DR. LATERNSER: Yes, but so far as it would exclude the assertion of a cons piracy, the assertion put dorm by the prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: But does it preclude the possibility of a conspiracy, to make aggressive war? It has nothing to do with it.
DR. LATERNSER: That did not quite come through to me, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The question of a revolt against the regime in Germany is, it seems to me, not necessarily connected with the conspiracy to carry out aggressive war; therefore, anything which has got to do with a revolt against the regime in Germany is not relevant to the question which you have to deal with.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, a conspiracy is assumed in considering wars of attack, and a conspiracy would be excluded if the high military leaders would turn against the regime in such a dramatic form that the intention of a putsch would have been discussed and carried through.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal thinks the proper way of putt in the question, which they understand you want to put, is to ask which of the generals were prepared to join in a revolt. You may put that question.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, in order to clarify just how far the readiness was for the entire group, I must ask the witness with how many of this group he contacted and how many of those declared themselves ready to act with them.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you might put that to him--how many. Ask him how many.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, that was the question which I did wish to put.
THE PRESIDENT: I said you may put it.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, Mr. President. BY DR. LATERNSER:
Q Witness, with how many of this group did you speak about this matter? would like to say that it was more the mission of Beck and Oster and Canaris to talk with these gentlemen, rather than being my task. That which you may want to hear you will rather not hear from me, that is, as far as names are concerned. But I can abbreviate your question insofar that unfortunately very few leading generals showed their serious will to overthrow this system.
Q And, witness, that was the point I wanted to make with my question. As you testified just a little while ago, you talked with von Brauchitsch and Halder and with Witzleben, and Olbrecht did not belong to this group. You did speak with these three, then?
Q Regarding the putsch intentions?
A They all gave agreements. Only Witzleben stuck to his word.
Q Then he did participate in this putsch? on the 20th of July in the main came from the Wehrmacht, that is, from the generals and from the officers of the general staff, and that they had the intention to keep those who were initiated into this plot as small as possible?
A No, I did not say that exactly. What I aid say was--I would rather put it in this way--a putsch can be carried out in a terror regime only by the military, and in that respect it is true that these few generals were the bearers of the putsch, and the strong points on the 20th of July were among the broad front of the civilia who for years had fought for the generals and were continually disappointed by the And for that reason, only because the assurances and agreements made by the genera were broken again and again, we decided on the 20th of July to wait this once unti the generals had actually acted for once, in order not to make false hopes to many civilians.
That is how I meant my limitation of my statement. generals and civilians?
Q And the head of this group was, as you testified, Colonel General Beck? name of the General Staff and OKW. Now, I have a further question: Do you know of connections of these military leaders with the minister of finance Popitz, who had intentions for a putsch for the purpose of doing away with Hitler and is alleged to have dealt with Himmler? Do you know anything about that?
A Yes, that is true. Popitz made great efforts to win the generals to a putsch and an attempted assassination. I regret that I did not mention his name in time. He was one of the men also who, starting with 1938 or 1939, did everything in order to bring about the downfall of the regime.
Q Did you talk with minister von Popitz about that? had made connections with for this purpose? he was in connection with Halder and Brauchitsch, and the list of disappointments which came to von Popitz is not shorter than the list of disappointments which we had.
Q Did he himself mention disappointments?
A He was bitterly disappointed. The eternal disappointment was the topic of our conversation, and that was the difficulty we ran into in connection with the civilians.
Q But were there other possibilities for the doing away with?
A No. No other means of power ware at our disposal in Germany either constituti nally or legally. The generals were the only bearers of arms and were delegated as such by Hitler.
Because of this, it is not possible to make any other relations or connections. I regarded that after 1933 these attempts at striking were considered mutiny and would have been punished as such during the war, and I would like to call your attention to the many death sentences, which ran into the hundreds, which civilians received during the war.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks that this matter has been fully covered and is really not relevant. You have already cross-examined this witness at some length before this, and the Tribunal does not wish to hear any further evidence on this subject in any further cross-examination.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I have already concluded. BY DR. LATERNSER:
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you said you had concluded?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I must have been misunderstood. I have concluded those questions as far as the putsch intentions were concerned. I would like to pass on to another point now and put one question. I would like to ask the question about the Fritsch crisis and would like to ask him when he heard about the exact situation; when he transmitted the knowledge of the situation to high military leaders or had that knowledge transmitted to them.
THE PRESIDENT: But the Fritsch crisis has nothing to do with the charges against the High Command. The charges against the High Command are crimes under the Charter, and the Fritsch crisis has nothing whatever to do with that.
DR. LATERNSER: Then I will withdraw that question. BY DR. LATERNSER:
THE PRESIDENT: What are you going to put to him now?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I would like to ask the witness now about some points which he made in response to the American prosecutor's question. I believe that some clarification is necessary.
THE PRESIDENT: The principle is not whether you think the clarification is necessary, but whetherthe Tribunal thinks it, and, therefore, the Tribunal wishes to know what points you wish to put to him.
DR. LATERNSER: Yes, indeed. In his testimony today the witness mentioned the fact that he had proof about murders in Poland and Russia. I wanted to ask him who had produced these reports and whether one report by Blaskowitz is known to him while he was commander in Poland; whether he made this report; so that it was to be reported and transmitted to his superiors, and that should be an important point. Blaskowitz is a member of the group which I represent. From the fact which is to be concluded that the members of this group were always against cruelty, if and when they received reports of these cruelties through official channels; therefore, I must determine whether these reports, activity of generals who belonged to this group which is accused.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It seems to me, if I may surest, Your Honors, individual generals. We are dealing only with the group. If what counsel right to say that General Blaskowitz did defy this Nazi conspiracy. And if penalties for the acts which he stood up against. a misapprehension that this is the occasion to try each and every of the generals. We make no charge against them that they either did or did not have a putsch or a Fritsch affair. The Fritsch affair is only referred to here as fixing the time when the defendant Schacht became convinced that aggressive warfare was the purpose of the Nazi refine. The putsch is only introduced because in his defense Schacht says he tried to induce a putsch. It enters not at all into the case against the General Staff. And most of the General Staff who took any part in the putsch were hanged and I cannot see how it was or was not conducted. It seems that we are off the main track.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I would like to define my position in response to this point.
If it is not admissible for me to ask about the demeanor of the members of this group and a point of such tremendous importance, High Tribunal.
It is absolutely necessary that I can follow these points, especially since I do not have any other evidence at my disposal, for I can consider and call a group criminals only if, for instance, the majority of the members of these groups actually committed crimes. I must be in a position to ask how Blaskowitz acted against murders and what position he took
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn to consider the matter.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal considers that the questions that you have been putting, if relevant at all, are only extremely remotely relevant, and they cannot allow the cross-examination to continue for any length of time or the time of the Tribunal to be wasted further. They think, and they rule, that you may put the question which they understand you desire to put in this form: The witness has spoken of reports which were received by the group of which he has spoken about atrocities in the East, and they think you may ask him who submitted those reports.
Q Witness, I would like you to answer this question: From whom did these reports emanate about murders in Poland and Russia? of the Polish capaign and on the basis of information received by his subordinate military offices, made. Beyond that, such reports to my knowledge were only made by the group Canaris Oster, but I would not like to asser that it is impossible that some one else had sent such reports.
Q What was the purpose of the report which Blaskowitz sent?
THE PRESIDENT: The report which one particular general sent does not tend to show that the group was either innocent or criminal.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, we have to find out what the attitude of that group was.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal think that the report of one general is not evidence as to the criminality of the whole group.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, is that question approved that I have asked for the purpose of that report?
THE PRESIDENT: No, the Tribunal is of the opinion that what was contained in that report is not admissible.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no more questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Then the witness may retire.
(The witness retired)
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Pannenbecker, that concludes your case, does it?
DR. PANNENBECKER: The case of the defendant Frick is hereby concluded, with the exception of the answers on interrogatories which I have not yet received.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Counsel for the defendant Streicher, Dr. Marx. Go on.
DR. MARX (Counsel for Defendant Streicher): With the permission of the Tribunal, Mr. President, I call now the defendant Julius Streicher as witness to the witness box.
JULIUS STREICHER, a witness, took the stand and testified 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. MARX: of your career? description for the purpose of my defense.
THE PRESIDENT: You really ought to answer the questions that are put to you.
A My Defense Counsel could not say now What I desire to say. I would like to, ask permission to.
My Defense Counsel was not in a position to
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, you understand that the Tribunal does not wish to have its time taken up with unnecessary matters.
It has no objection to your stating what is material or to your reading it if necessary. It hopes that you will be as brief as possible. guarantees to the defendants the right to speak freely and to have an undisturbed defense. a list with the names of the attorneys from which the defendants could choose a defendant's counsel.
Since the Munich attorney whom I had selected for Military Tribunal to put the Nurnberg attorney, Dr. Marx, at my disposal, expect as my Counsel to be attacked in public. Shortly thereafter, an attack in Berlin.
The International Military Tribunal felt itself compelled in Counsel of the express protection of the Military Tribunal. Tribunal, no doubt could remain about the fact that the Tribunal wished to see the defense of the defendants without any disturbance, a renewed attack occurred, this time by radio. The broadcaster said that among the That this terror occurred with the intention to intimidate the defendants' These terror attacks might have contributed or led to it -- that is my impression -- that my own counsel has refused to use a large number of pieces, of evidence which I considered important and to submit them to the Tribunal.
Fifthly. I wish to state that by this International Military Tribunal an undisturbed and therefore just defense was not made possible for me.
THE PRESIDENT: You can rest assured that the Tribunal will see that everything, in the opinion of the Tribunal, that bears upon the case or is relevant to your case or is in any way material in your case will be presented and that you will be given the fairest opportunity of making your defense.
THE WITNESS: I thank you, your Lordship.
DR. MARX: Excuse me, Mr. President; may I ask briefly to be permitted to speak about that. May it please the Court, when I was put, before, the question at the time to take over the defense of Mr. Streicher, in my mind, of course, there were strong objections.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, I don't think it is necessary, really, for you to make any personal explanation at this stage. It is very possible that the defendant may have different ideas about his own defense. I think we better let him go on with his defense.
DR. MARX: Just the same, I should like to ask permission, Mr. President, to speak about this one point which deals with the following: As attorney and as defense counsel of a defendant, I have to reserve the right for myself to determine in which manner I lead the defense. If my client is of the opinion that certain documents or books, in his opinion, are relevant, and the attorney, however, is of the opinion that they are not relevant, than there is a discrepancy between the counsel and his client.
If Mr. Streicher is of the opinion that I am not capable or not in a position to take care of his defense, then he should ask for another defense counsel, but I am certain that at this stage of the proceeding it would be very difficult for me to take that consequence and to say that I ask you to relieve me of that task of defense; I do not feel terrorized by any newspaper writer, but it is another thing if my own client loses confidence of his counsel; therefore, I see cause to ask for the decision of the Court whether, under these circumstances, I shall continue my defense, or whatever the opinion of the Tribunal is.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks, Dr. Marx, that the explanation and the statement which you have just made is in accordance with the traditions of the legal profession and they think therefore that the case ought to proceed and that you should proceed with the case. Now, defendant, will you go on.
THE WITNESS: About my life -- I was born on the 12th of February 1885 in a small village in Bavaria. I was the last of nine children. My father was a public school teacher. I, myself, became a teacher also. After I had remained several years in my closer home province in Bavaria, in 1909, I came to the municipal schools at Nurnberg. Here I had the opportunity to get in contact with the families of the workers' children in the suburbs and here I had an opportunity to see the social contrast and what I recognized there, led to it, that in the year 1911, I decided to go into politics. I became a member of the Democratic Party -- in the year 1912, as a young democratic speaker, I spoke at the time of the Reichstag elections. The car that was put at my disposal, was paid for by the banking firm Kohn. I emphasize that because at that time, I had much opportunity to meet Jews -also in the Democratic Party; therefore must have been fateful reasons, if later I became a writer and speaker in the field of racial politics. infantry regiment. I became an officer in a machine-gun company. I returned home with both Iron Crosses, with two Bavarian decorations, and the Cross of Merit, the Austrian silver Cross of Merit. When I had returned home, I did not have the desire to go into politics again. I only had the intention to continue quietly in my profession. Then I saw the glowing red posters of the revolution and I first went with the masses of that period and when the speaker had finished, I asked to be heard as an unknown. An inner-voice sent me up there to the platform and I spoke. I spoke in discussions and what had happened in Germany--in Germany, through the November revolution of 1918, Jews and friends of Jews had seized political power. Jews were in the Reich Cabinet and could be found in all provincial governments. In my own home country, Bavaria, the Minister-President was a Polish Jew, Eisner Kosmarowsky.
The reaction in Germany among the citizens, among the middle classes, manifested itself in the form of an organization, the "Schutz und Trutzbund," protection and fighting organization. In all large cities of Germany, sections and branches were formed of that organization, and as fate wanted it, when once again I was at the revolutionary meeting and spoke in the discussion, a man approached me and asked me to come to the Kulturverein Atis Peron, in the Golden Hall, and hear what one had to say there.
here today. It was a stroke of fate which made me what international propaganda believed me to be made. One called me a bloodhound; one stamped me a bloody sire of Franconia; one touched my honor, paid a crime with 300 marks. A criminal who had to life his hand in this hall for the oath stated he had seen how I, during the war, as an officer in France, had allegedly violated a teacher's right, a Madame Duquesne. It took two years until the truth come out by treason.
Here in this court, gentlemen, was the receipt. We have seen the receipt for 300 marks. With 300 marks, one wanted to take my honor. case, and if it should be judged with justice, then I must be permitted in passing to make such a remark. third question of the Soviet Russian officer who interrogated me was whether I was a sex criminal. I have told you what conditions were in Germany at that time, and it was quite a natural development that I did not go any more into the houses of the revolution to speak in discussions. I felt that I myself had to call meetings, and so, I spoke, I may say, through 15 years, almost every Friday before about 5,000 to 6,000 people. I spoke during the course of 20 years, and I admit that frankly, in the largest cities of Germany, sometimes before meetings in sport fields, on public squares, before 150,000 to 200,000 people. I have done that for 20 years, and I state here I was not paid by the Party. The Prosecution will never succeed, not even by a public proclamation, in getting anybody here into this room who could testify that I had ever been paid. I had a small income which was left after I was relieved from my job in 1924. Just the same, I remained the one and only unpaid Gauleiter in the movement. But later, through my writings, I took care of myself and my assistants. That goes without saying. I went to Munich. I was curious because someone had told me you had to hear Adolf Hitler, and now again, there is the finer faith.
One can only understand that tragedy if one not only sees it materially, but if one can conceive the higher vibrations which can still be felt today.
I went to Munich, to the Buergerbrau Cellar. There Adolf Hitler spoke. I had only heard his name. I had never seen that man before. And I sat, an unknown individual among individuals unknown. I saw this man, after three hours of speaking, drenched in perspiration, and a neighbour next to me saw what he thought was a halo around his head, and I, gentlemen, felt something which was not of every day. up. I went to the platform. When Adolf Hitler came down, I approached him and I told him my name. The Prosecution has submitted a document to the Tribunal which is reminiscent of that moment. Adolf Hitler wrote in his book "Mein Kampf" that it must have been with great effort that I turned over my movement, which I had created in Nurnberg, to him.
I mentioned this because the Prosecution thought that these things in Hitler' book "Mein Kampf" had to be submitted and used against me. Yes. I am proud of it. I myself the movement which I had created in Franconia and turned it over to Hitler. With that Franconian movement, the movement which Adolf Hitler had created in Munich and in Southern Barvaria became the bridge to northern Germany. Thai was also my deed.
In 1923 I took part in the First National Socialist revolution. That is to say it was an attempt at revolution. It entered into history as the Hitler Putsch. Adolf Hitler had asked me to come to Munich. I went to Munich and took part in the meeting during which Adolf Hitler agreed with the representatives of the middle class to go to northern Germany together and to put an end to the thing.
I experienced a march to the Feldherrnhalle. I was arrested later and , like Adolf Hitler and Rudolf Hess, I came to Landsberg on the Lech. After a few months I was nominated by the Voelkischer Block as a representative for the Bavarian Diet, and elected in the year 1924. the prison, I was nominated Gaulieter of Franconia. In 1933, I became representativein the Reichstag. In 1933 or 1934, I also received the honorary title of an SA Gruppenfuehrer.
In February of 1940 I was dismissed. I lived for five years, until the end of the war, on my estate. At the end of April, I went to Southern Bavaria, to the Tyrol. I wanted to comit suicide. Then an event happened which I do not care to talk about, but I can say one thing: I stated to friends that for 20 years, before the public of the world, I have confessed that I do not want to end by suicide. I want my way; I want to walk my path, be it as it may, as a fanatic for the truth until the very end, a fanatic for the truth. I had a subtitle, and that was, "A Weekly for the fight for the Truth". I was quite conscious that I could not own the entire truth, but I am also conscious that about 80 or 90 per cent of what I have expressed has been the truth. description of an experience which will show you, gentlemen of the Tribunal, that without the government's wanting it, things may happen which are not human, not according to the principles of humanity.
as we, the Gestapo, have been accused of. For Four days I was without clothes in a cell. I was burned; I was thrown on the floor, and an iron chain was put upon me. I had to kiss the feet of Negroes who spit into my face, Two colored men and a white officer spit into my mouth, and when I didn't open it any more, they opened it with a wooden stick, and when I asked for water I was led to the latrin and I was ordered to drink from there. of the hospital acted correctly. I state here, in order not to be misunderstood, the Jewish officers who are guarding us here in the prison have acted correctly, and the doctors who also treat me have even been considerate. And you may see from this statement the contrast from that prison until this moment.
officer has forwarded the report to Frankfort. What happened to it I have never found out. That was my life. Now, please ask your questions.
Q Witness, why were you dismissed from the teaching profession? Did you ever commit any punishable act or dishonorable act?
A I have answered that question I believe already. Everybody knows that in that profession I could not have been active in public life if I would have committed a crime. That is untrue. I was dismissed because the majority of the parties in the Bavarian Diet in the fall of 1923 after the Hitler Putsch demand ed that I should be dismissed. That was my sex crime, yes.
Q It is known to you that you are accused of two points. First you are accused that you were a member of the conspiracy which had the purpose of launching an aggressive war or aggressive wars, in general to break treaties and in that connection committed crimes against humanity.
Regarding the first point, I should like to ask several questions now. Did you discuss or take part in conversations with Adolf Hitler or other leading men of the state or the party in which the question of aggressive war was considered to make a short statement. on the platform I turned over my movement to the Fuehrer and I wrote a letter later. Furthermore, there was no conference, no conversation with Adolf Hitler or with any other personality. I returned to Nurnberg and continued to speak. That proclamation was made in public and that shows how public that conspiracy was and political opponents could make attempts at terror. would have been taken or something would have been arranged or agreed to which the public could not have or should not have known. The program had been presented to the police and on the basis of the laws governing organizations and parties just as other organizations that entered to register as unions or organizations. So that at that time there was no conspiracy of any kind.
program, was the demands of Versaille. What were your thoughts about that, as to how the dictates of Versaille could be removed at one time? things were, of course. There are amongst the people such a traitor as we have seen here today. But here are a large number of decent people. These decent people after the war had the slogans themselves to get rid of Versaille.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: If your Honor please, I think I must object to this sort of procedure. This witness has no right to call another witness a traitor. He has not been asked any question to which that is responsive and I ask that the Tribunal afmonish him in no uncertain terns and he confine himself to answering the questions here and we may have an orderly proceeding.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you will observe that injunction.
THE WITNESS: I ask the Tribunal to excuse me. I apoligize.
THE PRESIDENT: The observation that you made apparently I did not catch myself but it was made with reference to a witness who has just given evidence here and you Had no right at all to call him a traitor or to make any comment upon his evidence. BY DR. MARX:
Q Mr. Streicher, you cannot make such remarks and you will not make the community. adherents were one with him in their convictions and in their hearts and in the political faith in conspirators community (Verschworen Gemeinschaft), meaning united in their intentions.
Q Should not that mean that a conspiracy existed?
comradeship which could be considered a conspiracy and are you in closer relationship to any one of these defendants? community of people with the same intentions. One met them at Party meetings, when they spoke in Gaus. But the Reich Ministers I had the honor to meet here and the gentlemen from the army the same. Therefore, a political group did certainly not exist. the relation of the Jewish problem? the Jewish problem just as one did not speak about how the question of Versaille could be solved. One has to consider the chaos that existed at that time in Germany. A man like Adolf Hitler who would have said to his members in the year 1923 -- "I will start to call for the war", one would have said this man is a fool. We had no arms in Germany. The army of one hundred thousand men had only a few cannon left. The possibility for a war or to predict a war was absolutely excluded and to speak of a Jewish question at the time when I would like to say the public distinguished Jews only by their religion, to speak about a Jewish problem would have been nonsense. Jewish problem. You have not heard that from Adolf Hitler and there is no one here who I could say I heard one word from him about that. Hitler and that you had a considerable influence on the decisions of that man. Therefore, I should like to ask you to describe your relations to Adolf Hitler and to clarify them. know him knows how correct what I have to say now is. If anyone believed that he could pave a way to become a friend of Adolf Hitler then his thoughts were completely useless. Adolf Hitler was something peculiar in every respect and I believe I can say that a friendship between him and other men did not exist, a friendship that one could have said, this is truly a friendship of the heart.