dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR. ALDERMAN: "When the next action against the Government takes place those persons are to be proceeded against just as brutally as against all those other persons, without distinction of party, who are known to be adversaries of National Socialism. "In a report of the Party leaders for Austria the following principles have been emphasized: "A. The taking over of the power in Austria remains the principal duty of the Austrian National Socialist Party. Austria has for the German Reich a much greater significance and value than the Saar. The Austrian problem is the problem. All combat methods are consecrated by the end which they are to serve. "B. We must, on every occasion which presents itself, appear to be disposed to negotiate, but arm at the same time for the struggle. The new phase of the struggle will be particularly serious and there will be this time two centers of terror, one along the German frontier and the other along the Yugoslav frontier." That ends the quotation from the memorandum. I proceed with the next paragraph of the affidavit: "The Austrian Legion was kept in readiness in Germany. Although it was taken back some miles further from the Austrian frontier, it remained undissolved in spite of the engagement which had been taken to dissolve it. The Austrian Government received positive information to this effect from time to time which it passed on to me and I had direct information to the same effect from reliable persons coming from Germany to Vienna who actually saw the Legion." The fact of the reorganization of the Nazi Party in Austria is corroborated by a report of one of the Austrian Nazis. I offer in evidence our Document Number 812-PS, as Exhibit USA-61. It contains three parts. First, there is a letter dated August 22, 1939 from Mr. Rainer, then Gauleiter at Salzburg, to the Defendant Seyss-Inquart, then Austrian Reich Minister. That letter encloses a letter dated July 6, 1939 written by Rainer to Reich Commissioner and Gauleiter Josef Burckel.
DR. HANS LATERNSER: (Co-counsel for Defendant Seyss-Inquart): I object to the presentation of the letters contained in Document Number 812. Of course, I cannot object to the presentation of this evidence to the extent that this evidence is to prove that these letters were actually written. However, if these letters are to serve as proof for the correctness of their contents, then I must object to the use of these letters, for the following reason: Particularly, the third document: It is a letter which, as is manifest from its contents, has a certain bias, for this reason, that in this letter it is explained to what extent the Austrian Nazi Party participated in the Anschluss. It purports, further, to expose the leading role played by the Party group Rainer-Klausner. From the bias that is manifest in the contents of this letter, this letter cannot serve as prom for the facts brought forth in it, particularly since the witness Rainer, who wrote this letter, is available as a witness. I have discovered he is at present in Nuremberg. I object to the use of this letter to the extent that it is to be used to prove the correctness of its contents, because the witness who can testify to that is at our disposal in Nuremberg.
TIME PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will hear Mr. Alderman in answer to what has been said. The Tribunal has not yet read the letter.
MR. ALDERMAN: I think perhaps it would be better to read the letter before we argue about the significance of its contents.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you relying upon the letter as evidence of the facts stated in it?
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: From whom is the letter, and to whom is it addressed?
MR. ALDERMAN: The first letter is from Mr. Rainer who was at that time Gauleiter at Salzburg, to the Defendant Seyss-Inquart, then Reich Minister of Austria. That letter encloses a letter dated July 6, 1939, written by Rainer to Reich Commissioner and Gauleiter Josef Burckel. In that letter, in turn, Rainer enclosed a report on the events in the NSDAP of Austria from 1933 to March 11, 1938, the day before the invasion of Austria. I had some other matters in connection with this that I did want to bring to the attention of the Tribunal before it passes upon the admissibility.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think that the defendant's counsel is really challenging the admissibility of the document; he challenges the contents of the document:
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes. On that, in the first place, we are advised by defendant's counsel that this man Rainer is in Nuremberg. I would assume he is there. We have also an affidavit by Rainer stating that what is stated in these communications is the truth. However, it seems to us that the communications themselves, as contemporaneous reports by a Party officer at the time, are much more probative evidence than anything that he might testify to before you today.
DR. LATERNSER: I have already said that this letter has these characteristics, that it is biased, that it tends to emphasize and exaggerate the participation of the Austrian Nazi Party on the Anschluss. Therefore, I must object to the use of this letter as objective evidence. It was not written with the thought in mind that the letter would be used as evidence before a court. If the writer had known that, the letter undoubtedly would have been formulated differently, considering his political activity. I believe, although I am not sure, that the witness is in Nuremberg. In that case, according to a principle which is basic for all trial procedure, the witness should be presented to the Court personally, particularly since, in this case, the difficulties inherent in the question of Messersmith do not here pertain.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is of the opinion that the letters are admissible. They were written to and received by the Defendant Seyss-Inquart. The defendant can challenge the contents of the letters by his evidence. If it is true that Gainer is in Nuremberg, it is open to the defendant to apply to the Tribunal for leave to call Gainer in due course. He can then challenge the contents of these letters, both by the Defendant Seyss-Inquart's evidence and by Rainer's evidence. The letters themselves are admitted.
MR. ALDERMAN: May it please the Tribunal, I agree quite fully with the statement that if it had been known that these letters were to be offered in evidence in a court of justice, they very probably would have been differently written. That applies to a great part of the evidence that we shall offer in this case. And I would say that if the photographer who took the photograph of the Memorial Plaque had known that his photographs would be introduced in evidence in a conspiracy case, he probably never would have snapped the shutter. The letter from Rainer to Burckel indicates that he was asked to prepare a short history of the role of the Party. Perhaps I had better read the covering letter, addressed to the Defendant Seyss-Inquart: "Dear Dr. Seyss: "I have received your letter of 19 August 1939, in which you asked me to inform you what I know of those matters which, among others, are the subject of your correspondence with Burckel. "I do not wish to discuss sundry talks and all that which has been brought to my notice in the course of time by different people. I wish to clarify essentially my own attitude. "On 6 July 1939 I was asked by telephone by the Reich Commissioner Gauleiter Buerckel if I was in possession of the memorandum of Globus regarding the events of March. I told him that I did not have this memorandum, that I never possessed a single part of it; that I, furthermore, did not then participate in the matter and do not know its content. Because of official requests by Buerckel, I have entrusted him with a report accompanied by a letter written on 6 July. "If Buerckel now writes to you that certain statements were confirmed by me, I feel obliged to entrust you with a copy each of my copies of those two documents, which were only written in single originals. I shall specially inform Buerckel of this, adding that I have given-apart from those written explanations-no confirmations, declarations, or criticisms whatsoever regarding you and your attitude and that I have authored nobody to refer to any statements of mine.
MR. ALDERMAN: "Since the beginning of our collaboration, I have always expressed and represented forcefully my ideas regarding yourself and my opinion of your personality. This conception of mine was the very basis of our collaboration. The events of February and March have not changed this, especially since I considered the political success of 11 March merely as a confirmation of the intentions and convictions which have equally induced both of us to collaborate. "As far as Globus is concerned, you are fully aware of his nature, which I judged always and in every situation only by its good side. I believe that you have already talked to Globus about the occurrences between the 11 March 1938 and today, and I am convinced that he will tell you everything that is bothering him, if you will speak to him about this matter, as is your intention. "With best regards and Heil Hitler! Yours, Friedl Rainer." And so Rainer writes his report, which is enclosed with this letter, to show that the Party as a whole is entitled to the glory which was excessively ascribed to one person, Dr. Seyss-Inquart. I refer to the third paragraph of the first enclosure, the report to Reich Commissioner Gauleiter Josef Buerckel: "We saw in March and April how a false picture about the actual leadership conditions developed from this fact which could not be corrected in spite of our attempts to that erect. This was an important factor for the varying moods of Globocnik who hoped especially from you that you would emphasize for Hitler, and also for the public, the role of the Party during the events preceding 12 March 1938. I limited myself to address this verbal and written declaration to Party member Hess, and furthermore to secure the documents from the March days. In addition, I spoke at every available opportunity about the fight of the Party. I did not undertake steps to give just credit to other persons for the glory which was excessively ascribed to one person, Dr.
MR. ALDERMAN: Seyss-Inquart, and I would not do that, primarily because I appear as a beneficiary, and furthermore, because I believe that I would not gladden Hitler by doing so. "I am also convinced that Dr. Seyss-lnquart did not act crookedly, and furthermore, that Hitler does not want to commit an act of historical justice by special preference of his person, but rather that he is attracted to him personally. It really is of no great account to Hitler if this or that person were more or less meritorious in this sector of the great fight of the movement. Because, in the last analysis, by far the greatest part is to be ascribed only to him; he alone will be considered by history as the liberator of Austria. I, therefore, considered it best to accept existing conditions and look for new fertile fields of endeavor in the Party. "If I should be asked to describe-without personal interest- the role of the Party according to my best conviction, I am ready to do so at any time. For this reason I promised yesterday to submit to you again a short seminary, and to make it available for your confidential use. Of this letter and of this abbreviated description I retain the sole copy. Heil Hitler! Rainer." Now, of course, all of these enclosures went to the Defendant Seyss-lnquart, and he had knowledge of the contents of all of them. It is an historical fact of which the Court will take judicial notice, that Seyss-Inquart was the original Quisling. It so happened that the Norwegian Seyss-Inquart gave his name to posterity as a meaningful name, but all Quislings are alike. The Tribunal will observe from this that the Rainer report is hardly likely to be tendentious, as counsel says, or to be prejudiced in favor of Defendant Seyss-Inquart's contribution to the Anschluss. It tends, on the contrary, to show that Seyss-Inquart was not quite so important as he might have thought he was. Even so, Rainer gives Seyss-Inquart credit enough. The Rainer report further tells of the disorganization of the Nazi Party in Austria and of its reconstitution.
MR. ALDERMAN: I now quote the second and third paragraphs of the report, appearing on Pages 3 and 4 of the English text of 812-PS, which is Exhibit USA-61; and I believe it is on Pages 1 and 2 of the original German of the report or Bericht, which is the third part of the document: "Thus the first stage of battle commenced which ended with the July rising of 1934. The decision for the July rising was right, the execution of it was faulty. The result was a complete destruction of the organization; the loss of entire groups of fighters through imprisonment or flight into the Alt-Reich, and with regard to the political relationship of Germany to Austria, a formal acknowledgment of the existence of the Austrian State by the German Government. With the telegram to Papen, instructing him to reinstitute normal relationships between the two States, the Fuehrer had liquidated the first stage of the battle, and a new method of political penetration was to begin. By order of the Fuehrer the Landes- leitung Munich was dissolved, and the Party in Austria was left to its own resources. "There was no acknowledged leader for the entire Party in Austria. New readerships were forming in the new Gaue. The process was again and again interrupted by the interference of the police; there was no liaison between the formations, and frequently there were two, three, or more rival readerships. The first evident, acknowledged speaker of almost all the Gaue in Autumn 1934 was Engineer Reinthaler (already appointed Landesbauern Fuehrer, leader of the country's farmers, by Hess). He endeavored to bring about a political appeasement by negotiations with the Government with the purpose of giving the NSDAP legal status again, thus permitting its political activities. Simultaneously, Reinthaler started the reconstruction of the illegal political organization at the head of which he had placed Engineer Neubacher." Next we have secret contacts between German officials, including the Defendant Von Papen, and the Austrian Nazis; the use by the Austrian Nazis of front personalities.
MR. ALDERMAN: There are two cardinal factors concerning the Nazi organization in Austria which should be borne in mind. First, although the Fuehrer had, on the surface, cast the Austrian Nazis adrift-as indicated in the document I have just read-in fact, as we shall show, German officials, including Von Papen, maintained secret contact with the Austrian Nazis in line with Hitler's desires. German officials consulted and gave advice and support to the organization of the Austrian Nazis. In the second place, the Austrian Nazis remained an illegal organization in Austria, organizing for the eventual use of force in a so-called emergency. But in the meantime they deemed it expedient to act behind front personalities, such as the Defendant Seyss-Inquart, who had no apparent taint of illegality in his status in Austria. Mr. Messersmith relates, in his affidavit, that he got hold of a copy of a document outlining this Nazi program. I quote from Page 8 of Document 1760-PS, USA-57, the following: "For 2 years following the failure of the July 25 Putsch, the Nazis remained relatively quiet in Austria. Very few terroristic acts occurred during the remainder of 1934 and, as I recall, in 1935 and most of 1936, this inactivity was in accordance with directives from Berlin, as direct evidence to that effect which came to my knowledge at that time, proved. Early in January the Austrian Foreign Minister Berger- Waldenegg, furnished me a document which I considered accurate in all respects, and which stated: " 'The German Minister here, Von Papen, on the occasion of his last visit to Berlin, was received three times by Chancellor Hitler for fairly long conversations and he also took this opportunity to call on Schacht and Von Neurath. In these conversations the following instructions were given to him: "During the next 2 years nothing can be undertaken which will give Germany external political difficulties. On this ground, everything must be avoided which could awaken the appearance of Germany interfering in the internal affairs of Austria.
MR. ALDERMAN: Chancellor Hitler will, therefore, also for this reason, not endeavor to intervene in the present prevailing difficult crisis in the National Socialist Party in Austria, although he is convinced that order could be brought into the Party at once through a word from him. This word however, he will not give for foreign political reasons, being convinced that ends desired by him may be reached also in another way. Naturally, Chancellor Hitler declared to the German Minister here, this does not indicate any disinterestedness in Austria's independence. Also, before everything, Germany cannot for the present withdraw Party members in Austria, and must therefore, in spite of the very real exchange difficulties, make every effort to bring help to the persecuted National Socialist sufferers in Austria. " 'As a result, Minister of Commerce Schacht finally gave the authorization that from then on, 200,000 marks a month were to be set aside for this end (support of National Socialists in Austria). The control and supervision of this monthly sum was to be entrusted to Engineer Reinthaler, who, through the fact that he alone had control over the money, would have a definite influence on the Party followers. In this way it would be possible to end most quickly and most easily the prevailing difficulties and divisions in the Austrian National Socialist Party. " 'The hope was also expressed to Herr Von Papen that the recently authorized foundation of German Ortsgruppen of the National Socialist Party in Austria, made up of German citizens in Austria, would be so arranged as not to give the appearance that Germany is planning to interfere in Austrian internal affairs."' The report of Gauleiter Gainer to Reich Commissar Buerckel in July 1939 outlines the further history of the Party and the leadership squabbles following the retirement of Reinthaler.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you think this would be a convenient time to break off until 2 o'clock?
MR. ALDERMAN: Yes, sir. [The Tribunal adjourned until 1400 hours.] Afternoon Session
MR. ALDERMAN: May it please the Tribunal, I had just referred again to the report of Gauleiter Rainer to Reich Commissioner Buerckel in July 1939, which outlines the further history of the Party and the leadership problem following the retirement of Reinthaler. In referring to the situation in 1935, he mentioned some of the contacts with the Reich Government, that is, the German Government, in the following terms. I quote from Page 4 of the English text of that report, and I believe from Page 4 of the German text of the Rainer report, which is 812-PS, that is Exhibit USA-61: "In August some further arrests took place, the victims of which were, apart from the Gauleiter"-Gau leaders-"also Globocnik and Rainer. Schattenfroh then claimed, because of an instruction received from the imprisoned Leopold, to have been made deputy country leader. A group led by engineer Raffelsberger had at this time also established connection with departments of the Alt-Reich (Ministry of Propaganda, German racial agency, et cetera ), and made an attempt to formulate a political motto in the form of a program for the fighting movement of Austria." And, again, the Rainer report sets forth the situation a little later in 1936. I quote from Page 6 of the English text, and I think Page 5 of the German text: "The principles of the construction were: "The organization is the bearer of the illegal fight and the trustee of the idea to create a secret organization, in a simple manner and without compromise, according to the principle of organizing an elite to be available to the illegal Land Party Council upon any emergency. Besides this, all political opportunities should be taken and all legal people and legal chances should be used without revealing any ties with the illegal organization. Therefore, cooperation between the illegal Party organization and the legal political aides was anchored at the top of the Party leadership. All connections with the Party in Germany were kept secret in accordance with the orders of the Fuehrer.
MR. ALDERMAN: These said that the German State should officially be omitted from the creation of an Austrian NSDAP and that auxiliary centers for propaganda, press, refugees, welfare, et cetera , should be established in the foreign countries bordering Austria. "Hinterleitner already contacted the lawyer Seyss-Inquart, who had connection with Dr. Waechter which originated from Seyss-Inquart's support of the July uprising. On the other side, Seyss-Inquart had a good position in the legal field and especially well-established relations with Christian Social politicians. Dr. Seyss-Inquart came from the ranks of the Styrian Heimatschutz"-home defense-"and became a Party member when the entire Styrian Heimatschutz was incorporated into the NSDAP. Another personality who had a good position in the legal field was Colonel Glaise-Horstenau . who had contacts with both sides. The agreement of 11 July 1936 was strongly influenced by the activities of these two persons of whom Glaise-Horstenau was designed as trustee to the Fuehrer. The Gainer report thus discloses the dual tactics of the Austrian Nazis during this period of keeping quiet and awaiting develops meets. They were maintaining their secret contacts with Reich officials, and using native personalities such as Glaise-Horstenau and Seyss-lnquart. The Nazis made good use of such figures, who were more discreet in their activities and could be referred to as nationalists. They presented, supported, and obtained consideration of demands which could not be negotiated by other Nazis like Captain Leopold. Seyss-Inquart did not hold any public office until January 1937, when he was made Counsellor of State. But Rainer, describing him as a trustworthy member of the Party through the ranks of this Styrian Heimatschutz, points him out as one who strongly influenced the agreement of July 11, 1936. The strategic importance of that agreement will be considered a little later. Rainer's report, as I have said before, was hardly likely to over emphasize the significance of Seyss-Inquart's contribution.