but at any rate, the facts as I have described them did exist. During the examination by Sir David I myself admitted that I often had serious conflicts of conscience and that I often found myself in a position where I myself had to draw the consequences of those matters. But one thing I had not thought of and that was that I should in any way act against the head of the state and the supreme commander of the armed forces or refuse to obey him. As far as I am concerned, and as a soldier, this is a conception which cannot be violated. can be accused of having been weak under the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, but one thing you cannot accuse me of, and that is I was cowardly, that I was not honorable and that I was faithless.
DR. NELTE: Mr President, I have reached the end of my examination. I should only like to ask you, if I may, that the documents which have been offered to the Tribunal in the course of this examination, bearing the numbers one and two in document book two, named documents K-8 and K-9, be admitted in evidence without the necessity of my reading any pants thereof. The Prosecution knows, the documents and they are agreeable.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Defendant, there is one question I should like to ask you. Are you suggesting that you ever put your protest or objections to the orders of Hitler in writting?
A One I handed to him in writting,yes: that I know for certain. In the other cases, and as far as I can recollect, the matters were discussed verbally.
Q Did you keep a copy of that protest?
Q Did you keep a copy of the protest ? I did not ask you whether you had a copy; I asked you whether you kept a copy. Did you make a copy? to him through the chief adjutant. I think I had the draft in my personal files, but no longer have it and I don't know where these files have gone. They could possibly be or have been in the hands of the Chief of the Central Armed Forces Department, who dealt with personal matters in my office. Later on they may have got into hands of the chief adjutant of the Fuehrer, that I don't know and I think that the original of that document ought to be available amongst those files, the document which I sent to the Fuehrer at that time.
Q And what was the occasion of the protest? during which he had expressed his distrust, and it was made in connection with the current controversies on basic matters which existed between us.
Q whom?
Q And you can't say more about it than that it was made on basic matters? of the strength of the accusations made against me and on the strength of the reasons which I was quoting.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all. The defendant can return to his scat.
DR. NELTE: May I ask permission to submit the two documents to the Tribunal, the ones which I mentioned before?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly.
Are you going to call in any more witnesses?
DR. NELTE: I had asked the Tribunal to be able to call witness Dr. Lammers.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. NELTE: Witness Dr. Lammers please.
DR. LAMMERS, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you state your name in full?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me: pure truth, and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeat the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You will sit down if you wish. BY DR. NELTE: conception of the OKW, its juridiction, and the position held by the defendant Fieldmarshal Keitel as Chief of the OKW. We have, during discussions which we had, talked about the matter subject of which, through previous interrogations and through st atements made by the defendant Keitel appears clarified to me, but since, after statements made by Goering and the defendant and statements to be made by other witnesses it will be clarified, I do not propose to ask you in detail on the subject. But I would like you, as the chief of the Reich Chancellory, to answer questions which others may not know as well as you do, you, who had participated in some way or other when certain decrees, and particularly that of the 4th of February, 1938, were drafted. May I ask you, therefore, to tell me, first of all, how did the decree of February 4, 1938, come about? going to leave his position, and that on that occasion he wanted to make certain other changes of personnel in the German Government. In particular, he said that the Foreign Minister von Neurath was going to retire and that certain changes would take place in that connection, and that furthermore, in the Supreme Command of the Army, certain alterations were about to be made. Subsequently , he instructed me to draft a decree regarding the chiefs of the army.
I was about to participate and collaborate with the Armed Forces Department of the War Ministry as a directive in this connection, and the Fuehrer gave me the following instructions.
"In the future I no longer want to have a Reich Minister for War; and in the future I no longer want a Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces who would stand between me, the Supreme Commander, and the Supreme Commanders of the Armed Forces Sections." Commander of the Armed Forces was created in the shape of a military staff which stood under the direct orders of the Fuehrer. The Fuehrer desired that there should be no independent authority in that place which would stand between him and the commanders of the departments of the armed forces. Consequently, Admiral Keitel, who was appointed in that connection, had no authority of command of his own regarding the sub-sections of the armed forces. Such powers could hardly be existing because -
THE PRESIDENT: Has this not been really covered by the defendant Keitel himself? No question in cross examination has been put to him to challenge any of his statements upon the organization of the OK ; therefore, it seems to the Tribunal it is not necessary at all.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President when I spoke a few introductory words, I had asked the witness regarding the development regarding that decree. I had asked him one question and, persuably, he had to talk a little more regarding the decree of February 4, 1938, to explain it. I shall try and make Dr. Lammers' examination as short as possible, and I do think that the questions regarding the Chief of the OKW have been clarified, but it is, after all, a principal question. If a man of the standing of Dr Lammers' can confirm it, then this would probably increse the value of the evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: If the Prosecution had put any questions in cross-examination suggesting that there was any inaccuracy in the evidence which the defendant Keitel had given upon the subject, then, of course, it would be open to you and it would be necessary fur you to call other evidence upon it; but, when the subject is not challenged in any shape or form, it is not necessary to confirm it.
DR. NELTE: In that case, Mr. President, I don't need to ask the witness any questions at all since the subject on which I was going to examine him was the position of the Defendant Keitel as Chief of the OKW; his position as a Minister; his functions as a so-called Counsel for the Reich's Defense and his functions as a member of the 3 men collegium. In all these cases, no questions have been raised by the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, the Prosecution did raise the question as to whether the Defendant Keitel took part in any political action and upon that you may questionhim.
DR. NELTE: Thank you very much.
Dr. Lammers, what can you say on the strength of your personal knowledge, about the question whether the Defendant Field Marshal Keitel did occupy himself with political matters on the strength of his position as Chief of the OKW, or if he did concern himself with them? political matters. The way I understand your question is that you want me to say what Mr. Keitel, in his capacity of Minister of War, did do so far as he cooperated in political matters and what he carried out. I don't quite understand your question. in other words, nor has it anything to do with his functions in the Ministry of War. as to whether you know that the Defendant Keitel, during the time when he held the position of Chief of the OKW, occupied himself with political lines, say foreign political matters in the first place? foreign political affairs, I cannot make any statement regarding Keitel since I myself didn't participate in that phase.
Q Alright, then. I want to ask you a concrete question.
President Hacha came, when first there were meetings with other statesmen and you, principally, you were present also. Can you say whether during the time that he was presentduring such receptions, was it the function of Field Marshal Keitel to take part in political discussions and to co-operate? foreign statesmen. I myself did not take part.
You have mentioned President Hacha. That was an exception when I was there. In matters regarding the Protectorate, we were not interested in foreign political questions, as far as we are concerned, but during discussions with prominent men from abroad on foreign policy, I was practically never present and I cannot say, therefore, to what extent Keitel did participate during such c onferences, but I assume that he was frequently present during such conferences. of your knowledge. In that case, I am askingyou if, in accordance with the wishes of the decree of 4238, Hitler -- in other words, with whom you have discussed its problems -- stated whether the man who was to take over the position of Chief of the OKW was to have such political functions? Can you say anything on that?
A My opinion was that he wasn't to have anything to do with political functions in that sense. He was immediately subordinate to the Fuehrer. get the impression that Field Marshal Keitel was a political general, in the sense which one usually considers a General political?
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, in that case I do not propose to examine the witness further since everything else he was going to make statements on has already been clarified.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, the Tribunal thinks that you may have mis understood what I said to you about whether you should ask any questions about the Defendant Keitel as a member of the Reich's Defense Council.
If this witness can give any evidence upon that point, you may question him upon it. BY DR. NELTE:
Q Witness, in the law regarding the Reich's Defense of 1938, you, as Chief of the Reichs Chancellery, were appointed a permanent member of the Council for the Reich's Defense. Do you know if this Reich's Defense Law, together with the Council for the Reich's Defense, did it ever become effective.
A The Reich's Defense Law was made but has never been promulgated as such. In my opinion, it has never therefore become a law. The contents of the Reich's Defense Law were partially and applied as secret instructions from the Fuehrer. That Reich's Defense Council, as such, as far as I know, never did sit. I, at any rate, have never received an invitation to attend a meeting, and, in my recollection, I have never taken part in any meeting for the Reich's Defense.
have been called meetings of the Reich's Defense Council, but I believe that these meetings, because of the large number of people attending them -- I think there were 60 or 80 called by the Plenipotentiaries for the Four Year Plan -I can remember having partaken in such meetings. Apart from that, after the Reich's Defense Law had been formulated, I have had so little to do with it during the subsequent years that I myself did not remember that I had been appointed a permanent member of this Reich's Defense Council. In such meetings, if they were meetings of the Reich's Defense Council, in which I had partaken, no matters directly concerned with the defense of the Reich were ever discussed,
Q Do you know anything about the tasks which the Reich's Defense Council were supposed to have? which was not published. As far as I can recall, these were very general, these tasks which were to be performed referred to the Defense of the Reich. Reich's defense was an instrument for the planning of aggressive war. At any rate, an instrument for aggressions and for rearmament. Reich's Defense or whether members of that Council undertook such tasks? Cabinet Council of which you were supposed to be a member. Defendent Keitel was also a member of the Secret Cabinet Council, and it does, in fact, say so in that law?
A When Von Neurath resigned as Foreign Minister, it was the Fuehrer's wish, so far as the outside world was concerned, that the promotion of von Neurath should be emphasized -- be honored. He ordered me to draw up a decree regarding a Secret Cabinet Council which von Neurath would belong to -this Secret Cabinet Council. Apart from that, as far as I can recall, the foreign minister, the deputy of the Fuehrer, Reichsminister Hess, Field Marshal Keitel, and I myself were to be the other members. I think that's all.
that this was going to be a matter of a purely formal connection which would create a special position for von Neurath as far as the public was concerned, and I was positively convinced that the Fuehrer would never call a meeting of the Secret Cabinet Council. In fact, the Secret Cabinet Council has never actually met, not even for a constitutional meeting. It never received any tasks from the Fuehrer. It merely existed on paper.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Witness, if it was a secret, how could it affect the public?
as a foreign minister was to be demonstrated. It was to be demonstrated and made known that there were no differences between von Neurath and the Fuehrer which would have possibly been the cause of his resignation. It was to be demonstrated that he was not being put cut, but in fact, because of his a better position in foreign politics by being appointed President of the Secret Cabinet Council. BY DR. NELTE:
Q This, in other words, was a camouflage of his resignation?
Q I have yet one mere question. As Chief of the OKW, the accusation has been raised against Keitel that he has affixed his signature to certain laws, and I am now asking you what was the significance of the fact that the Chief of the OKW affixed his signature on its laws? had to countersign these laws in exercising them. He was assuming responsibility so far as the Fuehrer was concerned, that the armed forces, in other words, establishing connection with the Minister for War.
Consequently, so far as the Fuehrer's angle is concerned, he was supposed to ask the Fuehrer whether he could apply his signature or not. In exercising this jurisdiction his authorities were limited whereas Field Marshal Keitel signed the order of the Fuehrer on documents which came under thejurisdiction of the Minister for War.
Field Marshal Keitel was not a Minister? He only has the rank of a Minister. wouldn't have had to give him full ranking of a minister? But then, he was also a member of the ministerial council for the Reich Government. Didn't that make him a minister? that membership.
Q You mean no, don't you?
DR. NELTE: Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn until five minutes past two.
(A recess was taken until 1405 hours) The witness, Hans Heinrich Lammers, resumed the witness-stand:
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any of the other Defendants' Counsel who wish to ask questions of this witness? BY DR. SEIDL (Counsel for the Defendants Hess and Frank): his political aims and the program of the new Government? took his words. One of the details I remember at this meeting is that the Fuehrer talked first of all about the stopping of unemployment, something which would have to be achieved. Secondly, he spoke about the fact that an economic recovery of Germany would have to be arranged. And thirdly, he talked in detail about what he thought would be achieved if a revision of the Versailles Treaty were to be accomplished, and that it would be necessary to put an end to the defamation which was contained against Germany in the Versailles Treaty, and that it would be necessary for Germany to bring her on an equal footing with the ether nations. Government declaration. I also recollect that in that declaration there was mentioned the protection of Christendom. I can't remember any more details. But that, I an convinced, are the main points which we were concerned with. to keep the matters secret. And what was discussed was in the main contained in the Government declaration which was published in the press. alter the system of government and that he was going to establish a dictatorship? a failure -
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q You arc speaking about a meeting. What was the date of the meeting you are referring to?
DR. SEIDL: That is the first Cabinet meeting -about. I think the first Cabinet meeting was on the 30th of January, 1933. That is the day of the seizure of power. been a failure. Furthermore, he said that the result of that failure had been that the President of the Reich had been obliged to declare a state of emergency, according to Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution and that he had created an emergency Government, and that it would now be necessary to create a stable Reich Government, a Government which would be in power for many years, and that how one could create such a Government would be something which he would have to discuss with the President and the Reichstag, the German Parliament. arranging for a preferential position of power for the N.S.D.A.P.?
A He said that the N.S.D.A.P., the Nazi Party, was of course the strongest party and would as such have to be given due influence in the German Government. But he said nothing regarding the other parties that still existed and were represented, such as the German Nationalist, such as that he would remove them or want he was going to do. Hitler did not say that. and did he say in particular that Germany would finally have to be freed of the shackles of the Versailles Treaty and would have to have an equal footing in the community of peoples?
A Yes. I answered that question in the affirmative before. Those were the foreign political aims -- complete revision of the Versailles Treaty. foreign political aims one would consider another war as a possibility, if necessary -- a preventive war?
A As far as I know and as far as I remember, a war was not men-
tioned. At any rate, not a preventative war or an aggressive war. during any other meeting, when all ministers or members were present state his plan for the achievement of his foreign political aims?
AA general, main, plan, no. Nothering over and above the general points I have mentioned. Neither during that meeting nor during any other meeting did he develop his plans, just as in my opinion he never did discuss in detail his general plans, his long-term plans. Party and to make him a minister? of the Reich, could no longer take care of the business of the Party, in other words, for the technical command of the Party, he had to have another man, and he appointed him a minister because he wanted a man in the cabinet who was in a position to communicate the wishes and conceptions of the Party to the cabinet. Maybe he was visualizing in that connection something which became a law later on, a unity between the Party and the State. what was their attitude towards the leaders of the Party? generals did not exist as such. That could only have been in certain individual cases between certain members of the Party and some -- very few-generals. when the Fuehrer --that was, I think at the beginning of February 1933 -met the supreme commanders of the armed forces and had them introduced to him, and I had the impression that the Fuehrer had met only a few of these men previously. They were all introduced to him, and I stood by his side. It was my Impression that he knew some -- very few -- of these men and had met them previously. the leaders of the Party and the generals became closer, since the Party was included into the State to a considerable extent, but what I would like to say is that relations, general relations between the Party--that is to say, theReich leaders of the Party and the political leaders of the staff of the Party on one side, and the leading generals on the other, and even the generals of a slightly junior rank were at no time going beyond the purely formal or so-called social relations.
I would almost like to say that they were duty social contacts when one met at celebrations or demonstrations and very occasionally. I feel that the overall relations between the leadership staff of the Party on one side and the generals on the other did at no tine become any closer than that. change after Hitler became the leader, the head of the State and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces? nothing in principle changed, since the generals regarded the Fuehrer as not being the leader of the Party but as the head of the state, and they considered him as the supreme commander of all the armed forces. Consequently, they did not believe that any particularly close relations to the generals ought to be established. between the Reich government, the Reich leaders of the Party, and the high generals?
A Such joint meetings are out of the question. They never took place. That would have been impossible because of the large number of people involved. staff of the government and the leading generals in a position, as far as important questions referring to the nation were concerned, and particularly referring to war or peace, to define their attitude when they talked to Hitler?
they could not voice their opinions. They were not interrelated. Every individual one of these leader staff of the Party, the government and the generals, could, as such, not define their views either, particularly since they knew little about the Fuehrer's political and economic aim.
They knew nothing about them, so how could they define their attitude?
They knew because they were executing these matters and because they saw the facts, but they were surprised by them quite frequently, and any lter reaction would have meant a stab in the back against the Fuehrer's policy.
So that a political main plan of Hitler's in which these chief groups were included, did not exist at all, and, therefore, on could not talk about a conspiracy?
and that is the loading majority of ministers knew nothing of any such general plan. They never had any knowledge of it. Just how far the Fuehrer informed individual persons of such a general plan, I do not know. I was not present, but probably--or possibly--the Fuehrer may have told one or the other person, perhaps the Party or the government or the generals, perhaps he did tell them of some plans, but just what they said, what was mentioned, that of course I do not know, and whether they agreed with the Fuehrer in such case or whether they disagreed, that I cannot say either, just as I do not know whether shortly before the execution of any large scale political plans, such as for instance the march into Czechoslovakia or any such matter, whether shortly previously they did consult with the Fuehrer and advise him, whether they agreed, whether they contradicted him, or whether they merely took their orders from him which they had to execute. decisions of any magnitude were taken by Hitler alone? him alone, possibly after consultation and participation of a few persons, but never with the participation of the Reich government, because, if I should mention it then I should say that when we left the League of Nations, that was the last time that Hitler informed the Reich government of an action. Then came the important action of the march into the Rhineland. speak a little more slowly.
A More slowly? Certainly,
A More slowly? Certainly. Nations; they were informed previously. Government; only after the march had taken place did the Fuehrer inform the Reich Cabinet as far as the march into Austria was concerned, or the march into the Sudetenland. The march into Prague and the outbreak of the Polish war had the beginning of all the other campaigns against Norway, France, Russia and so on, and so forth. In all these cases the Fuehrer neither informed the Reich Cabinet first, nor were they informed afterwards. since these large plans which had certain significance to the Administration had not been communicated to them, that they were put before the accomplished facts. the Fuehrer alone, and of course, how much he consulted individual persons is something I made a statement about earlier, saying that I didn't know. not informed about any of these actions. They were only generally informed, like every reader of the newspapers and every radio listener, one or the other, as, for instance, I had heard perhaps a few hours before the event when things were made known to the press. But as to any previous consultations or information of the Fuehrer, so far as that is concerned, that never took place. powers could be transferred entirely to the Fuehrer? of habit. powers through the law which had been published in the Reichstag; they had been given the power to alter the German Constitution. These powers were made use of by the Reich Government by means of extraordinary laws, but, of course, they were also used by means of silent suffering, of habit, and the formation of governmental habits such as appeared to be recognized in all countries.
Particularly during the first years, and of course all during the later years, the law of usage and habit developed, which meant that the Fuehrer acted more independently than should have been the case according to the Weimar Constitution. Largely, political questions were all removed from the jurisdiction of the Cabinet by the Fuehrer. that time the Fuehrer did not wish that general political questions be raised in the Cabinet by any minister. I have repeatedly had to inform ministers that they were to refrain from bringing up questions which did not belong in their immediate sphere of influence and discuss them in the cabinet. men who wanted to discuss church policy. I had been forbidden to put any general political questions on the agenda of such a Cabinet meeting. If, in spite of that, a minister raised a political question during a meeting of the Cabinet, then the Fuehrer used to speak himself and deal with that individual person, or order him to report personally.
Then the period developed when, after Hindenburg's death, the Fuehrer became both the head of the State and the leader, and then such debates in the Cabinet, as long as there were Cabinet meetings, were stopped altogether. Nothing could be debated. The ministers were not allowed to feel that they were political ministers. I had to communicate these facts to them repeatedly, by order of the Fuehrer, and tell them to refrain from raising any particular questions during Cabinet meetings. large-scale political actions took place, and no Cabinet meetings took place at all. The Fuehrer acted independently and alone, and all statements were made on behalf of the Reich Government. He himself made these declarations, alone and without consulting anybody first. nevertheless failed to perpetually resist that custom.
"government" such as is laid down in Anglo-Saxon law under "Government", then there was no longer any Reich Government after 1936 in its proper entirety, consisting of minister. That form of government ceased to exist in 1936. The Fuehrer was the Reich Government, and those powers had slipped into his hands. but it wasn't a crime. It was a political development such as has happened repeatedly in history. the powers and had all powers, in that connection there was a gradual -
THE PRESIDENT: When you see two lights in front of you, you are
THE WITNESS: Very well. BY DR. SEIDL:
The Senate had all powers, and extraordinary laws, leading to -
THE PRESIDENT: Will you kindly keep silent when the Tribunal wishes to speak?
THE WITNESS: Yes, but, of course, I don't know when they do.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal really doesn't want to hear a history
THE WITNESS: Very well. BY DR. SEIDL: powers slipped into Hitler's hands.
THE PRESIDENT: We have had quite enough. We quite understand that debate at all.
It is perfectly clear that he said so.
DR. SEIDL: Yes. BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, will you please tell me one more thing? And this is my last question in this connection. Please tell me whether you, as Minister of the Reich and Chief of the Reich Chancellery, considered the development you have just described as legal. point of view of the legalist, and I have discussed these questions repeatedly with Hitler, and I consider it perfectly legal and, if it is necessary, I can quote you my reasons in detail. Particularly, I consider that development legal because of the well-known Enabling Act and later laws which gave plenipotentiary powers to the Government. Therefore, the Government, in turn, was in a position to detach some of those powers to the Fuehrer and to pass some of them on. In that manner the Reich Government, as such -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, the Tribunal isn't really interested in whether or not it was legal.
What the Tribunal is interested in is whether crimes against other nations were committed.
We certainly don't want to hear this in such great detail.