THE PRESIDENT: Well, you are defending the SA against a charge of being a criminal organization. You are now trying to show us what the ideology of the Stahlhelm was. You have been nearly an hour over this witness already. Practically everything he has said is written down in this summary of his evidence, the summary which we have before us, his evidence to the Commission.
DR. BOEHM: Yes, Mr. President, but I must show the Court something about the attitude of this witness and the one and a half million men who came from the Stahlhelm to the SA, and I can do that only in the context in which I have done it. For the few questions remaining -- there are four or five -- I will try to be as brief as possible. BY DR. BOEHM: of the Stahlhelm after July 1934 was illegal? whom you were in contact in this connection? Stahlhelmers, but these were only the liaison men. Behind them were the many thousand in the individual cities.
Q Were there other contacts among the Stahlhelmers?
A Yes. Aside from the contact with me, everywhere in Germany In the individual towns independent groups of Stahlhelmers had been formed. Sometimes they were of quite considerable size. For instance, in Berlin I often participated in meetings where there were 150 to 200 Stahlhelmers.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Boehm, if this is intended to show that this witness know the circumstances about the Stahlhelm, surely you can leave that to re-examination if it is challenged. Why should you anticipate that that will challenge this witness that he doesn't know anything about the Stahlhelm? Presumably 13 Aug LJG 15-4 Bubley be does.
Until it is challenged, you can leave it to re-examination.
DR. BOEHM: I will ask my last or second from the last question. BY DR. BOEHM: in crimes which were charged against the SA, for example the persecution of the Jews? to know about it. It would have been a quite noteworthy fact if it had been established that Stahlhelmers had participated in the persecution of Jews. I refer to the statements which I made about the non-existence of an anti-Semitic tendency in the Stahlhelm. was general regarding the SA or were there indications that considerable parts of the Stahlhelmers gradually changed their opinion? the case of the great majority, remained unchanged until the end. I should like to say that the longer the Third Reich lasted, the stronger this opposition became among the Stahlhelmers I do not believe that there were many Stahlhelmers who changed their opposition during the course of the years. Of course, there are always such individual cases in a largo number, but they were only individual cases.
DR. BOEHM: Mr. President, I have no mere questions to put to this witness at the moment. BY DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for the SD): were in opposition were watched by the SD? I heard only that the Gestapo and the local police observed the Stahlhelmers.
Q The son of Duesterberg made an affidavit under Stahl-
13 Aug A LJG 15-5 Bubley helm No. 4 that the SD watched the Stahlhelmers. Are these statements untrue? be mistaken. I myself never heard anything of the SD in the capacity of persecutors of the Stahlhelm.
BY COLONEL PHIOLIMORE:
Q. Witness, you have spoken about the radical and extremist tendencies of the SA ?
A. Yes.
Q. You mean, do you not, that they were terrorists and gangsters ?
A. If I said radical and extremist tendencies here, I meant those groups of people in the SA who at that time already severely endangered the respect of the people for the SA. But they ware only groups. That was not the whole SA. They were parts of it.
Q. There were groups in every town in Germany, weren't there ?
A. I can't say whether they were in every town in Germany but there no doubt were such groups in many cities.
Q. You are saying, aren't you, that the Stahlhelmers were forced to join the SA throughout Germany ?
A. Yes.
Q. That was done by threats by the local SA Leaders who took them over isn't that right ? That's what you are saying ?
A. Yes.
Q. Can there be any doubt that those threats and those arrests you spoke about were ordered by the SA Leadership ?
A. According to my judgment, these threatsk, arrests, and everything connected with them were introduced by the SA Leadership. Of course, in view of the large number concerned, it may have happened that the Party or other branches of the Third Reich participated, but primarily this pressure was applied by the SA itself.
Q. And you have spoken of the boycott of a man who was dismissed from the SA. Are you saying that that was the case all over Germany, if a man was dismissed he was boycotted ?
A. In these cases of which I know, and there were very many, such a boycott was carried out. I know for example of such a boycott in a small town...
Q. I do not want instances. And you say that a man would not be able to join the army. That can only have been, can it not, that the SA Leadership communicated his name to the army as having been dismissed ?
A. It is possible that the SA gave these names to the army but I do not know exactly. I only knew one thing -that the Stahlhelmers who wanted to join the army, for example former officers, were not accepted if, when their papers were presented, it was shown that they had been dismissed from the SA.
Q. I just want to ask you one or two more questions about the SA. Do you know Minister Severing ?
A. Like every other German, I know Minister Severing from the time when he was a minister. I do rot know him personally.
Q. Do you know of him as a man of integrity ?
A. I personally consider Severing, a decent man .
Q. Will you listen to his description of the SA in the early days, before ghe seizure of power.
A. I do not know this description.
Q. "Wherever the SA could exercise their terror unhindered they acted in such a manner. They had in--door battles against people who thought differently. Those were not the ordinary little fights between political fighters during elections; that was organized terror." Is that a fair description of the SA during the years before the seizure of power ?
A. I believe that on the whole Severing describes it correctly.
Q. Do you know the witness Gisevius ?
Q. No, I do not know him.
Q. will you listen to his words :"During the early part of the struggle for power, the SA constituted a private army for carrying out the orders of the Nazi Party. Whoever had not entirely made up his mind had it made up for him by the SA. Their methods were primitive but effective. One learned the new Hitler salute very quickly when, on the sidewalks beside every SA marching column, a few stalwart SA men went along giving pedestrians a crack on the head if they failed to perform the correct gesture at least three steps ahead of the SA flag; and these Storm Troopers acted the same way in all things."
SA as you knew it ?
A. I must say I am not really competent to pass judgment on the SA from the early period. My observations were made from 1933 on, I might say 1 had to make them officially because I was Bundeskaemmerer of the Stahlhelm. Before that I was a bank director. I did not have such great interest in the SA.
Q. Well then, I will put to you one more, my last question.
THE PRESIDENT: Are these statements in evidence ?
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: Yes, My Lord. The first statement I put in is from Minister Severing's evidence, age 10,084 of the transcript. The second statement is from Gisevius' evidence, page 8,442.
THE PRESIDENT: The nature of this witness's evidence has been that the Stahlhelmers were incorporated into the SA by force. He has not said anything about the SA being an orderly or properly run organization.
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: My Lord, he as spoken of radical and extremist tendencies and by inference one can assume that he was speaking of the SA.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean that is what he said about the SA ?
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: Yes, one can give it no ether meaning.
THE PRESIDENT: If he said that about the SA that is not giving evidence on behalf of the SA as an organization and you are not entitled to challenge him about that. If he had been giving evidence saying that the SA was a perfectly well behaved organization, then this cross-examination might be relevant; but if he has not said that I do not quite see how the crossexamination is relevant.
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: My Lord, witness after witness has appeared for the SA before the Commission.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but not this witness on this aspect of the matter. Let us deal with this witness. This witness has said nothing before us which shows that the SA was an orderly or well behaved organization.
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: My Lord, but he has said that the SA was a most disorderly organization. It is my submission on cross-examination that I cannot be asked to refrain from continuing to follow on that evidence, unless your Lordship feels it is a waste of time of the Tribunal.
In my submission it is of great importance when you have to judge the evidence of a large number of these witnesses for the SA who have appeared before the Commission. Your Lordship, it will be very short. I want to quote one further statement about the period after 1933. It is by the witness Gisevius, page 8443 of the transcript. BY COLONEL PHILLIMORE:
Q. "The SA organized huge riots. The SA searched houses. The SA confiscated property. The SA cross-examined people. The SA put people in jail. In short, the SA appointed themselves auxiliary police. Woe into anyone who got into their clutches. From this time dates the Bunker that dreaded private prison of which every SA Storm Troop had to have at lead one. Taking away became the inalienable right of the SA. The efficiency of a Standartenfuehrer was measured by the number of arrests he had made and the good reputation of an SA man was based on the effectiveness with which he 'educated' his prisoners." immediately following the seizure of power ?
A. I must say that the majority of what the author said became known to me then In Berlin but please consider that this concerns the SA which was under Chief of Staff Roehm and that later the SA was subjected to a purge.
Q. Yes, but I will come to that in a minute. But this is a fair description of what was happening in Berlin in the early months of 1933 ? And, if you had, to make a report about this, can you say whether that is a fair description of what was happening in every town in Germany ?
A. I should like to say that according to my recollection, Mr. Gisevius, did not exaggerate. It was no doubt often the way he describes it.
Q. Now, I want just to ask you about the Jews. You have said that the Stahlhelm members were not anti-Semitic. Was it because the SA was antiSemitic in its outlook, was that one of the reasons why you said Stahlhelm members did not like joining it ?
A. No it is rather so : The Stahlhelm education, this moderate democrat idea of the Stahlhelm , exluded any anti-Semitic propaganda because antiSemitic propaganda would have been radicalism and there was no such radicalism in the vast majority of Stahlhelmers.
Q. Do you know the witness Haufer ? He pave evidence before the Commission.
A. Yes, I know Haufer. He was in *resden formerly.
Q. He said this in his evidence, page 2681: "We disapproved completely of the Party's policy against the Jews." Was that right ?
A. Yes.
Q. And the Party's policy was the policy of the SA and the SA leadership wasn't it ?
A. Yes, that is true.
Q. Now with regard to the joining of the Stahlhelm, the incorporation of the Stahlhelm in 1933. It is not true to say that all Stahlhelm members were compelled to join, is it ?
A. I said before that certain age groups of the Stahlhelm had to join and these age groups were transferred as a whole and without exception.
Q. Certainly in the case of anyone over 35 he could have stayed out, couldn't he ?
A. Yes, if they had been asked beforehand, but they were not asked. I were given orders and had to join.
Q. You know the witness Waldenfels who appeared before the Commission? Do you know him?
A. Yes.
Q. He refused to join and he retained his post right up to the war, isn't that correct?
A. That is correct but that is just as in my case. Waldenfels was above the are of those who were incorporated into the SA.
Q. Well, he was under 45 at the time, wasn't he?
A. Whether he was under 45 at the time, I don't know, but he is an elderly man, and I assume that he was.
Q. He is an elderly man new. He was born on 10 August 1889, according to his evidence. The witness Juettner has said, you know, that even if press was put on a man to join, there was nothing whatever to stop him withdrawing. Now I know you say he would he boycotted, but in fact, the number in the SA fell, didn't it, from 4 1/2 million to 1 1/2 million between 1921 and 1939?
A. I have heard of that.
Q. Wasn't that because people were withdrawing?
A. No, as far as I can understand the state of affairs, first after the 30th of June, 1934, all followers of the chief of Staff Roehm were removed from the SA. There were very many of them, but I cannot give any number. There were very many, though. The hundreds of thousands of SA men were released from the SA, but not to return to private life. As far as I can recall, they were assigned to other branches of the Party. Only very few of the Stahlhelmers were affected by this release. I know that very well, because Stahlhelmers came to me in many cases and said that they hoped to be able to get out of the SA now, and after a time they came to me again and said it was not possible. The Stahlhelm had to remain in the SA because it could be better controlled that way.
Q. Once they were in the SA did these members of the Stahlhelm obey orders and perform the same actions as anybody else in the SA?
A. They had no other choice if they did not want to expose themselves to the extraordinary difficulties which I have described.
But it is a fact that in many cases it was Stahlhelmers who refused to obey orders.
COL. PHILLIMORE: I have no further question.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Boehm, have you any re-examination?
DR. BOEHM: No. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Witness, in 1933 when the Stahlhelm were incorporated into the SA can you give me the approximate numbers of the Stahlhelm and the approximate numbers of the SA?
A. I can only give the approximate strength of the Stahlhelm. I would estimate it at about one million. That is those people who were incorporated into the SA from the Stahlhelm. I do not know the strength of the SA.
Q. Do you know approximately how many Stahlhelmers there were in the SA on the first of September, on or about the first of September, 1939?
A. No, I cannot say that.
Q. Do you know how many Stahlhelmers there were at the end of the war?
A. If you mean how many Stahlhelmers there were in the SA at the end of the war, I cannot answer that question, either, but there may have been Stahlhelmers at the end of the war, perhaps five hundred to six hundred thousand men. Since everything in Germany was in confusion, one can only estimate. On cannot say exactly.
Q. Then you really can't give any apporximately accurate figures for the Stahlhelm after 1934?
A. Do you mean the Stahlhelm as it continued to exist after 1934 as a league, or the Stahlhelm which was transferred?
Q. I meant the Stahlhelm which were transferred to the SA.
A. Yes, there must have been about one million.
THE PRESIDENT: Then the witness may retire, and the Court will adjourn.
(A recess was taken) MR. ELWYN JONES : If your Lordship pleases, would your Lordship allow me to mention one brief matter?
During the SS case I submitted the Document-4043 PS wich was a statement by a Polish President as to the killing of 846 Polish priests and clergymen at Dachau. The Tribunal did not accept the document at the time because it did not appear to be in a satisfactory form. Now the Polish delegation wishes to submit a further certificate from a Dr. Pietrowski who said that the President's statement was made to him, in his presence, and in accordance with the stipulations of Polish law, and that in English law it is equivalent to a solemn declaration. I discussed this matter with Dr. Pelckmann and he has no objection to the document going in in its present form.
THE PRESIDENT : The Tribunal will consider the matter. You may put in the document.
MR. ELWYN JONES : Thank you. There are copies in Russian, French and German.
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Boehm, have you another witness DR. BOEHM : May I be permitted to call the Wittness Juettner?THE PRESIDENT : Yes.
as follows : BY THE PRESIDENT :
Q Will you state your full name, please?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me : speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT : You may sit down.
BY DR. BOEHM :
Q Mr. Juettner, from 1934 until 1945, you were chief of the main office leadership of the SA, and, beginning with 1939, simultaneously, you were the permanent deputy of the staff chief of the SA. All questions concerning the SA even before 1933, you can answer because you are advisor and informed on those questions? ponsible member of the higher SA leadership. From the record, from conversations, I am informed on all essential matters concerning the SA even before this tine. The questions put to no I can answer in the affirmative therefore. dership? What was your profession and political gackground? 1920, After my honorable discharge from the Army, I entered the Central German Lining Company. There I started as a common labored. I worked myself into an office position of a large concern. As far as politics are concerned, after 1920 I belonged to the German National Peopled Party for several years. Then I was without a party. Beginning with 1920, parallel with my profession. I worded in a leading position in the Central German Stahlhelm (Steel Helmet) Society. leadership into the SA? connected with the incorporation of the stahlhelm (steel Helmet) Society into the SA. I enjoyed a good reputation even anon political opponents.
I maintained a position of confidence with minor interest. These facts were well-known. Especially in the social field, the Stahlhelm was active. All of these factors may have contributed to my being called in. I left the wining industry voluntarily and became an SA leader for a profession. In the sum of 1934 I was taken into the party.
Q Therefore, you came from the Stahlhelm into the SA? decisive positions in the SA? technical background, but from memory I can tell you that 60 higher and intermediate SA leaders, I set down for my own purposes. They were people who were formerly members of the Stahlhelm Therefore many former Stahlhelm In members were incorporated into the SA in leading positions. The Chief of the Air Defense Office
Q Is that in the Stahlhelm or in the SA?
A. In the SA, all key positions in the Sa, in the course of time, were taken over by former Stehl Helmet members.
Q. But despite this personnel in the Personnel Office, the Office of the Adjutant General, the Office of the Chief of Staff, and the Head of the Educational Branch, and the groups with the heads of the various units that you could find from among ex-Steel Helmet members, can you say that the positions which were held by former Steel Helmet men and the men of the SA were of such a nature that they were of but little significance for the bulk of the SA ?
A. One cannot say that. The leaders of the SA who came from the Steel Helmet into this position had considerable influence on the education, training feud youth of the SA.
Q. About a half-hour ago, a witness by the name of Gruss was interrogated herem who, of course, was never a member of the SA, and who did not know the conditions in the SA from personal experience, but who testified in reply to a series of questions which, in my opinion, only an SA man could answer, and someone in a high position. Did you, during your membership in the SA, from the year 1934 until the dissolution of this organization, ever observe that some SA members who had come from the Steel Helmet Organization tried to form an opposition party ?
A. I can answer this question clearly and unequivocally with "no". Numerous SA men came to me in the first few months who had formerly belonged to the Steel Helmet Society; and like myself they felt regret that their fine old organization was no longer in existence. But together with me, they hailed the fact that they were now permitted to participate in this large community of the SA.
Q. Did you ever hear from any source of opposition on the part of these people who had come from the Steel Helmet ? Did other SA men complain about things like that ?
A. If I understand you correctly, we are concerned with men who had been in the SA.
Q. Yes, men who came from the Steel Helmet in the years 1933 and 1934 and entered the SA, who were incorporated into the SA, or who voluntarily entered the SA at that time.
A. These men, as far as I know, did not oppose the SA. I know of no opposition like that.
Q. What was the strength of the SA in the year 1933 ?
A. In 1933, the SA had 300,000 men.
Q. And how many SA members came into the SA in the years 1933 and 1934 ?
A. You mean members of the Steel Helmet ?
Q. Yes, members of the Steel Helmet.
A. When the Steel Helmet was incorporated into the SA, the Steel Helmet, had approximately 1,000,000 or a somewhat larger number of members. More than half of these were incorporated into the SA, 500,000 men. This figure is identical with that which remained in the Former Bundesfuehrer Seldte.
Q. Are you differentiating between the original Steel Helmet and the later Steel Helmet Organization ? Can you say that the total of the men coming from the Steel Helmet who were taken over into the SA was approximately 1,000,000?
A. After the Steelhelmet was dissolved -- I believe that occurred in 1935 -- it is quite possible that altogether 1,000,000 men came into the SA from the SteelHelmet.
Q. Therefore the ratio in the years 1933 and 1934 was such that the SA consisted of two-thirds Steel Helmet men and one-third men of the SA ?
A. In the year 1933-1934, in addition the SA Reserve No. 2 was brought in. That was the Kieffhauserbund. Therefore, that apportioning into thirds that you just set up does not quite apply. But if the original figure, the original strength as of January 1933 is taken into consideration, what you have just said is true.
Q. Then briefly, shortly after 1933, the SA went through a tremendous increase. The original figure of 300,000 jumped at 4,500,000 in 1935; is that correct ?
A. Up until 1934, that is true, yes.
Q. Then it was the intention on the part of the Higher SA leadership, since there were many people coming into the SA who really had no business there, to reduce this number; and approximately 3,000,000 men were eliminated from the SA up until the year 1939, so that in the year 1939, the SA had approximately 1,500,000 members; is that correct ?
A. Yes, indeed, that is quite correct. The figure of 1,500,000 had, of course, been reached some several years before. The reducing of the SA was brought about in such a way that these who were eliminated were first of all the SA Reserve No. 2, the Kieffhauserbund. The Kieffhauserbund was perhaps 1,500,000 members. Secondly, after the death of Roehm, the NSKK; thirdly very many SA men who were active in the political leadership, such as Block Leaders and Gau Leaders, and so forth; fourthly, the Staff Chief Lutze eliminated all of these men who for professional or other reasons could not serve or did not wish to serve.
Q. After the reduction of this number of 4,500,000 to 1,500,000 did it come to your attention that especially many Steel Helmet members or former Steel Helmet members were eliminated from the SA ?
A. Perhaps in this, connection I might refer to the Steel Helmet in Central Germany, of which I was the head. There we were located in the heavily industrial region around Halle. Really, after 1935, the nucleus of the SA was my old Steel Helmet Organization; therefore very many Steel Helmet men remained in the SA.
Q. And thus those who served in the SA remained until the dissolution of the SA ?
A. Yes; and they were not the worst elements.
Q. If now in the years 1935 and later, the individual SA man who had come from the Steel Helmet Society had fought against the need to lead the SA, could ha have done so ?
Q. Would he have met, with particular difficulties if he had done so ?
A. Under no conditions from the SA.
Q. The witness Gruss asserted among other things that in a case like the it would have become impossible for him to come to the army as an officer, of in that case, a remark would have been placed in his record,"Dismissed from the SA". Is that correct ?
A. The witness Gruss seems to have confused matters. Of course, a man who was expelled from the SA as a punishment for having committed some wrong act or other, would have had a remark placed in his record, and that would be comparable to being sentenced for the first time in ordinary life.
Q. Therefore, you can say in order to summarize briefly, that the larger part by far of the members of the Steel Helmet who entered the SA in the year 1933 and at the latest in 1934, as far as you know, were loyal comrades and remained such; Is that true ?
A. They were my best friends, and they remained so.
Q. What was the psotion of the Staff Chief of the Party Leadership with respect to the government, or to the State Chiefs ?
A. Roehm was a strong personality. His word meant much among the Party leadership. As Reich Minister -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Boehm, the Tribunal would like to know whether your case is that the SA, after its incorporation into the Stahlhelm, was a voluntary organization or was involuntary, so far as the Stahlhelm was concerned.
DR. BOEHM: If I understood the question correctly, Mr. President, I can say that the Steel Helmet was a voluntary organization, and it was taker into the SA on the basis of orders.
THE PRESIDENT: There seems to be a certain difference of view between the too witnesses that you have called. The Tribunal wants to know what your case was, whether you case is that the SA after being incorporated in to the Stahlhelm was a voluntary organization.
DR. BOEHM: After the Steel Helmet was incorporated into the SA, all voluntary bases of the Steel Helmet had been taken away from it. Of course. then the organization and each and every member of the Steel Helmet had became a member of the SA.
THE PRESIDENT: And was voluntary, you mean, or was involuntary ?
DR. BOEHM : The Steel Helmet, on the strength of orders, was taken over into the SA, and now after its incorporation, its virtue as an independent organization ceased. Then, it was the SA, and each and every former member became a member of the SA.
THE PRESIDENT : What I want to know is whether you contend, having become members of the SA, it was voluntary or involuntary?
DR. BOEHM : In my opinion, that is a question with Paragraph 6 of the Resolution of the 13th of March, 1945. As a question of law, I assort that on the strength of orders, the Steel Helmet was taken into the SA. In its later ramification, it was not voluntary, but rather on the strength of order.
THE PRESIDENT : You say they were involuntarily incorporated into the SA, involuntary members of the SA?
DR. BOEHM : That is not quite that way, Mr. President. I should like to say that on he strength of orders, most of the larger part, the bulk, went into the SA involuntarily.
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Boehm, I don't doubt what the witness said. I heard what the witness said, and I heard what the last witness said, Mr. Biddle wants to know what your case is. Are you saying that the Stahlhelm after it had been incorporated into the SA, those members of the Stahlhelm, who were incorporated, into the SA, were involuntary members or were voluntary members? It is for you to make up your mind which case you are putting forward. Possibly. Possibly it night make my meaning more clear to your case -- they could resign from the SA or that they could not resign.
DR. BOEHM: That was not to be the topic of my evidence, Mr. President. The topic of my evidence is to show first of all that the Steel Helmet was taken into the on the strength of an order involuntarily, and I am sure that must have been the opinions of the bulk of the Stool Helmet.
If and how far they could leave, that was the point I tried to clarify through this witness.
THE PRESIDENT : All right, go on, Dr. Boehm. At son stage, no doubt you will be able to tell us which of the witnesses you adopt.
Q (Continuing) Witness, I should like to ask you to continue in your testimony. What was the position of the Staff Chief to the Party Leadership and to the government. You said that Roehm was a decisive personality, and that his word did have a great influence on the Party Leadership. Now, I should like to ask you to continue, please. to influence the government in order to persue his aims. Staff Chief Lutze was on a Reichs leader in the Party. Despite the fact, he had no influence on the Party leadership. In the last few years and even before the war he avoided Gau and Party meetings. Lutze was not Reichsminister any longer; therefore, he had no influence on the conduct of the government and its leadership. Scheppmann was neither Reichs loader nor Reichsminister; and after the 30 of June, 1934, the SA degenerated to insignificance. The influence of the Staff Chief on party government had disappeared. Corps of the SA? Were the latter notified of everything that was intended and which was planned, were they advised of those matters? in the SA school, the Staff Chief constantly advised their Leader Corps about the fore-aim tasks, and especially the educational tasks of the SA.
At the Loader rallies there was an open discussion and after the death of Roehm? specially the higher SA leaders. I know then very well. For be it from me to give it a false color. A small fragment of SA leadership who proved that they rented to be mightier objects were eliminated Even those SA leaders during the last World war had shown themselves to be brave soldiers, and later had been members of the Free Corps under the government of Ebert Nosker and achieved certain merits. Their attitude and their manner of life, however, contradicted the principals of the SA; therefore, they had to leave. But a part from, that, the mass of the SA Leadership Corps were decent and clean, and they were perfect in choir conception of justice and duty.
Q Tell us about the Professional Leadership Corps? Obergruppenfuehrer and the Gruppenfuehrer, of that group, I know their development, that is, the origin, their manner of life and their political and ethical position. Quite apart from the incidental few who have left, these SA leaders were without blame. Not a one of then had been punished, not one of then was one who had left before they were taken into the Leadership Corps of the SA. with their May, they had lead such a life that it was modest and proper, and to compare then with compensurate officials, representatives of economy their pay was very small. And all other sources of income were chalked up to their record. There were no on in the SA who had more than one source of income; not one could enrich himself personally because of his position, and he could make a splurge into society who had means of his own. And the Gruppenfuehrer and the Obergruppenfuehrer who in 1939 were active in the SA leadership or among the SA group, more than half of then lost their lives in the war.