MR. DODD (continuing): I quoted a remark about the --
THE PRESIDENT: That is the document you already referred to?
DODD: Yes, it has been referred to heretofore, I believe. Some of these documents contain references to more than one part of the presentation, and I have to refer to them at different times in the presentation I make.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. Go on, if you want to refer to it.
MR. DODD: The sixth paragraph on the first page: "Existing reserves will have to be touched for the purpose of carrying through over this difficulty until the goal ordered by the Fuehrer has been reached, and then in the case of war, they are not a reliable backing in any case." And on the second page, the eighth paragraph down: "If war should break out tomorrow, we would be forced to take measures from which we might possibly still find a way at the present moment. They are therefore to be taken." With reference to the assertion that the Defendant Schacht was advised that Hitler ordered that all formations of the air force be ready by April 1, 1937, I respectfully refer to document 1301-PS, dated 31 August 1936. I am advised that the document should bear an additional number. It should read 1301-PS-7. On the first page, if your Honor please, the third paragraph, or the paragraph marked 3 and after the word "air force"-
THE PRESIDENT: The third page?
MR. DODD: No, on the first page, 1301-PS-7. In your folio, it is page 19 of the group of documents bearing the serial number 1301-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: Our documents are not paged.
MR. DODD: I think you will find the number on the upper left-hand corner, very near to the top and at the extreme left.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I've got this document now.
MR. DODD: Paragraph No. 3 after the word, "air force."
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. DODD: It states that according to an order of the Fuehrer, the setting up of all air force units had to be completed on April 1, 1937; and if your Honor will turn the page, page 20, about midway in the page, you will observe that a copy of this document was sent to the president of the Reichsbank, Dr. Schacht.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, what are you passing to now?
MR. DODD: I am now passing to another document immediately, your Honor. After their successes in Austria and the Sudetenland, the Nazi conspirators redoubled their efforts to equip themselves for the war of aggression which they planned to launch. In a conference on October 14, 1938, shortly before the Nazi conspirators made their first demands on Poland, the defendant Goering stated that, "The Fuehrer had instructed him to carry out a gigantic program, by comparison with which the performances thus far were insignificant. This faced difficulties which he would overcome with the greatest energy and ruthlessness." And that statement may be found in document 1301-PS, on page 25 of that document, and particularly the second sentence of the opening paragraph: "Everybody knows from the press what the world situation looks like, and therefor the Fuehrer has issued an order to him--"
THE PRESIDENT: That's not on page 25, is it? Is that on page 25 of 1301?
MR. DODD: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. DODD: "Everybody knows from the press what the world situation looks like, and therefore the Fuehrer has issued an order to him to carry out a gigantic program compared to which previous achievements are insignificant. There are difficulties in the way which he will overcome with the utmost energy and ruthlessness." for the invasion of Czechoslovakia, and it was considered necessary to replenish it. These--and I am now referring to the third paragraph of that same page 25 of document 1301-PS--"these gains made through the export are to be used for an increased armament. The armament should not be curtailed by export activities." He received the order from the Fuehrer to increase the armament to an abnormal extent, the air force having first priority. "Within the shortest time, the air force the air force should be increased five fold; also the navy should create war weapons more rapidly, and the army should produce large amounts of war weapons at a faster rate, particularly heavy artillery and heavy tanks.
Along with this a larger production of armament must go, especially fuel, rubber, powders and explosives must be moved to the foreground. This should be coupled with an accelerated expansion of highways, canals, and particularly of, the railroads. ensued between two men, the defendant Goering and the defendant Schacht, as a result of which the defendant Schacht resigned his position as head of the Ministry of Economics and plenipotentiary for the war economy in November of 1937 and was removed from the presidency of the Reichsbank in January of 1939.
I do not propose at this moment to go into the details of this controversy. There will be more said on that subject at a later stage in these proceedings, but for the present, I should like to have it quoted that it is our contention that Schacht's departure in no way implied any disagreement with the major war aims of the Nazis. The defendant Schacht took particular pride in his vast attainments in the financial and economic fields in aid of the Nazi war machine. And in the document bearing the number EC-257, which is a copy of a letter from the defendant Schacht to General Thomas, in the first paragraph of the letter, he wrote, "I think back with much satisfaction to the work in the Ministry of Economics which afforded me the opportunity to assist in the rearmament of the German people in the most critical period, not only in the financial but also in the economic sphere. I have always considered a rearmament of the German people as conditions sine qua non of the establishment of a new German nation." The second paragraph is of a more personal nature. It has no real bearing on the issues before us at this time. dated the 8th day of July, 1937, the defendant Schacht wrote, "The direction of the war economy by the plenipotentiary would in that event never take place entirely independant from the rest of the war mechanism but would be aimed at accomplishment of the political war purpose with the assistance of all economic forces. I am entirely willing, therefore, to participate in this way in the preparation of the forthcoming order giving effect to the Defense Act." tatives of the three branches of the armed forces in war games in war economy at Godesberg, which is probably some thing new by way--or was something new by way of movement exorcises. The war games in war economy were held at Godesberg, Germany. And I refer to the document bearing the label EC-174. It has as a heading, or subheading, under the summary, "War economy tasks in Godesberg undertaken by General Staff between the 25th of May and the 2nd of June," and it goes on to outline in some slight detail that there was a welcome to the General Staff war economy trip.
It tells something in a rather vague and not altogether clear way of just how a war game in war economy was conducted but il leaves no doubt in the mind that such a war game in war economy had been conducted at Godesberg at that time. On the second page of this document, the last paragraph, is the translation of Part L of the speech welcoming Dr. Schacht. It says: "Before I start with the discussion of the war game in war economy, I have to express how grateful we all are that you, President Dr. Schacht, have gone to the trouble to personally participate in our final discussion today despite all your other activities. This proves to us your deep interest in war economy tasks shown at all times and your presence is renewed proof that you are willing to facilitate for us soldiers the difficult war-economic preparations and to strengthen the harmonious cooperation with your offices."
I should also like to call the court's attention to the next to the last paragraph on the first page. It is a one-sentence paragraph, and it simply says, "I want to point out, however, that all matters and all information received has to be kept in strictest secrecy," and it refers to the preceding paragraph concerning the war games in war economy. Schacht had long sought, for in a speech to the employees of the former Austrian National Bank, as set out in the document bearing the label EC-297, and particularly the second paragraph of the first page of that document, nearly at the end, four or five lines from the end of that paragraph, we find these words, immediately after "large applause", these words: "Austria has certainly a great mission, namely, to be the bearer of German culture, to insure respect and regard for the German name, especially in the dierction of the southeast. Such a mission can only be performed within the Great German Reich and based on the power of a nation of 75 millions, which, regardless of the wish of the opponents,forms the heart and the soul of Europe." Dr. Schacht goes on to say, "We have read a lot in the foreign press during the last few days that this aim, the union of both countries, is to a certain degree justified, but that the methods of effecting this union was terrible.
This method which certainly did not suit one or the other power was nothing but the consequence of countless perfidies and brutal acts and violence which foreign countries have practiced against us." And I now refer to page 3 of this same document and to the fourth paragraph, about the center of the page, and reading from it: "I am known for sometimes expressing thoughts which give offense and there I would not like to depart from this consideration.
I know that there are even in this country a few people -- I believe they are not too numerous -who find fault with the events of the last few days; but nobody, I believe, doubts the goal, and it should be said to all grumblers that you can't satisfy everybody. One person says he would have done it maybe one way, but the remarkable thing is that they did not do it, and that it was only done by our Adolf Hitler; and if there is still something left to be improved, then those grumblers should try to bring about these improvements from the German Reich, and within the German community, but not to disturb us from without." defendant Schacht and other directors of the Reichsbank to Hitler urging a balancing of the budget in view of the threatening danger of inflation, it was stated, and I now refer to the document bearing the label EC-369 and particularly to the paragraph at the bottom of the first page of that document: "From the beginning the Reichsbank has been aware of the fact that a successful foreign policy can be attained only by the reconstruction of the German armed forces. It (the Reichsbank) therefore assumed to a very great extent the responsibility to finance the rearmament in spite of the inherent dangers to the currency. The justification therof was the necessity, which pushed all other considerations into the background, to carry through the armament at once, out of nothing, and furthermore under camouflage, which made a respect-commanding foreign policy.possible." point had been reached where greater production of armaments was no longer possible. That was merely a judgement on the situation and not a moral principle, for there was no opposition to Hitler's policy of agression. Doubts were entertained as to whether he could finance that policy. Hitler's letter to Schacht on the occasion of Schacht's departure from the Reichsbank, as contained in document EC-397, paid high tribute to Schacht's great efforts in furthering the program of the Nazi conspiritors.
The armed forces by now had enabled Hitler to take Austria and the Sudetenland. We say Schacht's task up to that point had been well done. From Document EC-397, in the words of Hitler, in a letter which he wrote to the defendant Schacht, "Your name, above all, will always be connected with the first epoch of national rearmament." was retained as a minister without portfolio and special confidential adviser to Hitler. Defendant Funk stepped into Schacht's position as president of the Reichsbank. And I ask at this point that the court might take judicial notice of the Volkisher Beobachter of January 21, 1939. The defendant Funk was completely uninhibited by fears of inflation, for like Goering, under whom he had served in the Four-Year Plan, he recognized no obstacles to the plan to attack Poland. written on August 25 1939, only a few days before the attack on Poland, the defendant Funk reported to Hitler that the Reichsbank was prepared to withstand any disturbances of the international currency and credit system occassioned by a large-scale war. He said that he had secretly transferred all available funds of the Reichsbank abroad into gold, and that Germany stood ready to meet the financial and economic tasks which lay ahead. from the speeches of the Nazi conspiritors themselves, that they did in fact direct the whole of the German economy toward preparation for aggressive war. To paraphrase the words of the defendant Goering, the conspiritors gave the German people "guns instead of butter," and they also gave -- we say, they also gave history its most striking example of a nation gearing itself in time of peace to the single purpose of aggressive war. Their economic preparations, formulated and applied with the, ruthless energy of Goering, the cynical financial wizardry of Schacht, and the willing complicity of Funk, among others, were the indispensable first act in the heart-breaking tragedy which their aggression inflicted upon the world.
documents which I have referred to in the course of this discussion. We have here the original documents in the folders, and they compare with the translations which have been submitted to the court.
THE PRESIDENT: Have the defendants had the opportunity of inspecting these documents?
MR. DODD: I doubt that they have had full opportunity to inspect them, your Honor. The statistics are there, but I don't think they have had the opportunity to inspect them because they haven't been there long enough for that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal -- I think that there should be full opportunity of inspecting them and comparing with the copies which have been submitted to us before the originals are put in.
MR. DODD: Very well, your Honor. We may offer these later, as I understand?
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly. The Tribunal will adjourn for ten minutes.
(Whereupon the court, at 1525 o'clock, recessed for ten minutes.)
COLONEL STOREY: May it please the Tribunal:
the case and it will be presented by Mr. Alderman.
MR. SIDNEY S. ALDERMAN: May it please the Tribunal:
entire case is really, we think, the heart of the case. If we did not the concentration camps and the crimes against humanity, the persecutions, dealing with territorial gains acquired by threats of force and with actual aggressions and aggressive wars, constitute the real heart of the case.
Accordingly, we ask the indulgence of the Tribunal if for these reasons we make the presentation of this part of the case as detailed as seems to us necessary in view of the outstanding importance of the subject matter. tion has been stated in the opening address of Mr. Justice Jackson. That address indicated to the Tribunal the general nature and character of the evidence to be offered by the American prosecution in support of the allegations with which I shall deal. However, before approaching the actual presentation of that evidence, it seems to us it would be helpful to an orderly presentation of the case, to address the Tribunal in an introductory way concerning this specific segment of the prosecution's case. In doing so, I shall not attempt to retrace the ground so ably covered by Mr. Justice Jackson. On the contrary, I shall confine my introductory remarks to matters specifically and peculiarly applicable to that part of the American case relating to the crime of illegal warfare, and the common plan or conspiracy to commit that crime. Tribunal on this aspect of the case, and the rule of law which must be controlling in the final judgement of the Tribunal on this part of the case, is stated in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal. Article 6, so far as is pertinent here, reads as follows:
"Article 6. The Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in "The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the juris '(a) CRIMES AGAINST PEACE:
namely, planning, preparation, initiation or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing;"Subparagraphs (b) and (c) of Article 6 are not pertinent to this aspect of the case.
However, the unnumbered final paragraph of Article 6 is of controlling importance on this aspect of the case.
That paragraph reads as follows:
"Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in any persons in execution of such plan."
Charter I have just read: (1) The Charter imposes "individual responsibility" for acts constituting "crimes against peace"; (2) The term "Crimes against peace" embraces planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of illegal war;(3) The term "Crimes against peace" also embraces participation in a common plan or conspiracy to commit illegal war; (4) an illegal war consists of agreements or assurances.
These two kinds of illegal war might not necessari ly be the same.
It will be sufficient for the prosecution to show that the ments or assurances.
On the other hand it would be sufficient for the pro aggression.
We think the evidence in this case will establish conclusively were illegal for both reasons.
The fifth principle which I ask you to bear criminal responsibility of a defendant is imposed by the Charter not merely by reasons of direct, immediate participation in the crime.
It is sufficient for the prosecution to show that a defendant was a leader an organizer, instigator, or accomplice who participated either in the formulation or in the execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit crimes against peace. In the case of many of the defendants the evidence will show direct and immediate personal participation in the substantive crime itself. In the case of some of the defendants the evidence goes to their participation in the formulation and execution of a common plan or conspiracy. In the case of each defendant we think the evidence will establish full individual responsibility for crimes against peace as defined in the Charter of this Tribunal. In this connection I wish to emphasize that the Charter declares that the responsibility of conspirators extends not only to their own acts but also to all acts performed by any persons in execution of the conspiracy. out to rob a bank in accordance with a criminal scheme to that end, and in the course of carrying out their scheme one of the conspirators commits the crime of murder, all the participants in the planning and execution of the bank robbery are guilty of murder, whether or not they had any other personal participation in the killing. This is a simple rule of law declared in the Charter. All the parties to a common plan or conspiracy are the agents of each other and each is responsible as principal for the acts of all the others as his agents. aspect of the case. Indictment lodged against the defendants on trial which relate to the crimes of illegal war or war of aggression. Particularly I ask the Tribunal to advert to the statements of offenses under Count I and Count 2 of the Indictment in this case. in paragraph III. The offenses there stated so far as pertinent to the present discussion is:
"All the defendants, with divers other persons, during a period of years preceding 8th May 1945 participated as leaders, organizers, instigators or accomplices in the formulation or execution of a common plan of conspiracy to commit, or which involved the commission of, Crimes against Peace, as defined in the Charter of this Tribunal ..... The common plan or conspiracy embraced the commission of Crimes against Peace, in that the defendants planned prepared, initiated and waged wars of aggression, which were also wars in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances."
..... relevant at this point. It must be obvious that essentially Counts I and 2 interlock in this indictment. The substance of the offense stated under Count 2, paragraph V of the Indictment is this:
"The emphasis in the statement of offenses under Count 1 of the Indictment is on the common plan of consoiracy. The emphasis under Count 2 of the Indictment is on the substantive crimes to which the conspiracy related and which were committed in the course of a nd pursuant to that conspiracy." case as between the chief prosecutor of the four prosecuting governments, primary responsibility for the presentation of the evidence supporting Count 1 has been placed on the American prosecutor, and primary responsibility for the presentation of the evidence supporting Count 2 of the Indictment has been placed on the British prosecutor. a cooperative effort as between the prosecutors to present both counts together, In addition to the statement of offense relating to illegal warfare in paragraph III under Count 1 of the Indictment, Count 1 also contains what amounts to a bill of particulars of that offense. In so far as those particulars relate to illegal warfare, they are contained in paragraph IV (F) of the Indictment which sets out in the English text on pages 7 through the top of page 10 under the general heading "Utilization of Nazi Control for Foreign Aggression." The allegations of this bill of particulars have been read in open court, in the presence of the defendants, and the Tribunal, as well as the defendants, are_certainly familiar with the contents of these allegations. I call attention to them, however, in order to focus attention on the parts of the Indictment which are relevant in consideration of the evidence which I intend to bring before the Tribunal.
would be faulty if I did not invite the Tribunal to consider with me the relationship between history and the evidence in this case. Neither Counsel nor Tribunal can orient themselves to the problem at hand neither counsel nor Tribunal can present or consider the evidence in this case in its proper context - neither can argue or evaluate the staggering implications of the evidence at hand to be presented without reading that history, reading that evidence against the background of recorded history, and by recorded history, I mean the history merely of the last 12 years.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, of the U.S. Supreme Court, found in his judicial experience that "a page of history is worth a volume of logic." My recollection is that he stated it perhaps better, perhaps earlier in the preface as to his book on the common law where he said, I think, "The life of the law has been not logic but experience." I submit, that in the present case, a page of history is worth a hundred tons of evidence. As lawyers and judges we cannot blind ourselves to what we know as men. The history of the past 12 years is a burning, living thing in our immediate memory. The facts of history crowd themselves upon us and demand our attention. of common knowledge need not be proved but may receive the judicial notice of courts without other evidence. The Charter of this Tribunal, drawing on this uniformly recognized principle, declares in Article 21:
"The Tribunal shall not require proof of facts of thereof."
The facts of record history are the prime example of facts of common knowledge which require no proof. No court would require evidence to prove that the Battle of Hastings occurred in the year 1066, or that the Bastille fell on the 14th of July 1789, or that Czar Alexander I fre ed the Serfs in 1863, or that George Washington was the first President of the United states, or that George III was the reigning King of England at that time. fessor of mine used to present a curiosity of the law - that a judge is held to responsibility for no knowledge of the law whatsoever, that a lawyer is held to a reasonable knowledge of the law, and a layman is hold to an absolute knowledge of all the lawyers. It works inversely as to facts, or facts of common knowledge. There, the Judge is imputed to know all of these facts. Howevere, many of them he may have forgotten as an individual man, So one of the purposes of this presentation will be to implement the judicial knowledge, if a hypothesis actually exists. these proceedings into a history book. The evidence which we offer in this case is the evidence which for the moment has been concealed from historians. It will fill in recorded history, but it must be read against the background which common knowledge provides. The evidence in this case is primarily captured documents - these captured documents fill in the inside story underlying the historical record. The evidence which we will offer constitutes an illustrative spot-check on the history of recent times as the world knows it. The evidence to be offered is not a substitute for History.
We hope the Tribunal will find it to be an authentication of history. The evidence which we have drawn from captured documents establishes the validity of the recent history of the past 12 years -- a history of many aggressions by the Nazi conspirators accused in this case. the court to see in those documents definite additions to history the addition of new elements long suspected and now proved. The ele ments which the captured documents on which this particular aspect of the case will add to recorded history are the following: (1) the conspiratorial nature of the planning and preparation which underlay the Nazi aggressions already known to history; (2) the deliberate premeditation which preceded those acts of aggression; (3) the evil motives which led to the crimes; (4) the individual participation of named persons in the Nazi conspiracy for aggression; (5) the deliberate falsification of the pretexts claimed by the Nazi aggressors as they arose for their criminal activities. beyond possible doubt and these ele ments in the context of historical facts we think are all that need be shown. the initiation of the first war of aggression was a very short period. This critical period of lawless preparation and illegal scheming which ultimately set the whole world flame was unbelievably short. It covered 6 years, 1933 to 1939. The speed with which all this was accomplished evidence at once the fanatical intensity of the conspirators and their diabolical efficiency. Crowded into these 6 short years is the making of the greatest tragedy that has over befallen mankind. years of war that followed, demands that we see this period of time divided into rather definite phases, phases that reflect the development and execution of the Nazi master plan.
I suggest that the Tribunal as it receives evidence, fit it into five phases. The first was primarily preparatory, although it did involve over-acts. That phase covers roughly the period from 1933 to 1936. In that period the Nazi conspirators, having acquired government control of Germany by the middle of 1933, turned their attention toward utilization of that control for foreign aggression. Their plan at this stage was to acquire military strength and political bargaining power to be used against other nations. In this they succeeded. The second phases of their aggression was shorter. It is rather interesting to see that as the conspiracy gained strength, it gained speed. During each phase the conspirators succeeded in accomplishing more and more in less and less time until toward the end of the period, the rate of acceleration of their conspiratorial movement was enormous. The second phase of their utilization of control for foreign aggression involved the actual seizure and absorption of Austria and Czechoslovakia in that order. By March the third month of 1939 they had succeeded in this phase. The third phase may be measured in months rather than years from march 1939 to September 1939. The previous aggression being successful having been consumated without the necessity of resorting to actual war, the conspirators had obtained much desired resources and bases and were ready to undertake further aggresssions by means of war, if necessary. By September 1939 war was upon the world. The fourth phase of the aggression consisted of expanding the warinto a central European war of aggression. By April 1941 the war which had thertofore involved Poland, the United kingdom and France, had been expanded by inva sions into Scandinavia and into the low countries and into the Balkans. In the next phase the Nazi conspirators carried the war eastward by invasion of the territory of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and finally, through their Pacific ally, Japan, precipitated the attack on the United States at Pearl Harbor.
While on the phase of the case we shall not rest exclusively on them alone, the essential elements of the crime which I have already pointed out can be made out by a mere handful of captured documents. My order of presentation of these will be first to present one by one this handful of documents, documents which prove the essential elements of the case on aggressive war up to the hilt. These documents will no leave no reasonable doubt concerning the aggressive character of the Nazi war or concerning the conspiratorial premiditation of that war. Some of this group of documents are the specific basis for particular allegations in the Indictment. As I reach these documents, I shall invite the attention of the Tribunal to the allegations of the Indictment which are specifically supported by them. Having proved the corpus of the crime in this way, I will follow the presentation of this evidence with a more on less chronological presentation of the details of the aggressive war fare producing more detailed evidence of the relevant activities of the conspirators from 1933 to 1941. this point, before developing the case in detail, are tenin number. The documents have been selected to establish the basic facts concerning each phase of the development of the Nazi conspiracy for aggression. Each document is conspiratorial in nature. Each document is one, I believe, hereto unknown to history and each document is selfcontained and tells its own story. Those are the three standards of selection which we have sought to apply. an orderly, planned sequence of preparation for war. This is the period covered by paragraphs 1 and 2 of section IV (F)of the Indictment, to be found at page 7 of the printed English text, The essential character of this period was the formulation and execution of the plan to re-arm and to re-occupy and fortify the Rhineland, in violation of the treaty of Versailles and other treaties, in order to acquire military streng and political bargaining powers to be used against other nations books.