THE PRESIDENT: You want it simply for the purpose of showing that General Thomas said that law was the cornerstone of war?
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: That has already passed into the record.
MR. ALDERMAN: I want to say to counsel for the defendants that it is here if they care to consult it at any time.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. ALDERMAN: I should have identified it by our number, 2353 PS. time it was replaced by another secret defense law, revising the system of defense organization and directing more detailed preparations for the approaching status of mobilization, which I think was the euphemism for war. other sections of our presentation. They have been discussed by Mr. Dodd in connection with the economic preparations for the war. Number 2194, PS. I offer it as Exhibit USA 36. Reichs Defense Law, the Ministry for Economy and Labor, Saxony, Dresden; and 6 December 1939, TEL. I suppose, Telegraph. 52151. Long Distance. Top Secret.
THE PRESIDENT: Does this occur at the beginning of 2194 PS?
MR. ALDERMAN: It should, yes, sir, unless mine is different from yours.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think I have any letter here introducing it.
MR. ALDERMAN: Doesn't that start after that, "To the Reichs Protector in Bohemia and Moravia"?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, that's right. I beg your pardon.
(Mr Alderman continuing):
"Transportation Section, attention of Construction Chief Counsellor Hirches, or representative in the office of the Reichs Protector in Bohemia and Moravia, received Prague, 5 September 1939, No. 274. Inclosed please find a copy of the Reichs Defense Law of 4 September 1938 and a copy each of the decrees of the Reichs Minister of Transportation, dated 7 October 1938, RL 10.2212/38, top secret, and of 17 July 1939, RL / LV 1.2173/39, top secret, For your information and observance, by order, signed Kretzchmar. 3 inclosures completed to Dresden, 4 September, 1939, signed Schneider 3 inclosures. Receipt for the letter of 4 September 1939, with 3 Counsellor Kretzchmar -- the whole point being that inclosing a second secret Reich Defense Law under top secret cover.
Now, next I refer to indictment paragraph IVF2a. That paragraph of the indictment refers to four points: (1) Secret rearmament from 1933 to March 1933; (2) the training of military personnel (that includes secret or camouflage training); (3) production of munitions of war; (4) the building of an air force. All four of these are included in the general plan for the breach of the Treaty of Versailles and for the ensuing aggressions. The facts of rearmament and of secrecy are self-evident from the events that followed. The significant phrase of this activity insofar as the indictment is concerned lies in the fact that all this was necessary in order to break the barriers of the Treaty of Versailles and of Locarno Pact and necessary to the aggressive wars which were to follow. The extent and nature of those activities could only have been for aggressive purposes, and the highest importance which the Government attached to the secrecy of the program is emphasized by the disguised financing, both before and after the announcement of conscription, and the rebuilding of the army, 16 March 1935.
Schacht dated 3 May 1935 entitled, "The Financing of the Armament program, "Finanzierung der Ruestung." As I say, it is not signed by the defendant Schacht, but he has identified it as being his memorandum in an interrogation on the 16th of October 1945. I would assume that he would still admit that it is his memorandum. That memorandum has been referred to but I believe not introduced or accepted in evidence. I identify it by our No. 1168-PS, and I offer it in evidence as Exhibit USA 37. court, I shall read the entire memorandum, reminding you that the German interpreter has the original German before him to read it to the transcript.
"Memorandum from Schacht to Hitler, identified by Schacht as Exhibit A, interrogation 16 October 1945, page 40. May 3, 1935," is the date of the memorandum.
"Financing of armament. The following explanations are based upon the thought, that the accomplishment of the armament program with speed and in quantity is the problem of German politics, that everything else therefore should be subordinated to this purpose as long as the main purpose is not imperiled by neglecting all other questions. Even after March 16, 1935, the difficulty remains that one cannot undertake the open propagandistic treatment of the German people for support of armament without endangering our position internationally (without loss to our foreign trade). The already nearly impossible financing of the armament program is rendered hereby exceptionally difficult.
"Another supposition must be also emphasized. The printing press can be used only for the financing of armament to such a degree, as permitted by maintaining of the money value. Every inflation increases the prices of foreign raw materials and increases the domestic prices, is therefore like a snail biting its own tail. The circumstance that our armament had to be camouflaged completely till March 16, 1935, and even since this date the camouflage had to be continued to a larger extent, making it necessary to use the printing press (bank note press) already at the beginning of the whole armament program, while it would have been natural, to start it (the printing press) at the final point of financing.
In the portefeuille of the Reichsbank are segregated notes for this purpose, that is, armament, of 3,775 millions and 866 millions, altogether 4,641 millions, out of which the armament notes amount to Reichsmarks 2,374 millions, that is, of April 30, 1935. The Reichsbank has invested the amount of marks under its jurisdiction, but belonging to foreigners in blank notes of armament. Our armaments are also financed partly with the credits of our political opponents. Furthermore, 500 million Reichsmarks were used for financing of armament, which originated out of Reichsanleihe, the federal loans, placed with savings banks. In the regular budget, the following amounts were provided. For the budget period 1933-34, Reichsmarks 750 millions; for the budget period 1934-35, Reichsmarks 1,100 millions; and for the budget period 1935-36, Reichsmarks 2,500 millions.
"The amount of deficits of the budget since 1928 increases after the budget 1935-36 to 5 to 6 millions Reichsmarks. This total deficit is already financed at the present time by short term credits of the money market. It therefore reduces in advance the possibilities of utilization of the public market for the armament. The Reichsfinanzminister, Minister of Finance, correctly points out at the defense of the budget: "As a permanent yearly deficit is an impossibility, as we cannot figure with security with increased tax revenues in amount balancing the deficit and any other previous debits, as on the other hand a balanced budget is the only secure basis for the impending great task of military policy"--I interpolate that evidently the defendant Schacht knew about the impending great military task to be made by Germany -- "for all these reasons we have to put in motion a fundamental and conscious budget policy which solves the problem of armament financing by organic and planned reduction of other expenditures not only from the point of receipt, but also from the point of expenditure, that is,by saving.
"How urgent this question is, can be deducted from the following, that a large amount of task has been started by the state and party"-it isn't just the state; it is the state and the party -- " and which is now in process, all of which are not covered by the budget, but from contributions and credits, which have to be raised by industry in addition to the regular taxes.
The existing of various budgets side by side, which serve more or less public tasks, is the greatest impediment for gaining a clear view over the possibilities of financing the armaments. A whole number of ministries and various branches of the party have their own budgets, and for this reason have possibilities of incomes and expenses, though based on the sovereignty of finance of the state, but not subject to the control of the Finanzminister (minister of Finance) and therefore also not subject to the control of the cabinet. Just as on the sphere of politics the much too far-reaching delegation of legislative powers to individuals brought about various states within the states, exactly in the same way the condition of various branches of state and party, working side by side and against each other, has a devastating effect oh the possibility of financing. If on this territory concentration and unified control is not introduced very soon, the solution of the already impossible task of armament financing is endangered.
"We have the following tasks:
"(1) A deputy is entrusted with," I suppose, "finding all sources and revenues, which have its origin in contributions to the federal government, to the state and party and in profits of public and party enterprises.
"(2) Furthermore experts, entrusted by the Fuehrer, have to examine how these amounts were used aid which of these amounts can in the future be withdrawn from their previous purpose.
"(3) The same experts have to examine the investments of all public and party organizations, to which extent this property can be used for the purpose of armament financing.
"(4) The federal ministry of finances is to be entrusted to examine the possibilities of increased revenues by way of new taxes or increasing of existing taxes.
"The up-to-date financing of armaments by the Reichsbank under existing political conditions was a necessity and the political success proved the correctness of this action. The other possibilities of armament financing have to be started now under any circumstances. For this purpose *** absolutely non-essential expenditures for other purposes have not ** take place and the total financial strength of Germany, limited as it is, has to be concentrated for the one purpose of armament financing. Whether the problem of financing, as outlined in this program, succeeds, remains to be seen, but without such concentration, it will fail with absolute certainty." sympathy with the defendant Schacht as he was wrestling with these problems.
THE PRESIDENT: Would that be a convenient time to adjourn for ten minutes?
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes.
(Whereupon the court at 1120 hours took a 10-minute recess).
MR. ALDERMAN: 21 May, 1935, was a very important date in the Nazi calendar. As I have already indicated, it was on that date that they passed the secret Reich Defense Law, which is our document 2261-PS. The secrecy of their armament operations had already reached the point beyond which they could no longer maintain successful camouflage and since their programme called for still further expansion, they made the unilateral renunciation of the armament provisions of the Versailles Treaty on the same date, 21 May, 1935.
I refer to Hitler's speech to the Reichstag on 21 May, 1935, our document 2288-PS. We have here the original volume of the "Voelkische Beobachter", (the "Popular Observer", I suppose is the correct translation) Volume 48, 1935, 122-151, May, and the date 22 May, 1935, which gives his speech, under the heading (if I may translate, perhaps) "The Fuehrer Notifies the World of the Way to Real Peace". number 2288-PS, as Exhibit U.S.A.38, and from that I shall read, beginning with the fifth paragraph in the English translation:
"The Treaty of Versailles was not broken ..."
I am starting with the words, "The Treaty of Versailles", in the fifth paragraph.
"The Treaty of Versailles was not broken by Germany unilaterally, but the well-known paragraphs of the dictat of Versailles were violated and consequently invalidated by those powers who could not make up their minds to follow the disarmament requested of Germany with their own disarmament agreed upon by the Treaty".
I am sorry, I said the fifth paragraph .. this indicates on Page 3. It is after he discusses some general conclusions and then there is a paragraph numbered 1, that says:
"The German Reich Government refuses to adhere to the Geneva Resolution of 17 May ..."
"The Treaty of Versailles was not broken by Germany unilaterally, but the well-known paragraphs of the dictat of Versailles were violated and consequently invalidated by those powers ..."
I am sorry. May I look at the German original? If the court please, I don't want to read the whole volume of the "Voelkische Beobachter"...
THE PRESIDENT: If it is only a short document you are going to read, perhaps the document could be taken away from the interpreter, and he could follow you.
MR. ALDERMAN: I think I could find it ... I am not very fast in reading German but ...
THE PRESIDENT: If you read it in English, he will translate it.
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes, but I want the interpreter to have the German.
You will find "1. The German Reich Government refuses to adhere to the Geneva Resolution of 17 May.."
"The Treaty of Versailles was not broken by Germany unilaterally, but the well-known paragraphs of the dictat of Versailles were violated, and consequently invalidated, by those powers who could not make up their minds to follow the disarmament requested of Germany with their own disarmament as agreed upon by Treaty.
"2. Because the other powers did not live up to their obligations under the disarmament programme, the Government of the German Reich no longer considers itself bound to those articles, which are nothing but a discrimination of the German nation..." (I suppose "against the German nation.") "...for an unlimited period of time, since, through them, Germany is being nailed down in a unilateral manner, contrary to the spirit of the agreement." I don't necessarily vouch for the absolute truth of everything that he presents. This is a public speech he made before the world, and it is for the Tribunal to judge whether he is presenting a pretext or whether he is presenting the truth. aggressive war, there were various programmes for direct and indirect training of a military nature. This included not only the training of military personnel, but-also the establishment and training of other military organizations, such as the Police Force, which could be and were absorbed by the Army. However, the extent of this programme for military training is indicated by Hitler's boast of the expenditure of ninety billion Reichsmarks during the period of 1933 to 1939, in the building up of the armed forces.
I have another volume of the "Voelkische Beobachter", Volume 52, 1939, the issue of 2nd and 3rd September, 1939, which I offer in evidence as Exhibit U.S.A. 39; and there appears a speech by Adolf Hitler, with his picture, under the heading which, if I may be permitted to try to translate, reads:
"The Fuehrer announces the Battle for the Justice and Security of the Reich." I hand the original volume ... 1 September, 1939, the date of the attack on Poland, identified by our number 2322-PS; and I read from that the paragraphs indicated to the interpreter:
"For more than six years now..."
I beg your pardon. On the Court's mimeographed copy it is the bottom of page 3, the last starting paragraph of the page.
"For more than six years now, I have been engaged in building up the German Armed Forces. During this period more than ninety billion Reichsmarks were spent building up the Wehrmacht. Today, ours are the best-equipped armed forces in the world, and they are superior to those of 1914. My confidence in them can never be shaken." early development is illustrated by a reference to the secret training of flying personnel, back in 1932, as well as the early plans to build a military air force. A report was sent to the defendant Hess, in a letter from Schickedantz to the defendant Rosenberg, for delivery to Hess. should get this letter, and therefore sent it to Rosenberg for personal delivery to Hess.
This document points out that the civilian pilots should be so organized as to enable their transfer into the military ear force organization. in evidence as U. S. Exhibit 40. It starts: "Lieber Alfred", (referring to Alfred Rosenberg) and is signed "Mit bestem Gruss, Amo". Amo, I think, was the first name of Schickedantz.
"Dear Alfred: I am sending you enclosed a communication from the RWM forwarded to me by our confidential man (Vertrauensmann) which indeed is very interesting. I believe we will have to take some steps so that the matter will not be procured secretly for the Stahlhelm. This report is not known to anybody else. I intentionally did not inform even our long friend". (I suppose that means "our tall friend". I may interpolate that the defendant Rosenberg, in an interrogation on 5 October 1945, identified this "long friend" or "tall friend", as being Von Albensleben).
"I am enclosing an additional copy for Hess, and ask you to transmit the letter to Hess by messenger, as I do not want to write a letter to Hess for fear that it might be read somewhere. Mit bestem Gruss, Yours Amo."
Then enclosed in that is "Air Force Organization".
"Purpose: Preparation of material and training of personnel to provide for the case of the armament of the air force.
"Entire management as a civilian organization will be transferred to Col. Von Willberg, at present commander of Breslau, who, retaining his position in the Reichwehr, is going on leave of absence.
"(a) Organizing the pilots of civilian air lines in such a way as to enable their transfer to the air force organization.
"(b) Prospects to train crews for military flying. Training to be done within the organization for military flying of the Stahlhelm. . ."
I believe that means the "steel helmet". .
". . . which is being turned over to Col. Hanel, retired.
"All existing organizations for sport flying are to be used for military flying. Directions on kinds and tasks of military flying will be issued by this Stahlhelm directorate. The Stahlhelm organization will pay the military pilots 50 marks per hour flight. These are due to the owner of the plane in case he himself carries out the flight.
They are to be divided in case of non-owners of the plane, between flight organization, proprietor and crew in the proportion of 10:20:20. Military flying is'now paid better than flying for advertisement (40). We therefore have to expect that most proprietors of planes or flying associations will go over to the Stahlhelm organization. It must be achieved that equal conditions will be granted by the RWM, also the NSDAP organization." and breaching the Versailles Treaty are forcefully shown by a number of Navy documents, showing the participation and cooperation of the German Navy in this rearmament programme, secret at first.
that it had always been their objective to break Versailles. "The Fight of the Navy Against Versailles, 1919 to 1935." The preface refers to the fight of the navy against the unbearable regulations of the peace treaty of Versailles. The table of contents includes a variety of navy activities, such as saving of coastal guns from destruction as required by Versailles; independent armament measures behind the back of the government and behind the back of the legislative bodies; resurrection of the U-beat arm; economic rearmament; and camouflage rearmament from 1933 to the freedom from the restrictions in 1935. power by the Nazis in 1933 on increasing the size and determining the nature of the rearmament program. It also referred to the far-reaching independence in the building and development of the navy, which was only hampered insofar as concealment of rearmament had to be considered in compliance with the Versailles Treaty. of the Reich in 1935, the reoccupation of the demilitarized zone of the Rhineland, the external camouflage of rearmament was eliminated. book to which I have referred entitled "Der Kampf Der Marine Gegen Versailles" -- The Fight of the Navy against Versailles -- 1919 to 1935, written by Sea Captain Schussler. There is the symbol of the Nazi Party with the Swastika in the spread eagle on the cover sheet, and it is headed "secret", underscored. It is our document C-156. It is a book of seventy-six pages of text followed by index lists and charts. I offer this in evidence as exhibit U.S.A. 41. I may say that the defendant Raeder identified this book in a recent interrogation and explained that the navy tried to fulfill the letter of the Versailles Treaty and at the same time to make progress in naval development. I should like to read from this book, if the Court please. I certainly shall not read the entire book, but I should like to read the preface and one or two other portions of the book.
"The object and aim of this memorandum under the heading 'Preface', is to draw a technically reliable picture based on documentary records and the evidence of those who took part in the fight of the navy against the unbearable regulations of the peace treaty of Versailles. It shows that the Reich Navy after the liberating activities of the Free Corps and of Scapa Flow did not rest, but found ways and means to lay with unquenchable enthusiasm in addition to the building up of the 15,000-man navy the basis for a greater development in the future, and so create by work of soldiers and technicians the primary condition for a later rearmament. It must also distinguish more clearly the services of these men, who, without being known in wide circles, applied themselves with extraordinary zeal in responsibility in the service of the fight against the peace treaty, thereby stimulated by the highest feeling of duty, they risked, particularly in the early days of their fight, themselves and their position unrestrainedly in the partially self-ordained task. This compilation makes it clearer, however, that even such ideal and ambitions plans can be realized only to a small degree if the concentrated and united strength of the whole people is not behind the courageous activity of the soldier.
Only when the Fuehrer had created the second and even more important condition for on affective rearmament in the coordination of the whole nation and in the fusion of the political, financial and spiritual power, could the work of the soldier find its fulfillment. The framework of this peace treaty, the most shameful known in world history, collapsed under the driving power of this united will. Signed, the Compiler."
Now, I wish to invite the court's attention merely to the summary of content, because the chapter titles are sufficiently significant for my present purpose.
I. First, defensive action against the execution of the Treaty of Versailles (from the end of the war to the occupation of the Ruhr, 1923).
Under that sub-first: Saving of coastal guns from destruction to removal of artillery equipment and ammunition, hand and machine weapons.
II. Independent armament measures behind the back of the Reich Government and of the legislative body (from 1923 to the Lomann case in 1927).
1. An attempt to increase the personnel strength of the Reich Navy.
2. Contributing to the strengthening of patriotism among the people.
3. Activities of Captain Lomann.
with the story about Captain Lomann.
4. Preparation for the resurrection of the German U-boat arm.
5. Building up of the air force.
6. Attempt to strengthen our mine arm (Die Mine).
7. Economic rearmament.
8. Miscellaneous measures.
a. The Aerogiadetic, and;
b. Secret evidence.
III. Planned armament work countenanced by the Reich government but behind the back of the legislative body from 1927 to the seizure of power, 1933.
IV. Rearmament under the leadership of the Reich Government in camouflage (from 1933 to the freedom from restrictions, 1935). turn to chapter four, page seventy-five-- do you find Roman four?-Concealed rearmament under the leadership of the government of the Reich (from 1933 until military freedom in 1935). taking over of power on 30 January 1933 was of the decisive influence on the size and shape of further rearmament. withdrew as a legislative body, the Reichstag assumed a composition which could only take a one-sided attitude toward the rearmament of the armed forces. The government took over the management of the rearmament program upon this foundation.
Then a heading "Development of the Armed Forces."
ment developed for the armed forces in such a manner that the War Minister, General von Blomberg, and through him the three branches of the armed forces, received far-reaching powers from the Reich Cabinet for the development of the armed forces. The whole organization of the Reich was included in this way. In view of these powers the collaboration of the former inspecting body in the management of the secret expenditure was from then on dispensed with. There remained only the inspecting duty of the accounting office of the German Reich.
Another heading, "Independence of the Commander in Chief of the Navy." The commander in Chief of the Navy, Admiral Reader, honorary doctor, had received the advise of a farreaching independence in the building and development of the navy. This was only hampered Insofar as the previous concealment of rearmament had to be continued in consideration of the Versailles Treaty. Besides the public budget there remained the previous special budget, which was greatly increased in view of the considerable credit for the provision of labor, which was made available by the Reich. Wide powers in the handling of these credits were given to the Director of the Budget Department of the navy, up to 1924 Commodore Schussler, afterwards Commodore Foerster. These took into consideration the increased responsibility of the Chief of the Budget.
Another heading, "Declaration of Military Freedom". When the Fuehrer, relying upon the strength of the armed forces executed in the meanwhile, announced the restoration of the military sovereignty of the German Reich, the last-mentioned limitation on rearmament works namely, the external camouflage, was eliminated. Freed from all the shackles which have hampered our ability to move freely on and under water, on land and in the air for one and a half decades, and carried by the newly-awakened fighting spirit of the whole nation, the armed forces, that his part of it, the navy, can lead with full strength towards its completion the rearmament already under way with the goal of securing for the Reich its rightful position in the world.
blem about proof which I believe we have not discussed. I have in my hand an English transcription of an interrogation of the defendant Erich Raeder. Of course he knows he was interrogated; he knows what he said. I don't believe we have furnished copies of this interrogation to defendant's counsel. I don't know whether under the circumstances I am at liberty to read from it or not. If I do read from it I suggest that the defendant's counsel will all get the complete text of it -- I mean of what I read in the transcript.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the counsel for Defendant Reader any objection to this interrogation being read?
DOCTOR SIEMERS: So far as I have understood the trial to date, I believe that it is a question of a trial in which either proof through documents or proof through witnesses will be furnished. I am surprised that the prosecution wishes to make proof by way of protocols taken at a time when defense counsel was not present. I would be obliged to the court if I could hear whether in principle every piece of evidence of that sort will be made possible to me as defense counsel or whether it will be made possible to me as defense counsel also to present documents, that is to say, documents in which I myself interrogated witnesses myself, or whether I should be obliged to put them on the stand.
THE PRESIDENT: In the future the Tribunal thinks that if interrogations of defendants are to be used copies of such interrogations should be furnished to defendant's counsel beforehand. The question which the Tribunal wished to ask you was whether on this occasion you objected to this interrogation being used without such a copy having been furnished to you with regard to your observation as to your own rights with reference to interrogating your defendant.
The Tribunal considers that you must call them as witnesses upon the witness stand and can not interrogate then and put in the interrogations. The question for you now is whether you object to this interrogation being laid before the Tribunal at this stage.
DOCOTR SIEMERS: I should like first of all to have an opportunity to see this document before it is presented to the Tribunal. Only then will I be able to decide whether interrogations can be read, the contents of which I am not familiar with.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn now, and it anticipates that the interrogation can be handed to you during the adjournment and then can be used afterwards.
(adjourned 1230 to 1400.)