BY DR. THOMA: which it becomes clear that the District Suman (?) was to be the hunting district for the Reich Commissioner, and for that reason hundreds of people were shot down because resettling them would have been too complicated and too lengthy. Will you make a statement about that? atrocities committed in the East. Upon investigating them, it was found that these reports did not conform with facts. In this particular case this report appeared so credible to me that I made it the cause to report to the Fuehrer directly, considering that I was having trouble with Gauleite Koch in any case. Apart from other questions, the question of schools in the Ukraine had arisen; so had the question of establishing high schools and certain personal statements from Koch, which I submitted in the form of complaints of mine, and I also submitted this report I've just mentioned. for the Forest Administration of the Ukraine, from which it appeared that these forest districts were suitable for supplying timber for railway construction and such woods were to be used for this purpose, but the bandits and partisans were hiding in these woods, and in which he stated that such a task, in consideration of the obscure situation, might be very difficult. It was stated that Koch, though not in the interest of his hunting, but because of the care he wanted to take for his district, had started a cleansing action and that in the course of that a number of partisans and bandits had been found who had been shot. The remaining population from these wood districts had been r esettled. When Koch added, in addition to the statement from the administration, that a number of these resettled persons had expressed their gratitude for the fact that they had I taken to a better country than they had lived in in these woods, the Fuehrer shrugged his shoulders and said, "It would be difficult for me to decide. I have the statement from the Forest Administration from the Ukraine and I must accept that. I leave the matter alone; and the other decision regarding the policy will be sent to you."
files here, but which, unfortunately, has not been found. It is a decree about which witness Lammers has spoken and wh ich in principle states that the Reich Commissioner must not make obstruction and that he was to confine himself to principle matters. His decrees should go to the Reich Commission for his information and, in the event of conflicts, the decision of the Fuehrer should be gotten. represent the views which I considered right. But I will, of course, not deny that on several occasions, due to pressure exercised by the Fuehrer and Bormann, I became a little weary. And when it was said in clear-cut points that I was apparently more interested in these Eastern people than I was in the welfare of the German mission, I made some reassuring statements; but my decrees from then on continued in the old established way. As I can now ascertain, I reported to the Fuehrer on eight different occasions in this particular matter; I submitted written petitions and I rectified my decrees as desired. with his police affairs, but also politics in the Eastern Territories, and when, in November, '43, I could no longer report to the headquarters at all, I tried for the last time to make a suggestion to the Fuehrer regarding a generous Eastern policy. At the same time, I told him very distinctly, if he should refuse, I would be glad if he would relieve me from any further posts. In this connection I'm referring to a letter from Dr. Lammers of 12 October 1944, at the beginning of which it says that, in the face of current developments and Eastern problems, I was asking that he should submit this letter of mine to the Fuehrer personally. I am saying that I was considering the manner in which the German policy in the East was being handled as being so unfortunate; and that, at the same time, I wasn't included in the negotiations; and that, nevertheless, I was being made responsible for them, and I was asking him to submit my letter to the Fuehrer as soon as possible for his decision.
Dr. Lammers immediately transmitted the letter to the Fuehrer's secretary. In the direct letter to the Fuehrer I am saying--this a lengthy letter, and I am only quoting a few passages. On Page 2:
"For observation and direction of this development I have created leading departments for all Eastern peoples in the Ministry for Eastern Affairs. It has now been found that they have been well employed. They also contain representatives from the various regions, and it would appear in the interest of German policies. They may be recognized as national committees." End of quotation. it that the representatives from all Eastern nationalities could raise complaints from their nationals. They could raise them personally in the Eastern Ministry, which in turn would mean that such complaints would be raised with the German labor authorities in question or the Plenipotentiary for Labor. and as far aspolitical psychological leadership was concerned, had reported to the Chief of the Reich Chancellery in a letter, and I say: "I am asking you, my Fuehrer, that I may report the contents of it to you as well." This is a reference to a further report I am making.
On Page 36: "I am asking you, my Fuehrer, to tell me whether you still desire my activity in this direction, for since it was not possible for me to report to you orally, the problems of the East are brought to you and discussed from various sides, so I must, in consideration of this development assume that you, my Fuehrer, do not consider this activity of mine as necessary any more. In addition rumors are spread by sources unknown to me of the dissolution of the East Ministry, in fact even that these rumors are used in official correspondence to the highest Reich authorities as a reason for various demands which have been made. Under such circumstances efficien work, my Fuehrer, is not possible, and I ask you to give me directives as to how I should act in consideration of the state of affairs which has developed."
conception provided for in my speech of the 20th of June, and in my protest during the meeting of the 16th of July, and it says:
"This conception provided that in order to mobilize all the national forces of the Eastern peoples, the voluntary promise to them in advance of a certain autonomy and the possibility of cultural development, with the aim of leading them against the Bolshevist enemy. This conception, which in the beginning I ventured to assume you approved of, hasnot been carried out because the peoples were treated in an opposite way politically. Solely and only because of the agrarian order of 1942 approved by you has their willingness to work been maintained to the end by encouraging among then a certain hope of acquiring property."
of mine for an adjustment of the Eastern policy, which is reiterated for the last time, and in paragraph 2 on page 1, it says that the spokesmen attached to the Eastern Ministry are used by him in the name of the Reich Ministry, and at a point to be fixed by the Fuehrer are to be recognized as national committees means that these will be spokesmen on behalf of the people which they represent.
And on page 2 in the middle, it says: "In the leadership of the peoples of the East-
THE PRESIDENT: Is the Tribunal interested in all this detail? The substance of it has been given by the witness, has it not ? He has summarized the whole letter before he began to read any of it. There is nothing new up be now,
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, the defendant wanted to summarize briefly what his conception was, namely, autonomy, free cultural development, and that was the basis of the controversy with Koch, namely, that Koch was favoring a sort of exploitation and that he was emphasizing it. That was the reason why he wanted to say once more what the whole plan and his conception regarding the Soviets was.
the reconstruction in the Ukraine I want to have the defendant make a statement on the subject of the treatment of prisoners of war. Document Book 081. Unfortunately I shall have to have the original given to the defendant -wait a minute, here it is.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it anywhere in your books? Is it 081-PS?
DR. THOMA: It has been submitted under a USR exhibit number. BY DR. THOMA:
Q. Have you got it, Defendant?
A. It is USSR 353. fairly near the beginning of the activity of the Eastern Ministry, and then later on, particularly during that dreadful winter, 1941 and 1942. were reported to me by my political department, and we passed these complains on to the military sources concerned, together with a request that they should be considered, for reasons which must have been generally understanable. by stated to me that they had a great deal of understanding with those wishes, particularly for the wish stated by us that prisoners from these large prisoner of war camps should be selected according to their nationality to be taken to smaller camps in accordance with their nationality. This sorting out according to nationality and the human treatment would be an excellent solution because of the very numerous complaints mentioning the death of thousands of Soviet prisoners. Red Army were defending themselves in such a tough way and would not surrender, when they were so hungry and so completely exhausted that when they were captured by the Germans there were numerous cases of cannibalism among those soldiers, but that nevertheless these soldiers were too tough to surrender. being shot, and that complaint too, was passed on by us, but that an order existed in this connection was unknown to me.
prisoners which had been liberated were often found dead or crippled, that in this connection there must have been a case of police or other type of reprisal. Later on I had been informed that such shootings were prohibited, and I came to the conclusion that political kommissars were members of the Red Army.
Here is Document 081-PS. It has been stated by the Prosecution that this is a letter from the Minister for Eastern Affairs to the Chief of the OKW. The document was also found amongst my files, but it is not a letter originating from me to the Chief of the OKW, General Fieldmarshal Keitel. It was obviously deposited in my office by the sender. In the left-hand top corner on page 1 it appears that there is a figure I, 1, which means Main Department I, Sub-department 1. In the case of letters originating from me such a reference would always be absent, since I was not a sub-department of any kind. the personal character of either having the name of the addressee, or they would have the personal address. Chief of the OKW is the office, the service department, just as the ordinary address would be the Reich minister for Occupied Eastern Territories and would not be employed in the c aze of a personal letter to me, but in the case of a letter written to the office.
letter addressed to no, tions and state of affairs in connection with prisoners of war of Soviet Russian nationality, and it is apparently based on the numerous complaints which have been received by means of information from relatives. Apparently, the sender considered these complaints as being true, and he wrote to the military authorities and sent them such a letter of complaint.
I won't go into the details, but I will take the liberty of reading one final passage in connection with which I will state that it is in keeping with the spirit in which I have made efforts to educate my collaborators. On the other hand, they thought that they ought to act in the sane sense. It states, literally, on page 5, that the main -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): What is the date?
A (Continuing): The letter is dated 28 February 1942. That is to say, it was the winter of that dreadful frost. It goes on to say:
"The main demand will have to be the one that the treatment of prisoners of war must be carried out in accordance with the laws of humanity and in accordance with the dignity of the German Reich. It is conceivable that the numerous cases of inhuman treatment which have been ascertained have been allotted to German prisoners of war by the Soviet Army. They have embittered the German Army to such an extent that they wish to take reprisals. Such retribution, however, is not improving the situation of German prisoners of war, but will, in thelast consequences, lead to the situation that both parties will no longer take any prisoners at all." regarding the activity of my political department, and because this is an example of their work. I think that this will clarify the question.
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, this was going to be the end of the questions relating to the eastern territory. I will submit an affidavit from Professor Dr. Stanger referring to the employment of machinery in the Ukraine. This affidavit contains the following -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): Have you finished your examination now ?
DR. THOMA: I have finished the questions relating to the Ministry for Eastern Affairs, and after that I shall have a few more brief questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has seen this affidavit recently so there is no need to read it. We saw this affidavit the other day and read it when you considered it. Now, if you will give us the exhibit number.
DR. THOMA:R-035. This deals with machinery which had a value of 180 millions, and it was delivered to the Ukraine. BY DR. THOMA:
Q Witness, were you a member of the SA or SS?
Q So that you have never worn SS uniform?
Q Did you know anything about concentration camps?
A Yes. That question, of course, has been put to everybody and the fact that concentration camps existed became known to me in '33.
But although this may appear a repetition, I must nevertheless state that I knew the name of two concentration camps, Oranienburg and Dachau. amongst other things, that in one concentration camp there were 800 Communist agitators who sentences averaged four years of prison or penitentiary. Based on the fact that this was carried out by legal means, but nevertheless was something revolutionary, I had, of course, considered for some time that protective custody for certain persons might be decreed. But at the some time I saw and heard how our toughest opponents, against no accusations of criminality could be raised, were treated so generously that our strongest opponent, the Prussian Minister Severing was retired with full pension as a minister, and that attitude particularly was felt by me to be National Socialistic. For that reason I had to assume that these new institutions were, first of all, a state political necessity, a conviction which I certainly did have. the war? concentration camps, neither Dachau nor any other one. I think in 1938 I questioned Himmler about concentration camps and I told him that I had heard from the foreign press quite a lot of detrimental news, and asked him what was true about it. Himmler told me, "Why don't you come along and have a look at Dachau and take a look at things? We have got a swimming pool there. Our sanitary installations are first class and no objections can be raised."
I didn't visit the camp because if something improper had been going on, then Himmler, upon being asked such a question, would probably not have shown it to me. On the other hand, I thought that it was a question of bad taste if I wanted to watch people who had been deprived of their liberty, but I thought that it would be a good thing if I pointed out to Himmler that such rumors were becoming known.
A second time, later on--I can't tell you whether it was before or after the outbreak of war--Himmler himself touched on the subject and spoke about the so-called biblical scientists, a matter which has often been raised by the Prosecution and called the persecution of a religion. Himmler only told me that it was impossible to suffer refusal to serve in the armed forces considering the condition the Reich was in, that it would have terrible consequences, and he went on to say that he had often personally talked to these detainees so that he could understand them and convince them. That, he said, had been impossible, however, because they replied to all questions with quotations from the Bible which they had learned by heart, so that nothing could be done with them. From that statement of Himmler's, I gather that if he was telling me such a story he couldn't possibly prepare a shooting action against these Bible scientists. paper from Columbus. I gather from that that the United States, too, were detaining Jehovah's witnesses during the war in tained in such camps.
Presumably, under similar conditions, every state would proceed against such a refusal to carry out one's war service in some form or other.
That, of course, was my attitude, and I couldn't call Himmler wrong in that connection.
Q A few more brief questions. Did you intervene in the case of Pastor Niemoll
A Yes. When the case of Niemoller was heard before the courts in Germany, I dispatched an official from my office to that trial because I was interested in both from the official and the human point of view. This official -- his name was Dr. Zigar -- made a report to ma from which I gathered that the indictment was partly based on misunderstandings on the part of the authorities, and that partly he wasn't as seriously incriminated as I had assumed. him whether he couldn't think about the case. Sometime later, when I was with the Fuehrer, I brought the conversation around to that subject, and I said that I had considered the whole proceedings to be most unfortunate, and particularly the outcome they had had. The Fuehrer told me, "I have only demanded one statement from Niemoeller, and that is that he as a clergyman will not make speeches against the state. That he refused, and I can't let him out. Apart from that, I have given orders that he should receive the most decent treatment possible, that he, being a constant smoker, ought to have the best cigars, and he must have the possibility of carrying out all the scientific research he wants to."
I don't know on what reports the Fuehrer based this statement, but as far as I was concerned it was so clear that I could not intervene any further in the matter.
Q We come to the last question but one. Is it true that after the seizure of power you, on your part, had to have your attitude towards the Jews investigated, and that the whole treatment of Jews immediately after the seizure of power was bringing about a certain amount of doubts, that originally it had been thought of treating the Jewish question completely differently?
A I won't deny that during that time of struggle, until 1933, I too had used very strong words and published them in this connection. Many hard words and suggestions appeared in that connection. After the seizure of power I thought--and I also think the Fuehrer thought the same--that one could distance oneself from the whole thing, and that a certain parity and honorable treatment on the question was to be introduced. Under "parity" I understood something which I stated in a public speech on the 28th of June, 1933, and also during the Party rally in September of 1933, quite publicly, something which was published and which come over all the broadcasting systems. That is, that in my opinion it was not possible that the hospital system in Berlin had 80 per cent of Jewish doctors and that 30 per cent would be parity. and that the Reich Government, in connection with these measures of equality, was making exceptions for all those members of the Jewish people who had lost a relative during the last war, be it father or son. The expression I used was that we would now have to make efforts to solve the problem in that manner. that the activities in connection with the emigration, or in support of this emigration to numerous states abroad had brought about the result that the situation deteriorated and that matters had occurred which were regrettable, and which deprived me of my inner strength to continue in the manner which was demanded of me. which has been mentioned here- and what has been testified to the other day in this courtroom, that was something which I considered absolutely impossible and I would not have believed it even if Heinrich Himmler had told me so himself. There are things which, even to me,appear to be humanly impossible, and this is one of them.
DR. THOMA: I have one just question, and in that connection I want to refer to document RO-15- 3761. This is contained in the document book, but it has not yet been submitted to the Tribunal with an exhibit number.
It is a letter from Rosenberg, addressed to Hitler, containing the request that he did not wish to be nominated as a candidate for the Reichstag. BY DR. THOMA: development of National Socialism from its beginning until its dreadful end, and you have participated in it, you have watched its honorable rise and its dreadful descent, and you must know that everything meant one person. Will you inform this Tribunal what you did yourself and what efforts you made to see to it that not all power was centralized in that one person? And will you tell the Tribunal what you have done so that the effects were alleviated? which has also been submitted to the Tribunal under the number USA 725.
(The documents were submitted to the witness.) movement from its very beginning, and that I was completely loyal to a man who, during these years of struggle, was admired by me, because I could see his personal devotion and the passion with which this former German soldier was working for his nation.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, exactly what is your question to the witness? We don't want him to make a speech. We only want to know what question you are putting to him. BY DR. THOMA: public, regarding the limitations on the Fuehrer's power? my book "Myths of the 20th Century", have represented the view that the leadership principle could not be applied to one head but that both the leader and those he leads have a joint duty. I also stated that this conception "leadership principle" should have its climax in the establishment of a senate, or, as I considered it, a council, which would have a correcting and advisory capacity.
senate hall built in the Brown House in Munich with 61 seats, which he himself considered necessary. I once more represented that same thought during a speech in 1934.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal doesn't think this is in answer to the question as to what he did to limit the Fuehrer's power. We want to know what he did, if anything, to limit the Fuehrer's power.
DR. THOMA: In public speeches and before enormous meetings statements were made. I draw your attention to a -document in book 1, volume 2, at page 118, where he has publicly pointed out-
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, I didn't want you to point it out to me, I wanted the witness to point that out to the Tribunal. BY DR. THOMA: you have made? the question either. They signify that I have stated that the Socialist State must not breed a caste which would reign over the German nation, and that the leader of the German nation must not be a tyrant. However, I have never seen Adolf Hitler as a tyrant. Like many millions of National Socialists, I have trusted him personally on the strength of the experiences I have had during 14 years of struggle. And his personal powers were not limited by me; I did not want to limit them, conscious as I was that this was a personal exception for Adolf Hitler. That is, this was not the National Socialist conception of a state. However, this would not mean the leadership principle as we understood it, or the new order for the Reich and its future. during those years--that was supported by me too. And the effects, particularly those of the wrong masters, were branded by me, in the middle of the war, before political lenders, when I stated that this concentration of power as it existed at that moment, during that war, could only be a phenomenon of the war and could not be regarded as the National Socialist conception of a state.
It might be comfortable for some one, it might be comfortable for 200,000 people, but to carry it on later would mean the personal death of 70 million. Gauleiters and other political leaders. I got into touch with the leaders of the Hitler Youth, fully conscious that after the war a reform would have to be carried out in the Party, so that the old ideas of our movement, for which I had fought, would be reestablished. However, that was not possible; fate has finished the movement and things went a different way. that the Party, right from the beginning, did not have the plan to take over power alone, but that it was going to collaborate with other parties?
A That, of course, is a historical development over 14 years. If I can utilize that letter in this connection, then I would like to say, for instance, that at the end of 1923, after the collapse of the so-called Hitler revolt, when the representatives of the Party were either captured and detained or had emigrated to Austria, and when I remained in Munich together with a few others, I represented the point of view at the time that there had to be a new development and that the Party would now have to justify itself in the struggle of parties. down. My collaborators and I continued to try to influence him, however, and the Fuehrer wrote me a long, hand-written letter in which he once more reiterated the reasons why he didn't like my suggestion.
Later on he had, nevertheless, agreed. In this letter here before the Tribunal I asked him not to nominate me for the Reichstag, and the reason was that I did not want to achieve the advantages of a member of the German Parliament, and the second reason was because I considered that I had been in Germany for too short a time, so that after so few years of my activities I didn't think I could expose myself so much.
DR. THOMA: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the Defendants Counsel want to ask any questions
DR. SERVATIUS: Dr. Servatius, Attorney for the Defendant Sauckel. BY DR. SERVATIUS: ports regarding conditions in connection with recruiting of workers in the occupied eastern territories. Did you investigate to find out whether the statements contained in these reports were the truth? were investigated continuously as the years went by, and I have asked the Tribunal to hear the export on the question, Dr. Beil, as a witness here. This request has been granted by the Tribunal, and I now here that he is sick and that he can only give a written statement in which he reports his experiences. From my own knowledge I can say the following:
Dr. Beil and the so-called central department for people of eastern nationalities were reporting these things to me frequently. In a letter which ha: been mentioned I transmitted them to Sauckel, and they continued to reach the Reich Commissioner for the Ukraine or any other administrative officials, together with a request for a reply, and some of these details proved correct, whereas some others proved untrue and exaggerated. As far as I know the general plenipotentiary, Sauckel, has gone into the complaints he received from me and made them the cause for his own intervention. The German Labor Front too, responsible for the welfare of all foreign, workers in Germany, continuously negotiated with the ministry for eastern affairs and has made requests continuously.
Eventually, at the end of 1944, Dr. Ley, as the chief of this welfare department, thought that he could inform me that after considerable difficulties ties the trouble have been surmounted and good conditions had at last been achieved.
I replied to him that I wanted to express my pleasure in that connection. wrong. The active execution was carried out by members of my ministry together with executives of the German Labor Front, and they went to inspect a number of labor camps so as to investigate the complaints and then have them alleviated by means of the German Labor Front.
Q You are mostly talking about conditions in Germany, aren't you, which didn't come under your juridiction. In the memorandum of the 16th of March, 1942, which has been mentioned, a reply to your complaints -- in that memorandum you are telling Koch that he must only use legal means and that the guilty persons must be properly prosecuted. Was that your reaction to the reports? complaints already.
Q And what did Koch reply? and lawful means, but in the document which has been read today, his report dated the 16th of March, 1943, he made several complaints that I didn't always believe his assurances, but that in every case did the minister for eastern affairs not only intervene but even asked him to make reports regarding these instructions.
Q So he denied considerable wrongs, did he ?
A Yes, he denied them. He only referred to one particularly drastic case in that document, namely, that certain houses had been burned down in Volhynia because those who had been called upon to work had resisted by force, and he said that he had no other means. This case in particular caused new reproaches on the part of the eastern ministry.
Q Was he entitled to such measures, in your opinion? orders coming from the departments in the Reich. He was responsible for their execution and he was responsible for orders for the execution. He had at least I believe, often overstepped the limitations of his instructions and acted on his own initiative, and as he thought in the interest of war economy.
He introduced measures which sometimes I heard about and sometimes I did not. As appears from the documents -
THE PRESIDENT: The question you were asked was whether in your opinion he was entitled to burn houses because people refused to work, and you have given that long answer which you have just given.
It seems to me to be no answer to the question.
A (continued) The right for the burning down of houses, in my opinion he did not have. That is why I intervened and he tried to justify himself. with a certain amount of administrativ coercion. How far was that permissible? Is there legal and illegal coercion? How do you judge the measures which were carried out in practice? the urgent demands from the Fuehrer I could not maintain that attitude of mine, so that I agreed that some legal form could be given to certain ago groups which were to be called up from which all those were to be eliminated who were required in the occupied eastern territories, whereas all the others were to be recruited with the help of their own administrations, that is to say, there own burgomeisters in the occupied territories. There is no doubt, of course, in this connection that so as to give emphasis to these demands of the administration gendarmes were used for the execution of this program. it? of the Ukraine was subordinated to investigate and to interfere in accordance with the instructions which he had received from me.
Q But why did you go to Sauckel as well? Was it Sauckel's duty to stop this the right to give instructions to mem the ministry for eastern affairs, and over and above that he had the right to bypass me and give instructions to the Reich Commissioner, a privilige which he has used by giving lectures in the district of the Ukraine and eastern territories on several occasions.
Q Was Sauckel responsible for the conditions in the Ukraine? course on the basis of the authority given him by the Fuehrer he made his demands so strongly and precisely that the regional governments which were responsible to the general commissioners did feel it their duty to, back the published notices for recruitment by a certain amount of executive power, as appears from document 285-PS, from the general commissioner in Zhitomir, and I think from another report, the number of which I have forgotten, from the district commissioner in Kaunas.