Tell me, were those the only meetings, the ones you have related? Did you meet them again, before Hitler came into power? or three times. I cannot recall any more during these eighteen months. However, there is no question of any frequent meetings.
Q How; do you explain the appearance of your letter to Hitler of the 29th of August, 1932, in which you offer to Hitler your own services? you remember this letter, do you not?
Q How do you explain its appearance?
A I have spoken about this repeatedly. Will you please read it in the record?
Q Will you repeat it once again, please, briefly?
THE PRESIDENT: If he has been over it once, that is sufficient.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Very well, I will pass on to another question. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: participate in the future Hitlerite Government, and when were you promised the post of Director of the Reichsbank? government, but he was really a high official outside of the government circle. was on the 30th of January, 1933, when I ran into Goering accidently, in the vestibule of the Kaiserhof Hotel, and he said to me: "Ah, there comes our future President of the Reichsbank." Fascist theory of German race supremacy was nothing else but nonsense; that the Fascist viewpoint was really not a serious viewpoint; that you were against the so-called solution of the Lebensraum problem by means of aggressive wars; that you were against the principle of leadership which was established by the Fascist Party; and also, in regard to this, that you made a speech in the Law Academy and stated that you were against the Fascist ideology which was directed against the Jews.
Is that correct? Did you state that while you were answering the questions put to you by your counsel?
Q Well, say it then. What was it that led you to Fascism and to cooperation with Hitler?
A Nothing led me to Fascism; I have never been a Fascist. a negative attitude toward his theories and the theories of German Fascism?
THE PRESIDENT: General Alexandrov, he has told us what he says led him to cooperate with Hitler. I think you must have heard him.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: But, in fact, it took place. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q In reply to a question of your counsel as to why you didn't emigrate, you stated that you did not want to be a martyr. Of course, you know the fate of the eminent people in Germany who were liberals; you know what their fate was when Hitler took control.
A You make a mistake here. I did not answer that I did not want to be a martyr so far as the question of emigration was concerned. However, I said that emigrants--that is, people who left voluntarily--never did any service to their country, and I did not want to put my own fate into safekeeping, but I wanted to continue to work for the fate of my own country. from such a role in the interests of my country. I said that men who die for their country are martyrs only if that fact becomes known.
Q I understood you somewhat differently. I will repeat my question. progressive in mind? What was their fate when Hitler took over Germany? in concentration camps. You know about that, do you not? who are in exile, not those who left the country by force but these who left voluntarily--those are the ones I had been speaking about. The fate of the others is not known to me in detail. If you ask me about individual persons, I will tell you about each one of these persons, whether I know about his fate or not.
AAnd the fate of such people is well known generally. You are one of very few German statesmen who was cooperating with Hitler, Do you admit it?
A. No.
Q. You testified -- and I am forced to come back to the same question -as to the entry in the Goebbels diary dated the 21st of November, 1932. You stated the entry is false. Once again I remind you of this entry which Goebbels wrote, and I quote:
"In conversation with Dr. Schacht I was convinced that he fully reflects our viewpoint. He is one of the few who fully agrees with the Fuehrer's positi far as the facts I mentioned are concerned? I ask you this now.
A. I have not claimed that this entry is false. I claimed Goebbels was under this impression and that he was merely in error.
Q. And then according to your statement this does not correspond with the facts, this entry, so far as your attitude towards Hitler's regime was concerned. Is it so or not?
A. In the general way in which Goebbels does his writing, it is absolutely wrong.
Q. Then why didn't you express a protest against this, when Goebbels' entry was published?
A. IF I had wanted to protest against all the inaccuracies which were printed in Germany, reports about me, I would never have come to my senses.
Q. Well, this is the diary of Goebbels, who is very, very well known as one of the Fascist men in Germany. In this diary he informed people about your political views and if you were not in agreement with such views it would have been quite all right for you to react in some way.
A. Permit me to say something to this. We either have argument or you want to speak uniliterally. I say that the diary of Goebbels was a rather unusual thing.
Q. The witness, Franz Reuter, your biographer and a close friend, in his written affidavit dated 6th of February, 1946, which you have presented to the Tribunal through your Counsel as No. 35, testified to the following:
"Schacht in the beginning of 1930 enjoined Hitler and helped in the matters of the seizure of the government." so far as the facts are concerned, or do you confirm and admit them?
A. I consider them wrong.
Q. What kind of participation did you have in so far as securing Hitler's seizure of power was concerned -- I shall continue the question: Under what kind of circumstances in February, 1936, had you organized a meeting or a conference of Hitler with the industrialists? It has already been mentioned here before.
A. I never helped Hitler at all to come to power. All this has been discussed in detail here. In February of 1933 Hitler had already been in power quite some time. Regarding the money collections and industrial meetings of February, 1933, we have been speaking in detail right in this court room.
Q. What particular role did you play in this conference?
A. This, too, has been discussed in detail. Please read about it in the record.
Q. I already have familiarized myself with the reports, but you were not quite exact in giving us information on the circumstances. I am referring to the testimony of the Defendant Funk dated June 4, 1945. In order to clarify the question, this document, No. 28-PS contains -- and I quote Defendant Funk's statement on it:
"I was present at this conference and money was demanded, not by Goering by Schacht. Hitler left the room and Schacht made a speech in which he was demanding money for an election campaign. I was present there. I was present as an impartial witness, inasmuch as I was quite friendly to the industrialists."
Is this testimony of the Defendant Funk true; so far as the facts are concerned, or is it not?
A. Mr Funk is in error. We have heard the document, D-203. It was read by the Prosecution -- please don't interrupt me. The Prosecution has submitted this document and this document shows that Goering directed the request for financial aid and not I.
Q. When the Defendant Funk was interrogated in regard to this matter he maintained this speech was uttered not by Goering but by you. I ask you now which is true.
A. I have just told you that Mr. Funk is in error and that the evidence of the Prosecution is correct.
Q. And still what particular role did you play during this conference?
A. This, too, I have already described in detail.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has already heard a long cross-examiniation and it doesn't desire to hear the same facts or matters gone over again. Will you tell the Tribunal whether you have any points which the soviet Union are particularly interested in which have not been dealt with on cross-examination?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, in his testimony which went into quite detail the Defendant Schacht was not quite clear in many instances, which would have been satisfying to us. Therefore, I am forced in separate instances to come back to the same questions. In particular it is not quite clear to us what was the role of the Defendant Schacht in carrying through this conference of Hitler with the industrialists. The Defendant Schacht did not give clear and concise answers to this question. think that after the recess -- within twenty or thirty minutes -- I will finish my cross-examination, and all those additional supplementary questions, which are quite interesting to us, in order to ascertain the guilt of the Defendant Schacht.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The Tribunal is not prepared to listen to questions which have already been put.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Perhaps now you will find it desirable to declare a recess, so that the cross-examination can continue after the recess.
THE PRESIDENT: General Alexandrov, the cross-examination will continue up to the recess. bank and then the Minister of Economics and General Plenipotentiary for War and you admit that you played a decisive part in a matter of armament in Germany and in such a way in the matter of getting ready for aggressive wars. economics?
Q I didn't hear it out of your own mouth, not one single time.
THE PRESIDENT: He has admitted throughout -- and of course, it is obvious -- that he was Plenipotentiary for war economy; but what you put to him was, whether he as Plenipotentiary for War Economy took part in rearmament for aggressive war, and he has said over and over again that that was not his object, that his object was to gain equality for Germany. He said so, and we have to consider whether that is true. But that he said it, is perfectly clear.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: In my subsequent questions it will be quite clear why I ask this question. for War Economy?
A I just told you -- I don't understand the question, for what duration. All this has been mentioned herd already.
THE PRESIDENT: We have got the date when he became Plenipotentiary for War Economy and the date when he ceased to be. were charged with as the General Plenipotentiary. You are charged with the law for the Defense of the Reich, on the 29th of May, 1936, and I will quote a few excerpts from the second part of this law, entitled "Mobilization."
Point 1 : In order to direct the whole war economy the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor will appoint a General Plenipotentiary on the question of war economy.
Point 2: The problems of the General Plenipotentiary for Mar Economy consists of the fact that all economic forces should be mobilized for the service of war, in order to secure the economic life of the German people. The Reich Economy Minister, the Reich Food Minister, the Reich Labor Minister, the Reich Forester and all other subservient persons are to be obedient to the General Plenipotentiary. Furthermore, he is responsible for the finance of war, so far as the Reichsbank and the War Ministry are concerned. And the General Plenipotentiary for War Economy has a right to enact public laws within his economy which may be diversions as far as the present laws are concerned. powers so far as the war economy is concerned? read it correctly. the document -- I am asking you whether you admit that by such law you were given extraordinary powers in the sphere of the war economy. Do you admit it? the regular powers but extraordinary powers, that you were granted? of May, 1935, you considered this law was just an ordinary law? you considered those functions just ordinary ones?
THE PRESIDENT: The Court will adjourn now.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours) Tribunal in the matter of:
The United States of
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, General Alexandrov.
GENERAL-ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, taking into consideration the Tribunal's desire, as well as the fact that Mr. Jackson has already questioned Schacht in detail, and having read the minutes of this morning's session, it has been possible for me to shorten considerably the questions which I intend to put to Defendant Schacht. I have only two questions. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Government made a decision with regard to defense. The decision was as follows, citing point 1:
"Appointed by the Fuehrer, the General Plenipotentiary for Military Economics has begun his work still at the time of peace According to his directive, he is to head economic preparations for war as far as such preparations do not conflict with other economic organs." carried through actively by you and with your help? Do you admit that?
A No, I definitely do not admit that, Mr. Prosecutor. in Leipzig, you said the following, citing USA-627:
"My foreign friends are not giving me any aid at the present time, nor are they giving any aid to my attempts. Neither are they trying to show that I have been in disagreement with certai basic Nazi theories.
They do appear to understand that I am somewhat the economic guardian of Germany.
"I do want to say that everything that I do economically will be exclusively with the Fuehrer's consent, and that I will not undertake anything without his consent. Thus, the real leader and inspirer of the economic program is not myself but the Fuehrer."
Do you understand the citation? Do you agree that you said that at one time?
A. I admit it and would like to make a statement. far as I had foreign friends, did not do me a favor if they said publicly that I was an adversary of Hitler, because that made my position extremely dangerous. Secondly, I said in that conversation that I would not do anything which would not be according to my conviction, and that Hitler did everything which I had suggested to him, that is, if it was his opinion also. If I had said the contrary, that would have shown. I was in accordance with him as long as he carried out my policies; after wards I was not, and then I left.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I have no more questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to re-examine, Dr. Dix?
DR. DIX: I will put only a few questions which were caused by the cross examination. BY DR. DIX: dealt with without Dr. Schacht's having had an opportunity to explain it and to state what part, if any, that plan had in the economy of rearmament, and who the responsible creator of the New Plan was. Therefore, may I put this question to Dr. Schacht now.
development which took place after the Treaty of Versailles. I mentioned only briefly that by the separation of German property abroad, the entire organization for German foreign trade was taken away and therefore great difficulties arose for German export. payment of reparations or any such payments. Nevertheless, all great powers, particularly those who were in competition with Germany throughout the rest of the world, resorted to increase of tariffs in order to exclude German merchandise from their markets or to create more difficulties for Germany's sales, so the opportunity to sponsor German export was diminished more and more. with lower wages, to maintain her export or to increase her export, the other powers resorted to different means in order to meet German competition, and I remind you that the various devaluations of foreign currency took place, which reduced the possibility of competition by German products. When that was not sufficient, the system of quotas was invented, which is to say that German goods which were imported to a country could not go beyond a certain quota; that was prohibited. Such quotas of German imports were established by Holland, France, and other nations, so here also German export was made increasingly difficult. could not pay private debts abroad anymore. As you have heard here, for many years I had warned against these debts. I was not listened to, however, and it may be interesting to state here briefly that Germany, against my advice, within five years had as many debts in other countries as the United States throughout 40 years before the First World War.
needed foreign money, and Germany at that time was active in colonial development and could make good use of foreign capital.
Now, however, came the last point. When we were no longer able to pay our interests abroad, some of the countries resorted to the method of not returning the amounts which Germany was supposed to receive for exports, but confiscated these funds, and from these funds our debts abroad were to be paid, that is, so to say, to be accounted for. That was the so-called clearing arrangement. The private assets were confiscated in order to satisfy the demands of foreign creditors. would make German export possible, and I established a simple principle which was, "I will only buy where people also buy from me." Therefore, I looked around for countries which were prepares to cover their needs in Germany, and I was prepared to buy merchandise there.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't know what we have got to do with this Dr. Dix.
BY DR. DIX: had nothing to do with it? of German economic production was armament production? that time I wasnot able to answer it because I could not recall as to what amounts Germany expended for armament. Now, we have here -- by the testimony of Field Marshal Keitel, we have heard that armament expenditures during 1934 - 1934, 1935 - 1936, 1937 and so on, during these years as long as the Reichsbank was still cooperating, amounted to five billions of marks and the next year, seven billions of marks and the next year, nine billions of marks, and that is an estimate which scientists have established. The total of the entire German economy during these years could be estimated as fifty to sixty billions of marks, approximately, and if I put that in relation to the armament expenditures, which have been stated here and in witness interrogations, then we find that armament expenditures amounted to about ten to fifteen per cent of the entire German economy during the years in which I had anything to do with it. your readiness, lack of readiness, to turn over the office of plenipotentiary for the war economy, and in order to prove your statement that General von Blomberg did not desire that you turn over that office, you have referred to a document which has been submitted by the prosecution. I am referring to document EC 244 and that is a letter by the Reich Minister von Blomberg to Hitler, of the 22nd of February, 1937. It has already been read so I do not have to do so, and may I only point out that in the last paragraph Blomberg expressed his desire and wish that the Fuehrer would direct or cause the Reichsbank president to remain in office, so that covers the statement made by Schacht. Furthermore, in the course of cross examination by Justice Jackson, mention was made of your credibility concerning colonial aspirations and from a different point of view of colonial politics without naval power -there was no naval power; Germany had no naval power -- can Germany discuss naval problems?
That was the question and answer; and in that connection, I would like to ask you: Did Germany have colonies before 1914?
Q Before? properties, did Germany have naval power in relation to Great Britain?
Q That covers it. Then there is another problem fromthe point of view of the credibility of your statements; mention has been made about the question of the ethical conflicts concerning the oath to Hitler, as you say, as head of state, and the intentions which you have manifested to overthrow Hitler, even to kill him. Of past history, don't you know of many cases where high officials of a state attempted to overthrow the head of a state to whom they had sworn an oath?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Dix, we aren't concerned with past history, are we?
You don't think the question of whether there are historical instances, is a legitimate question to pub to this witness?
DR. DIX: Then I will not pursue that point any longer; it is more argumentation and maybe I can use it later.
Q Now, returning to the question of colonies, isn't it correct that aside from your personal colonial aspirations, Germany within the German Reich government had prepared officially the qcquisition of colonies and later the administration and wasn't there a political office until 1942 or 1943 or thereabouts? nial demands are part of the Party program, Of course, also the Foreign Office has concerned itself with it and I believe also in the Party.
Q There was a colonial political office under Ritter von Epp? more in conclusion, did you want to express that the MEFO drafts should serve to put the brakes on rearmament because the signature of the Reich was typing up a means of the Reich government for repayment? MEFO bills was for five years and the date of maturity after five years necessary had to put brakes on armament automatically at that time.
Q Furthermore, Justice Jackson dealth with the subject "that the name of Schacht when he retained the office as minister without port folio, had propagandistic results in favor of the Nazi regime abroad and therefore served the Nazi regime," In this connection and in order to abbreviate and to shorten the presentation of my documents, may I read from my document, Exhibit 37; that is in the English text on page 157 and the German text 149, and the fifth page of that Huelse affidavit says:
"The foreign press drew from the dismissal" --that is, the dismissal of the Reichsbank President in 1939 -- " the correct conclusions and interpreted it as a warning signal. In that sense in repeated conversations, even at the end of 1938, and in agreement with Dr. Schacht, I had spoken with representatives of foreign issuing banks, whom I had met at board meetings of the Bank for International Payment and I informed them that the resignation of Schacht and the individual members of the Reichsbank Directorate would mean that things in Germany were following a dangerous path."
Schacht of the fact that in the biography of Reuter it is stated expressly that Schacht assisted the regime in the stage of struggle for power. That is the substance of it. That is true, as it occurred in Reuter's notes, but there is something else, and I believe we still have to submit that Exhibit 35, page 124 of the English text and 125 of the German text, and there we find on the second page of that long affidavit the following sentence which shows its limited value of that biography as a source of information. Reuter says in this affidavit, and I quote: "I had a biography of Dr. Schacht published twice, first at the end of 1933 by the R. KITTLER Publishing house in Berlin, and at the end of 1936 by the German Publishing Institute in Stuttgart. Besides a factual presentation of his life and his work, it also served the purpose to shield him from his attackers. Therefore the principles of purely objective historical research work, are not applicable to these publications, because defensive views required by the situation of the respective period had to be taken into consideration," One has to know and read if on wants to consider the value as evidence of that biography. And that concludes my questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant can then retire.
DR. DIX: I come now to the witness Vocke. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Will you state your full name?
A. Wilhelm Vocke.
Q. Will you repeat this oath after me: the pure truth, and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. BY DR. DIX:
Q. Mr. Vocke, you were a member of the Directorate of the Reichsbank. When did you enter the Reichsbank Directorate, and when did you resign from it?
A. Reichspresident Ebert, in 1919, appointed me a member of the Reichsbank Directorate, and Hitler, on the 1st of February 1939, dismissed me from office. Therefore, I was about 20 years a member of the Reichsbank Directorate, and of these, about ten years under Schacht.
Q. Excuse me, but I have to ask you, were you a member of the Party?
A. No.
Q. Were you a member of the SA?
A. No.
Q. Were you a member of the SS?
A. No.
Q. Were you a sponsoring member of the SA or SS?
A. No
Q. You had no connection with the Party?
A. No.
Q. When did you meet Schacht?
A. In 1915. At that time I made his acquaintance, but only later when he became Reichsbank Kommissar and Reichsbank President, I came to know him better.
Q. I come now to the period of the First Reichsbank presidency of Schacht, that is, the year 1923. What was at that time the attitude of the Reichsbank Directorate to the candidacy of Schacht as Reichsbank President?
A. An attitude of disapproval.
Q. And for what reason?
A. The reasons were -
Q. Would you please make a pause after my question?
A. We had desired Helferich as candidate for president of the Reichsbank, because Helferich, in close cooperation with the Reichsbank, had created the Rentenmark and stabilization of currency. out of the file of Schacht, which referred to his activity under Herr von Jung in 1915. That was referring to the fact that Schacht, who had come from the Dresdner Bank, had rendered an assistance which von Jung did not consider quite correct, and therefore he had dismissed Schacht at that time. against Schacht, but Minister Severing stuck to the words, "It is not the wrost fruit which is eaten by worms," and Schacht was appointed president.
Q. So that Schacht came to you as President, and he must have known that the Directorate did not want him, or at least wanted somebody else. Therefore, I assume the question is in order as to what the relations were between that group of men, that is, the Reichs Bank Directorate, and the new President.
A. Schacht started in his office in January 1924. He called a meeting of all of us in which he spoke very frankly about the situation, and this was the substance of what he said:
"Now, you all have disapproved of me as President because I stole silver spoons, but now I am your President, and I hope that we will work together, and we will get everything straightened out."
That was the expression used by Schacht. "However, if the one or the other should not find himself able to comply and to cooperate with me, well, then he will have to assume the consequences, and I will gladly assist him to find another position."
itself very favorable. It was very good to work with Schacht. We recognized soon that he was a master in his and our field, and also in other respects his conduct was beyond reproach. He was clean, and there was no favoritism. He did not bring any favorites with him whom he wanted to sponsor. He also was a man who at all times tolerated controversy and differences of opinion, and even sponsored that. He did not appreciate assistants who were "yes men."
THE PRESIDENT: There is neither any charge nor any issue about this.
DR. DIX: That is quite correct, your Lordship, but I thought it would be helpful to touch those things, but we are now at the end, and will come to the Reichsbank presidency from 1933 on. BY DR. DIX:
Q. After the ansence of Schacht in 1933, he again became President of the Reichsbank. Did you have any conversations with him about his relations to Hitler and to the Party at all?
Q Would you like to describe to the Tribunal what Schacht's statements were to you? most literally. During the period when Schacht was not in office, about three years, I hardly ever saw him, maybe three or four times at occasions of the Wilhelmstift. He never visited me. Neither did I visit him, with the exception of one time. Schacht came into the bankmaybe he had some business there-- and he visited me in my office.
Q When was that? of power. We immediately came to speak about political questions and his relation to Hitler. I used that opportunity to warn Schacht seriously against Hitler and the Nazis. Schacht said to me, "Mr. Vocke, one has to give them a c chance, these people. If they are no good, they will disappear. They will be wiped away such as their predecessors were."
I told Schacht, "Yes, but it is also possible that the damage which will occur in the meantime for the German people will be so tremendous that it can never be repaired." "You are an old pessimist or the like, he left." after Schacht's re-entry into the Bank. That was probably during March 1933, or the beginning of April. Schacht at that time showed an ostentatious enthusiasm and I talked to him about his relation to the Party. I assumed that Schacht wa a member of the Party. I told him that I had not the intention to become a mem ber of the Party, and Schacht said to me, "You don't have to. You are not supposed to. What do you think? I wouldn't think even in my dreams of becoming a member of the Party. What do you think? I should accept the Party Program, the Party discipline? And then, think of it, when I speak to Hitler I should click my heels and say 'Mein Fuehrer', or when I write to him 'Mein Fuehrer' that is quite out of the question for me. I am and remain a free man."