"Question": Would you have had to know it if it had been the case, and why would you have had to know it?
"Answer: I would have had to know it if it would have been the case. I was always close to him; and my employees would have told me about it, or reported about it, if, during my absense, he had left.
"Question: Do you still have the log book of the trips made, and can you present it now?
"Answer: Since about 1941 log books were never kept any more. Instead of that, monthly reports about travels were sent to the Reich Security Service in Berlin. The copies left in my office were, in April 1945, according to orders, burned with all the rest of the material.
"Question: Do you know whether the defendant Frick has ever visited the camp Dachau?
"Answer: To my knowledge Frick has never visited the camp Dachau.
"Moosburg, 23 March 1946." Signed, "Max Gillhuber". Signed, "Lenoard F. Dunkel, Lieutenant-Colonel, Infantry." to a concentration camp a visitor cannot always get a correct picture of local conditions, I ask to be permitted to read a letter which I received from a Catholic Priest, Bernard Ketzlick. I received this a few days ago, without having asked him for it. This letter, which I submit -
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Your Honor, the prosecution makes objection to this because it is a character of evidence that there is no way of testing, I have a basket of such correspondence making charges against these defendants, which I would not think the Tribunal would want to receive.
If the door is open to this kind of evidence, there is no end to it. of testimony, and I think it is objectionable to go into letters received from unknown persons.
DR. PANNENBECKER: May I say just one thing about that? The letter was received by me so late that I did not have an opportunity to ask the individual to send me an affidavit. Of course, I am prepared to got such an affidavit afterwards if such an affidavit would have probative value.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal think that the letter cannot be admitted, but an application can be made in the ordinary way for leave to put in an affidavit or to call the witness.
DR. PANNENBECKER: Yes. Then, at a later date, I will make a motion. and I refer, finally to an excerpt from the book "Inside Europe", by John Gunther which will become Frick Exhibit No. 12. It is Under number 39 in the document book. This is a book which appeared, in the original, in the English language, and I therefore quote it in English:
"Born in the Palatinate in 1877, Frick studied law and became a Beamter, an official. He is a bureaucrat through and through. Hitler is not intimate with him, but he respects him. He became Minister of the Interior because he was the only important Nazi with civil service training, Precise, obedient, uninspired, he turned out to be a faithful executive; he has been called the only honest Nazi The last document I should like to use is an extract from the book "To the Bitter End" by Gisevius.
I believe I do not have to quota these passages individually because he himself will be heard here. This will become Frick Exhibit number 13. and Seger, which have not been received. I ask to be permitted to read these answers, as soon as I have received thorn, at a later date. ry to call the witness now.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now adjourn.
(A recess was taken untill 1400 hours)
THE PRESIDENT: Are you prepared to call your witness, Dr. Pannenbecker?
DR. PANNENBECKER: Yes, Mr. President. I ask to be permitted to call the witness Gisevius, the only witness for Frick, and I have selected Dr. Gisevius as a witness to clarify conditions of political power in Germany because from the very beginning he has been in the opposition and I believe he is qualified to give the picture of the power constellation in the field of the police. as follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you state your full name?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath,)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. BY DR. PANNENBECKER: affiliated organizations? of July 1944 and that you have been at the OKW?
Q How did you get into the police service?
A In July 1933, I made my state examination for law. As a descendant of an old family of civil servants, I applied for entry into the civil service in the Prussian administration, I belonged at that time to the German National Peoples' Party and the Stool Helmet and according to the concepts of that time, I was considered politically reliable; so, as the first station in my career as a civil servant, I was attached to the political police, that meant my entry into the newly-formed Secret State Police, the Gestapo. At that time, I was very happy that I was sent particularly into the police service. At that time, already, I had heard that all sorts of atrocities were occurring in Germany. I was inclined to believe that they were just the last events growing out of that situation very similar to civil war, which we underwent from the end of 1932 to the beginning of 1933; and I hoped to contribute, to be able to contribute to it, that now again a regular official authority should see for the obedience of the law, a decency. That happiness was of short duration. I was hardly more than two days in that new police office, when I had discovered already that incredible conditions existed there: that there was no polices which interfered against perpetrations, against murder, against arrests, against burglary. There was a police organization which protected just those who committed such perpetrations. The arrested were not these who were guilty of such crimes, they arrested those who sent their cries for help to the police. It was not a police which interfered for protection but a police whose task, it seemed to be, was to hide, to cover up and to sponsor crimes, in fact, because those commandos of the SA and SS who played police, were encouraged by that so-called Secret State Police and all possible aid was given to thorn. The most terrible and best visible fact was to see how a system was of depriving people of their freedom, and it couldn't have been worse. The offices of the now State Police had a tremendous building which was not sufficient to harbor all the captives, A special concentration camp for the Gestapo was installed and the names of those will remain for a terrible shame in history. They were Oranienburg end the private prison of the Gestapo, in the Papenstrasse, the Columbia House or, as it was called cynically, the "Columbia Diele,"(Columbia Hall).
I would like to see to it that there should not be any misunderstanding compared to what we have experienced later, all of us; that certainly was just the beginning; but was how it began and I can only convey my personal impression by remembering one incident. Already, after two days, I asked one of my colleagues, who was also a professional civil servant-he was of the old--had been taken from the old political police into the new one, and he was one of those officials who were forced to belong to that office--so I asked him "Tell me, please; am I here in a police office or in a robber's cave?" The answer that I received was "You are in a burglar's cave and you can expect that you mil see much more yet."
Q. Under whom at that time was the political police?
A. The political police were subordinate to a Rudolph Dieltz. He also came from the old Prussian Political Police. He was a professional career civil servant and one should have believed that he still knew the old concepts of law and decency, but he was brutal, cynical, and determined to the last, and he was intent on forgetting his political past as democrat before the new power to be, and ingratiating himself with his new superior, the Prime Minister of Prussia and Minister of the Interior. It was he who invented the Gestapo office. He inspired Goering to issue the first decree to make these offices independent. It was Dieltz also who let the SA and the SS into this establishment. He covered and legalized the actions of these commandos. But it became evident to me very soon that so much injustice -that one bourgeoise renegade could not commit all of it by himself; he had to have somebody behind him of importance to back him up; and quickly I also realized that day after day, every day, somebody was supervising everything which happened in that office.
Reports were written, telephone inquiries came. Dieltz reported several times daily, and it was the Prussian Minister of the Interior, Goering, who had established and considered that Secret State Police as his special instrument. Nothing happened during these months in that office that Goering did not know personally or ordered personally. I want to emphasize that fact, because throughout the years the public gained a different impression of Goering since he retired gradually from his official affairs. At that time, it wasn't that Goering who finally floundered in the morass of Karin Hall. At that time it was a Goering who personally looked after everything, and he had not yet come to the point where he was busy building Karin Hall or donning all sorts of uniforms or decorations. It was still a Goering in civilian clothes who actually was the Chief of an office, of an organization, who inspired it, and who stressed the fact that he wanted to be the Iron Goering.
Q. Witness, I believe you can be shorter on some points. As to what you said just now, do you know that of your own experience or where did you get that from?
A. Not only from my own experience; I have heard and seen it and I have heard much from one individual who at that time was also a member of the Secret State Police and whose information will play an important part in the course of my statements. Police. Probably the best known expert of the State Police, Oberregierungsrat Nebe. Nebe was a National Socialist. He had been in opposition to the former Prussian police and joined the National Socialist Party. He was a man who sincerely believed in the decency of the National Socialist aims and purposes; and so I saw how this man could find out first-hand what sort of game it was that was played and how he changed his mind. Nebe became a strong opponent and later went the path of opposition, until the 20th of July, and later suffered death at the gallows. Nebe at that time, August, 1933, received from Goering the order to arrest, to kill, a former member of the National Socialist Party, Gregor Strasser, by way of an automobile or hunting accident. That mission shocked Nebe to such an extent that he refused to carry it out and sent a request of that nature to the Reich Chancellory. The answer from the Reichschancellory was that the Fuehrer knew-nothing about that mission. Thereafter Nebe was called to Goering, who reproached seriously to him that he had sent an inquiry about the defendant Goering. Still at the end of all these reproaches he preferred to promote him, because he though he would keep quiet. was that the defendant Goering gave so-called blanket authority for murder to the political police. At that time there were not only so-called amnesty laws which gave amnesty for atrocities afterwards, but there was a special law according to which investigations already underway by police authorities and by state attorneys could be quelled or supressed, under the condition, however, that in those special cases the Reichs Chancellor or Goering personally had to sanction it with their own signature. That law was used by Goering to give blanket authority to the Chief of the Gestapo where only the names of those about to be murdered were left open.
That fact shocked Nebe so much that from that moment on he did his duty in the fight against that Gestapo. At our request he remained in the criminal police, because we needed one man at least who should keep us informed and who could keep us informed about police conditions in case our wishes for an overthrow would come true,
Q. Witness, what did you do yourself when you saw all these things?
A. I on my part attempted to reach those circles who on the basis of my connections seemed to be open to me. I went to various ministries: to the Prussian Ministry of Interior, to State Secretary Grauert, and several department heads. I went to the Reichsminister of Interior, to the Reichs Ministry of Justice, to the Foreign Office; and I went into the Ministry of War. Repeatedly I spoke to the Chief of the Army, General von Hammerstein, and of all connections which I made at that time one again is particularly important for my testimony. At that time I met in the newly founded Intelligence Department of the OKW a Major Auser (?)
I gave him all the material which had been accumulated until then and we began with a collection, which we continued until the 20th of July, of all documents which we could get; and Oster is the man who from then on in the Ministry of War never failed in the case of every officer whom he could reach officially or unofficially to inform them.
In the course of time by the favor of Admiral Canaris Oster became Chief of Staff of the Intelligence. When he was killed at the gallows he was general. But I consider it important to give testimony here already that, after all that this man has done, the unforgettable sacrifice against the Gestapo, against all the crimes which have been committed against humanity end peace, that I believe I car. say that there was under the inflation of German field marshals and generals one German general. observe? ministries one was very receptive. There was still in the ministry the Reich President von Hindenburg. So it came that at the end of October, 1933 the defendant Goering was forced to submit deeds to the Chief of the State Police. At the same time a purge commission was installed in order to restore that institution from the bottom. According to the ministerial decree, Nebe and I were members of that commission. But that purge commission never met. The defendant Goering found ways and means to avoid that measure. He nominated, as chief and as successor for Dieltz, a worse Nazi than these had been, a man named Hinkler, who formerly had been acquitted in a trial for reasons of irresponsibility. And Hinkler carried it so far that hardly thirty days passed until he was dismissed, and now the defendant Goering felt free to recall Dieltz. of the 30th of November, 1933, by which the tasks of the Gestapo were separated from the office of the Ministry of the Interior and put in together with the Prime Minister's office?
A That was the moment of which I speak, I believe. Goering realised that it would not serve his purpose if other ministries were too much concerned about his secret state police. Although he was Prussian Ministry of the Interior also, he was disturbed by the fact that the police department, of the Ministry of the Interior in Prussia could look into the affairs of his private domain and thus he took the secret state police out of the framework of the police and subordinated it to himself personally, thereby excluding all other police offices and channels.
From the point of view of any regulated police organizations, that was nonsense because you cannot create a political police by separating it from criminal police and order police. But Goering knew why he did not want any other police authority to look into the affairs of the secret state police.
Q Witness, did you remain in the police service yourself?
A On that day when Goering -- and I can't find another expression for it -- made his little putsch "Coup d'etat" by creating his own state police, that secret police issued a warrant of arrest against me. I expressedly had gone into hiding. The next morning I went to the Chief of the police department of the Prussian Ministry of the Interior, Ministerial Director Daluege, a high SS, general, and remarked that "it doesn't scorn to be right to have an arrest warrant against me." me right there in the room of the Chief of the Prussian police. Daluege was kind enough to let me free though a back door to State Secretary Grauert, and Grauert intervened with Goering. As always, in similar cases, Goering was very much surprised and ordered a severe investigation. That was the expression used, meaning to say that such incidents were filed. observer to the Reichstag file trials at Leipzig. The last days of November I could make some observations about that dark affair, and since, together with Nebe, I had already attempted to find a clarification of that crime, I could supplement my knowledge there. will limit my statements now only to say that I am ready, if it is necessary, to help Goering to refresh his memory about his knowledge and about his activities concerning this first coup d'etat and the doing away with others by murder. Interior. Did you get in touch with Frick himself or his ministry?
A Yes. Immediately after the Reichstag fire trials were over, that is at the end of 1933, I was dismissed from the police service and sent to East Prussia to a Landrat office.
I complained, however, about that apparent demotion to State Secretary Grauert, since he and Daluege knew about my quarrels with the secret state police. They got me into the Ministry of the Interior and assigned to me the task to receive all these reports, which still come by error to the Ministry of the Interior, to collect them, and to forward them to the Prussian Prime Minister and to the secret state police. my presence in the Ministry, but the Minister of the Interior intervened and was successful in keeping me in that post. immediately. I was quite a subordinate official there. But I assume that the defendant Frick knew about my activity and about my opinions, my point of view, because now I was encouraged to continue to collect all those requests for help which came to the Ministry of the Interior, and a large part of these reports I sent through official channels to Daluege, Grauert, and Frick. There was, however, the difficulty that Goering in his capacity of Prime Minister of Prussia had prohibited Frick, as his Minister of the Interior, to take cognizance of such reports. Frick without commentary was supposed to forward them to the Gestapo. I saw no reason to keep me from turning then over to Frick just the sane and since Frick at the same time was Reich Minister of the Interior, and in that capacity could give directives through the provinces, that is to say, also to Goering. Frick accepted these reports, took cognizance of them in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, and tolerated the fact that they were sent by me with the request for a report to Goering. Goering intervened repeatedly, and I know that it came to severe disputes between him and Frick on that account.
the Reichsminister of the Interior certain directives were issued to limit protective custody?
A That's correct. It is correct that at that time quite a number of such directives were issued, but if I am to say that a great number of such directives were issued, that already includes that by way of principle they were not heeded by subordinate authorities. power, and as an impression from my education as a civil servant, I will never forget that at that time in the Secret state police we officials Were directed principally not to answer any requests from the Reichsminister of the Interior. Of course at certain intervals the Reichsminister of the Interior sent requests. The cleverness of an official in the Gestapo was measured by the number of such protests which were received from the Ministry of the Interior in order to prove that he had not paid any attention to them.
Q On the 30th June 1934 it came to the so-called Roehm Putsch. Can you give us a short description of the conditions which preceded that Putsch? On the 30th of June there was only a Goering-Himmler Putsch. I am in a position to give some information about that dark chapter, because I was at the Police Department of the Ministry of the Interior, and I had to deal with that case and to see how at least the radiograms which were sent on that day by Goering and Himmler to the Police Offices of the Reich came into my hands. The last one of these radiograms said "Upon order from Goering all material about the 30th June has to be burned immediately." day I do not know whether they survived the attempts of Kaltenbrunner or not. I still hope to find these papers, but if I do, I can prove that on that entire 30 th June not a single shot was fired by the SA. The SA did not commit a Putsch, whereas I do not wish to say a single word of excuse for the leaders of the SA. On the 30th June not a single SA leader died who had not deserved death a hundred times, but in a regular court proceeding. June on one side the SA, headed by Roehm, was standing, and on the ether side confronted by Goering and Himmler.
sent on a vacation. The SA leaders were precisely for that 30th of June called by Hitler to a meeting at Wiessee, and it is not common that people who want to march to a coup d'etat go to a meeting in sleeping cars. They were surprised at the railroad station and brought to the execution.
The so-called Munich Putsch happened in the following manner. The Munich SA did not rally at all, and at a distance of one hour by car from Munich the socalled traitors, Roehm and Heines, slept into their death without having the slightest idea that, according to the descriptions of Hitler and Goering on the previous evening, a Putsch alledgedly had occured at Munich.
The Putsch at Berlin could be observed by me very closely. It occured absolutely under exclusion of the public by the SA. We in the police offices did not notice anything. However, it is true that in one of the alleged main Putsches, I the Berlin SA Obergruppenfuehrer Karl Ernst, four days before the 30th of June came, very much worried, to the Ministerial Director Daluege, saying there were rumors flying around in Berlin that the SA contemplated a Putsch, He asked for an interview with Minister of Interior Frick so that he could assure Frick that there was no such intention. strange conversation where an SA leader assured a Minister of Interior that he did not intend to make a Putsch.
Ernst went on a recreation trip to Madeira. On the 30th of June he was taken from the steamer to Berlin for his execution, and I witnessed his arrival at the airport at Tempelhof, which seemed to me very interesting, because a few hour before I had already read the official report about his execution in the newspapers. ceal anything, I just have to add I was present when the defendant Goering informed the press about these events. At that occasion the bad word was uttered. He, the defendant Goering, for had waited for a signal which he had arranged with Hitler, and then he had hit of course with lightning speed.
But he also had increased the scope of his mission. This increase of the scope of his mission caused the lives of a large number of innocent people. May I remind you only of the names of General Schleicher, who was killed, together with his wife; von Bredow, Klausner, Edgar Jung, and many others. In what manner did Frick find out about these measures, and was he himself in any way active in the combatting of that so-called Putsch?
A I have experienced personally how at half past 9:00, Daluege came, pale, from Goering after he had been told what had happened. Daluege and I myself went to Gravert. We drove to the Reichsminister of Interior Frick.Frick jumped out of the room -- it may have been about 10:00 o'clock -- in order to drive to Goering and to find out there what had happened in the meantime, and at the same time to find out that he, as Police Minister of the Reich, was supposed to go homo now and not to worry about anything further. In fact, Frick returned home, and during those two dramatic days he never set foot in the Ministry.
Once Daluege drove to him with me. For the rest, it was up to me as the youngest official of the Reich Ministry of the Interior on that Saturday and Sunday to inform the Ministry of the Interior of the Reich what atrocious events in the meantime had happened in Germany. received not to bother about these things. him about it. I do not know whether there was a written directive. Neither do I know whether Krick has asked about one. I should think that Frick at that time, on that day, thought it would be wise not to ask too many nosey questions.
the consequences in any way? to say first that on Saturday, the 30th of June, we at the Ministry of the Interior knew very little about what had happened. On Sunday, the first of July, we found out much more, and doubtlessly Frick, when these days had passed, had a clear picture of what had happened. He also, during these days, made no secret of his indignation that apparently murder and arrests had taken place. question by saying that the first reaction of the defendant Frick of which I was to know, was that Reich law in which the Reich Ministers determined that the events of June 30 had been right. That law had extraordinary psychological consequences for further developments in Germany which cannot be separated from the history of German terror. On the other hand, much happened in the Third Reich that cannot be understood by a normal human being, and could only be understood in the regions of minister and state secretaries. attempted seriously to modify the most apparent hardships. Maybe he thought that in the Reich Cabinet other ministers should rather open their mouths. generals who were shot, and who, in spite of it, had signed that law. I want to mention the name Blomberg with emphasis and ask to be permitted to interrupt myself in order to give information about an incident which occurred this morning. I was in the room of the defendants' counsel, speakto Dr. Dix. Dr. Dix was interrupted by Dr. Stahmer, counsel for Goering. I heard what Stahmer told Dix.
DR. STAHMER: May I ask whether a personal conversation which I had with Dr. Dix has anything to do with the proceedings?
THE WITNESS: I am not speaking -
THE PRESIDENT: (Interposing): Don't go on with your evidence whilst the objection is being made.
Yes, Dr. Stahmer
THE WITNESS: I didn't understand you.
DR. STAHMER: I do not know whether this is part of the proceedings, to speak here about a conversation which I had personally with Dr. Dix.
THE WITNESS: I -
THE PRESIDENT: will you kindly keep silent.
THE WITNESS: Only one can speak at the sane time. May I finish my information?
THE PRESIDENT: Keep silence, sir.
DR. STAHMER: This morning, in the room of the defense counsel, I had a personal conversation with Dr. Dix concerning the case Blomberg. That conversation was not intended to be heard by the witness. I do not know the witness, didn't even see him then, and I do not know whether this is part of those proceedings, if such a conversation should be made public.
MR JUSTICE JACKSON: This incident has been reported to me and I think it is important that this Tribunal know the influence, the threats that were made at this witness in the courthouse while waiting to testify here, that is, not only against him, but against the defendant Schacht.
Now, the affair was reported to me. I think it is important that this Tribunal know it. I think it is important that it come out. I should have attempted to bring it out on cross examination if it had not been told, and I think that the witness should be permitted to. These other parties have had great latitude here. This witness has been subjected to threats, as I understand it, which were uttered in his presence, whether they were intended for him or not, and I ask that this Tribunal allow Dr. Gisevius, who is the one representative of democratic forces in Germany, to take this stand to tell his story.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, the Tribunal would like to hear, first of all, anything further you have to say upon the matter. They will then hear what Dr. Dix has to say if he wishes to say anything, and they will then hear whether the witness himself wishes to say anything in answer.
DR. STAHMER: I have no reservations about telling the Court clearly what I have said. Last night, I discussed the case with the defendant Goering and told him that the witness Gisevius -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): We don't want to hear any communications which you had with the defendant Goering, other than those you choose to make in support of your objection to this evidence that has been given.
DR. STAHMER: Yes, Mr. President, but it belong to it; if is part of it. interest to him, but he did hot want that Blomberg, who had recently died -and I assumed it was only the question of the marriage of Blomberg -- he, Goering, did not want these facts concerning the marriage of Blomberg to be discussed here in public. If that could not be prevented, then of course Goering, for his part -- and it is only the question of Schacht because Schacht was expected to speak about these things -- would drop any consideration for Schacht.
That is what I told Dr. Dix this morning, and I am sure Dr. Dix can confirm that.
THE PRESIDENT: We will hear you in a moment, Dr. Dix.
DR. STAHMER: I said -- and that was neither referring to Schacht nor to the witness nor to anybody present -- for reasons of professional eithics I would like to tell it to Dr. Dix. That is what I said and what I did. I didn't even know that the witness Gisevius was present at that moment. At any rate, it was not intended for him, and I know that I spoke with Dr. Dix on the side.
THE PRESIDENT: So that I may understand what you are saying, you say you had told Dr. Dix the substance of the conversation you had had with the defendant Goering, and said that Goering would withdraw his objection to the facts being given if the defendant Schacht wanted them to be given. Is that right?
DR. STAHMER: No, I have only said that it didn't matter to Goering what was said about himself, but as for Blomberg who is dead, he would not want that things concerning Blomberg's marriage should be discussed If that could be prevented, if Schacht would not avoid that, then he, Goering, his part, would drop any consideration for Schacht, would not have any consideration for Schacht.
That is what I told Dr. Dix.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. STAHMER: As I said, that is what I told Dr. Dix, and that finished the conversation, and I emphasized to Dix that I only told him that for professional reasons, as one colleague to another.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. That is all you wish to say?
DR. STAHMER: Yes.
DR. DIX: I believe I remember what happened as follows: This morning I was i the room of the defense counsel speaking to the Witness Dr. Gisevius. I believe my colleague Professor Kraus was there and took part in the conversation. and I said that at the moment I was in an important, hurried conversation with Gisevius, and asked if he couldn't speak to me later. Stahmer said no, that he would like to talk to me at once. Then, I probably stepped five or six paces to the side, leaving the group I had spoken to before, together with Stahmer.
My colleague Stahmer told me the following. It is quite possible -- I don't know whether he introduced what he said with the words that he was telling me the for professional reasons, as one colleague to another. If he says so now, I am sure that is how it was, but I don't remember it any more.
Stahmer told me, "Goering has the point of view that Gisevius may attack him as much as he pleases, but if he attacks Blomberg who is dead, the Goering will disclose everything against Schacht because he knows a lot of things which may disagreeable for Schacht." if the dead Blomberg should be attacked, then he would have to reveal things against Schacht. He said that he would mention things against Schacht.
That was the conversation. I cannot, with absolute certainty, say whether Stahmer told me he wanted Gisevius to know he had said that. If he says he did not say so, then it is certainly true and I believe him, but I could not understand that information any differently than that it meant I should notify Gisev about what Goering had said, and I had no doubt that that represented the intention of Goering and my colleague Stahmer, that, that was the purpose of the whole thing, because why else at that particular moment, should my colleague Stahmer, immediately before the testimony of Gisevius, while I was speaking with Gisevius, tell me that, and say he had no time, he could not wait, and I had to interrupt my conversation?