule as you have stated, that the defense are entitled to cross-examine every person who makes an affidavit. It is a matter entirely within the discretion of the Tribunal and therefore that objection is rejected
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I do not want to hold you an longer on this matter but I wanted to show that this was an unnecessary delay as Dr. von Luedinghausen used the document himself to introduce some extracts from the testimony of Frank. Frank. This document, I repeat, is in connection with the warning which we just demonstrated to this Tribunal, dated 17 November, 192 and was signed by von Neurath, who did not raise his voice either against the shooting of the students nor as to those students who were to be sent to concentration camps and he did not really request any changes in this legislation. BY GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q Did you hear the testimony, defendant?
Q Do you deny this?
A But most definitely, most emphatically. I did not have any possibility whatever to do so because I was not in Prague and therefore I could neither have knowledge of nor could I have signed it or passed on it.
Q Very well. You still insist in stating that the police never informed you regarding the arrests which were made and other police measures which were taken? Do you state that firmly? they informed me afterwards. My information usually came from Czech sources.
police regularly reported to you regarding the important events which took place. plans. Possibly they might have told me afterwards if I had from Czech sources what news there was and then I would make inquiries from the police.
Q Very well. I am going to read an extract from the testimony of Karl Hermann Frank, dated 7 March, 1946. This testimony was submitted by me to the Tribunal yesterday and it was partially read by me already.
Frank states:
"The Reich Protector, von Neurath, regularly received reports on the most important events in the Protectorate which had some bearing to the Security Police from me, as well as from the State Secretary and from the head of the Security Police. For example, von Neurath received information about a certain demonstration in Sudetenland in November 1939 both from me and from the head of the Security Police. This definite case dealt with Hitler's direct orders demanding the shooting of all the ringleaders, insofar as this concerned the execution of students. The number of ringleader was to be fixed by the Prague Gestapo and the Reich Protector was to be informed of this. In this definite case the name of the ring leaders was left to the State Police, and was subject to the approval of the Reich Protector. Reich Protector von Neurath signed the official dispatch informing of the execution of these students, thereby approving this action.
"If this had not met with his approval and had he wished to revise it as for instance, making it less severe, which he had the right to do, then I should have had to adhere to his decision."
Now, do you wish to deny these statements? in Prague at all.
might have made these statements you have read. It does not give the date, but I think you just said it was on 7 April when he made this statement. That is a few days before his execution, is it not
GENERAL RAGINSKY: I should like the Tribunal to note that the defendant consciously perverts the fact when he says that this statement was made on April 7. It was made on March 7, not April 7 BY GENERAL RAGINSKY: Well, let us leave this question.
AAll right, then, 7 March instead of 7 April. I said 7 April because I did not see the date at the top. But as I have already told you three times, I could not know about it because I was not there.
Q. You are not very clear as to the number of students who were shot.
I am afraid that you were not very exact on the number. I am afraid that your memory did not serve you rightly.
A. I can not remember what I said yesterday, but I am sure that I did not make a mistake, unless there were one or two that I did not know about.
Q. I should like to remind you that in reply to a question by Sir David, who submitted document 3857-PS, in regard to the closing of the higher institutions of learning -
THE PRESIDENT: Is it necessary to go over Sir David's cross-examination again? Surely we have said that we do not want to yo over the same subject twice.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I do not want to go back to the very same thing, and I do not want to repeat the questions put by Sir David. I only wanted to establish the truth. The defendant stated yesterday that in the document which was submitted by sir David there was a mistake -that in Prague there existed only two institutions of higher learning and that there could not have been arrested 1,2000 students, and that consequently it was incorrect. But the question was not merely about the closing of two Prague universities, but, on the basis of the order 17 November 1939, there were closed the Czech universities in Prague, the Czech universities in Bruenn, the Czech Higher Techinical School in Bruenn.
THE PRESIDENT: We heard all this yesterday, and we do not want to hear it again. We heard, all about the closing of the university in Prague.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Very well, Mr. President. I am not going to delay you further on that, but I just wanted to state that not two universtieis were closed, but ten higher institutions of learning. to the defendant.
BY MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q. You received special awards from Hitler, as is evident from the documents, and as you yourself stated. For instance, you received on 22 September 1942, the special award, the Iron Cross for Special Service.
THE PRESIDENT: Surely we went into this yesterday, did we not, in Sir David's cross-examination, or in the examination in chief; I forgot which. I think it was the examination in chief. All those decorations which were given the defendant.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I do not want to revert to those orders and awards, but I should like to ask the defendant, for what special services did you receive the Iron Cross?
THE PRESIDENT: All right, ask him that.
THE WITNESS: Unfortunately, I cannot tell you. I cannot tell you what sort of achievements I had. The award of this order of merit was carried out generally to all higher officials who were active at the time.
BY MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q Very well, I am not going to insist that you reply. I just wanted to state here that you receive this award in 1942 after the mass terror was introduced into the Protectorate. terror. this question. various articles about you were published in many newspapers. I am not going to submit to the Tribunal all these papers or quote these articles, but I should like to read a few excerpts from the newspaper "Fraenkischer Kourier" of 2 February 1943. We shall submit to you one of the copies of this so that you can follow me as I read this document into the record.
MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY: This newspaper is being submitted to the Tribunal under number USSR 495. BY MAJOR GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q In connection with your anniversary, it was stated:
"The most important events in the field of foreign policy after Hitler's coming to power in which Baron von Neurath played a most important role as Reich Foreign-Minister and with which his name will always be connected are: Germany's leaving the Geneva Disarmament Conference on 14 October 1933 and Germany's withdrawal from the League of Nations one week after the re-uniting of the Saar to Germany, the declaration of the military sovereignty of the Reich, and the denouncing of the Locarno act immediately after the conclusion of the Franco-Sovier Military act.
"Reich-Minister and Reich Protector Baron von Neurath was repeatedly decorated by the Fuehrer for outstanding services to the German nation and Reich. Among other awards he was decorated with the Golden party Badge of Honor, received the rank of SS-Gruppenfuehrer, was Cavalier of the Adler Order German and the Treudienst Gold Badge of Honor, which marked 40 years of diplomatic service.
"In appreciation of his outstanding services in the field of military effort in the post of Reich Protector for Bohemia and Moravia, the Fuehrer decorated him with the Military Cross, First Class."