dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you-say, "We will have to kill him," or did you say, "Somebody else will have to kill him," Dr. Schacht?
SCHACHT: If I had had the opportunity I would have killed him, I myself. I beg you therefore not to summon me before a German court for attempted murder because in that sense I am, of course, guilty.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, now, whatever your activities, they were never sufficiently open so that the foreign files in France, which you say were searched by the Gestapo, had an inkling of it, were they?
SCHACHT: Yes, I could not announce this matter in advance in the newspapers.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And the Gestapo, with all its searching of you, never was in a position to put you under arrest until after the 20 July attack on Hitler's life?
SCHACHT: They could have put me under arrest much earlier than that if they had been a little smarter; but that seems to be a strange attribute of any police force.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: And it was not until 1943 that the Hitler regime dismissed you? Until that time apparently they believed that you were doing them more good than harm?
SCHACHT: I do not know what they believed at that time, hence I ask you not to question me about that. You will have to ask somebody from the regime; you still have enough people here.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You have now contended that you knew about the plot of 20 July on Hitler's life?
SCHACHT: I knew about it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You knew that Gisevius says you did not know about it?
SCHACHT: I already stated yesterday that I was informed not only of Goerdeler's efforts but that I was thoroughly informed by General Lindemann, and the evidence of Colonel Gronau has been read here. I also stated that I did not inform my friends about this, because there was a mutual agreement between us that we should not tell anyone anything which might bring him into an embarrassing situation in case he were tortured by the Gestapo.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Do you recall that Gisevius said that there were only three civilians that knew about that plot which was carefully kept within military personnel?
SCHACHT: You see that even Gisevius was not informed on every detail Naturally, he cannot testify to more than what he knew.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And so, Dr. Schacht, we are to weigh your testimony in the light of the fact that you preferred, over a long period of time, a course of sabotage of your government's policy by treason against the head of the State, rather than open resignation from his cabinet?
SCHACHT: You constantly refer to my resignation. I have told you and proven that no resignation was possible. Consequently your conclusion is wrong.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: All right! Now let us see. In your interrogation on 16 October 1945, Exhibit USA-636, some questions were asked you about the generals of the Army, and I ask you if you were not asked these questions and if you did not give these answers: "Question: 'I say, suppose you were Chief of the General Staff and Hitler decided to attack Austria, would you say you had the right to withdraw?' "Answer: 'I would have said, "Withdraw me, Sir."' "Question: 'You would have said that?' "Answer: 'Yes.' "Question: 'So you take the position that any official could at any time withdraw if he thought that the moral obligation was such that he felt he could not go on?' "Answer: 'Quite.' "Question: 'In other words, you feel that the members of the General Staff of the Wehrmacht who were responsible for carrying into execution Hitler's plan are equally guilty with him?' "Answer: 'That is a very hard question you put to me, Sir, and I answer, "yes".' " You gave those answers, did you not? Did you give those answers?
SCHACHT: Yes, and I should like to give an explanation of this, if the Tribunal permits it. If Hitler ever had given me an immoral order, I should have refused to execute it. That is what I said about the generals also, and I uphold this statement which you have just read.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am through with him, Your Honor, except that I would like to note the exhibit numbers. The petition to Hindenburg referred to yesterday is 3901-PS, and will become Exhibit USA-837. The Von Blomberg interrogation of October 1945 is Exhibit USA-838.
DR. HANS LATERNSER: (Counsel for General Staff and High Command of the German Armed Forces): Mr. President, I request that the statement of the Defendant Schacht insofar as it was cited and becomes part of the minutes be stricken from the record. The question, as I understood it, was whether he considered the General Staff to be just as guilty as Hitler. This question was answered in the affirmative by the Defendant Schacht in this examination. The question and the answer-the question to begin with is inadmissible and likewise the answer because a witness cannot pass judgment on this. That is the task of the Court. And for this reason I request that this testimony be stricken from the record.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: May it please the Tribunal, I do not, of course, offer this opinion of Schacht's as evidence against the General Staff or against any individual soldier on trial. The evidence, I think, was as to the credibility of Schacht and as to his position. I do not think that his opinion regarding the guilt of anybody else would be evidence against that other person; I think that his opinion on this matter is evidence against himself in the matter of credibility.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Dix.
DR. RUDOLF DIX (Counsel for Defendant Schacht): The question by Justice Jackson was not whether Schacht considered the generals guilty, but the question was whether it was correct that Schacht, in an interrogation previous to the Trial, had given certain answers to certain questions. In other words, it was a question about an actual occurrence which took place in the past and not a question about an opinion or a judgment which he was to give here. As Schacht's counsel, I am not interested in this passage being stricken from the record, except to the extent that these words remain: `'I, Schacht, would never have executed an immoral order and an immoral demand by Hitler." So far as the rest of This answer of Schacht is concerned I, as his defense counsel, declare that it is a matter of indifference to me.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, after the declaration of Justice Jackson, I withdraw my objection.
MAJOR GENERAL G. A. ALEXANDROV (Assistant Prosecutor for the U.S.S.R.): Mr. President, may I begin my cross-examination?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Defendant Schacht, when answering the questions put to you by your counsel, you informed us of the circumstances under which you first became acquainted with Hitler and Goering. You even remembered a detail such as the pea soup with lard which was served for supper at Goering's house. What I am interested in now are some other particulars, rather more relevant to the case, of your relations with Hitler and Goering. Tell me, on whose initiative did your first meeting with Hitler and Goering take place?
SCHACHT: I have already stated that my friend, Bank Director Von Stauss, invited me to an evening in his home so that I might meet Goering there. The meeting with Hitler then took place when Goering asked me to come to his home-that is, Goering's home- to meet Hitler.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: For what reasons did you, at that time, accept the invitation to meet Hitler and Goering?
SCHACHT: The National Socialist Party at that time was one of the strongest parties in the Reichstag with 108 seats, and the National Socialist movement throughout the country was extremely lively. Consequently, I was more or less interested in making the acquaintance of the leading men of this movement whom up to then I did not know at all.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: But you declared that you were invited by Goering himself Why did Goering especially invite you?
SCHACHT: Please ask Herr Goering that.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Did you not ask him yourself?
SCHACHT: Herr Goering wished me to meet Hitler, or Hitler to meet me.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: What for? With what aim in mind?
SCHACHT: That you must ask Herr Goering.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Do you not think that Hitler and Goering intended-and not unsuccessfully at that-to inveigle you into participating in the fascist movement, knowing that in Germany you were an economist and financier of repute who shared their views?
SCHACHT: I was uninformed about the intentions of these two gentlemen at that time. However, I can imagine that it was just as much a matter of interest for these gentlemen to meet Herr Schacht as it was for me to meet Herr Hitler and Herr Goering.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Then it was a matter of purely personal interest; or were other considerations involved, of a political nature? You yourself understood that your participation in the fascist movement would be of advantage to Hitler, inasmuch as you were a well-known man in your own country?
SCHACHT: As far as I was concerned, I was only interested in seeing what kind of people they were. What motives these two gentlemen had are unknown to me, as I have already stated. My collaboration in the fascist movement was entirely out of the question, and it was not given...
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Tell me, please...
SCHACHT: Please let me finish. My collaboration was not given before the July elections of 1932. As I have stated here, the acquaintance was made in January 1931, which was 1.5, years before these elections. Throughout these 1.5 years no collaboration took place.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Tell me, was your acquaintance with Hitler and Goering exclusively limited to these meetings, or had you already met them before Hitler came into power?
SCHACHT: Until July 1932 I saw Hitler and Goering, each of them, perhaps once, twice, or three times-I cannot recall that in these 1.5 years. But in any case there is no question of any frequent meetings.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Then, how do you explain your letter to Hitler of 29 August 1932 in which you offered your services to Hitler? You remember this letter?
SCHACHT: Yes.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: How do you explain it?
SCHACHT: I have spoken about this repeatedly. Will you be so kind as to read it in the record?
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Please repeat it once more, briefly.
THE PRESIDENT: If he has been over it once, that is sufficient.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: When, and by whom were you first invited to participate in the future Hitlerite Government and promised the post of President of the Reichsbank?
SCHACHT: The President of the Reichsbank did not hold a position in the government, but was a high official outside the government. The first time that there was' any talk in my presence about this post was on 30 January 1933, when I accidentally ran into Goering in the lobby of the Kaiserhof Hotel, and he said to me, "Ah, there comes our future President of the Reichsbank-"
GEN.ALEXANDROV: When answering the questions of your counsel, you declared that the fascist theory of race supremacy was sheer nonsense, that the fascist ideology was no ideology at all, that you were opposed to the solution of the Lebensraum problem by the seizure of new territories, that you were opposed to the Leadership Principle within the Fascist Party and even made a speech on this subject in the Academy of German Law, and that you were opposed to the fascist policy of exterminating the Jews. Is this right? Did you say this when answering the questions put by your counsel?
SCHACHT: Yes, we both heard it here.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Well, then tell me, what led you to fascism and to co-operation with Hitler?
SCHACHT: Nothing at all led me to fascism; I have never been a fascist.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Then what induced you to co-operate with Hitler since you had adopted 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 co-operate with Hitler, I think you must have heard him.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: But it did, in fact, take place? [Turning to the defendant.] In reply to a question by your counsel as to why you did not emigrate, you stated that you did not wish to be a simple martyr. Tell me, did you not know the fate which befell Germany's outstanding personalities, who held democratic and progressive ideas when Hitler came to power? Do you know that they were all exiled or sent to concentration camps?
SCHACHT: You are confusing things here. I did not answer that I did not want to be a martyr to the question of whether I wanted to emigrate; but I said, "Emigrants-that is, voluntary emigrants-never served their country," and I did not want to save my own life, but I wanted to continue to work for the welfare of my country. The martyr point was in connection with a question following, as to whether I expected any good to have resulted for my country if I had died as a martyr. To that I replied, "Martyrs serve their country only if their sacrifice becomes known."
GEN.ALEXANDROV: You related it somewhat differently. I shall, nevertheless, repeat my question.
THE PRESIDENT: I would be very grateful if you would repeat this question.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Do you know the fate which befell the foremost men of Germany, men who held progressive and democratic ideas when Hitler came to power? You know that all these people were either exiled or sent to concentration camps?
SCHACHT: I expressly stated here that when I spoke of emigrants I meant those who were in exile, who did not leave the country under compulsion but left voluntarily-those are the ones I was speaking about. The individual fates of the others are not known to me. If you ask me about individual persons, I will tell you regarding each one of these people, whether I know his fate or not.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: The fate of these great men is universally known. You, one of the few outstanding statesme n in democratic Germany, co-operated with Hitler. Do you admit this?
SCHACHT: No.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: You testified-and I am obliged to refer once again to the same question-that the entry in the Goebbels diary of 21 November 1932 was false. Once again I remind you of this entry which Goebbels wrote, and I quote: "In a conversation with Dr. Schacht I found that he fully reflects our viewpoint. He is one of the few who fully agrees with the Fuehrer's position." Do you continue to say that this entry does not conform to reality? This is the question which I am asking you.
SCHACHT: I have never claimed that this entry was false. I only claimed that Goebbels got this impression and he was in error about it.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: But according to your statement this entry does not conform to reality, to your attitude toward Hitler's regime. Is that the case or not?
SCHACHT: In the general way in which Goebbels represents it there, it is wrong; it is not correct.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Why did you not lodge a protest? After all, Goebbels' diary, including this entry, was published.
SCHACHT: If I would have protested against all the inaccuracies which were printed about me, I would never have come to my senses.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: But do you not see, this is not exactly an ordinary excerpt from Goebbels' diary-and he was rather an outstanding statesman in fascist Germany-for he describes your political views; and if you were not in agreement with him it would have been appropriate for you, in some way or other, to take a stand against it.
SCHACHT: Permit me to say something to this. Either you ask me-at any rate I should not like to have here a two-sided argument if it is only one-sided. I say that the diary of Goebbels is an unusually common piece of writing.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: The witness, Dr. Franz Renter, your biographer and close friend, in his written affidavits of 6 February 1946, presented to the Tribunal by your counsel as Document Schacht-35, testified to the following: "Schacht joined Hitler in the early thirties and helped him to power..." Do you consider these affidavits of the witness Dr. Franz Reuter as untrue, or do you confirm them?
SCHACHT: I consider them wrong.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: How far did you personally participate to help bring Hitler to power? I continue this question: Under what circumstances and for what purpose did you, in February 1933, organize a meeting between Hitler and the industrialists? This subject has already been mentioned before.
SCHACHT: I did not help Hitler to come to power in any way. All this has been discussed here at great length. In February 1933 Hitler had already been in power quite some time. As to finances and the industrial meetings of February 1933, that has profusely been gone into.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: What particular role did you play in this conference?
SCHACHT: This, too, has been discussed in detail. Please read about it in the record.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: I have already familiarized myself with the reports but you have not explained events sufficiently clearly. In order to shed some more light on the question I shall refer to Defendant Funk's testimony of 4 June 1945. This is Document Number 2828-PS. I quote Defendant Funk's testimony: "I was at the meeting. Money was not demanded by Goering but by Schacht. Hitler left the room, then Schacht made a speech asking for money for the election. I was only there as an impartial observer, since I enjoyed a close friendship with the industrialists." Does this testimony of the Defendant Funk represent the truth?
SCHACHT: Herr Funk is in error. Document D-203 has been presented here to the Court by the Prosecution...
GEN. ALEXANDROV: But . . .
SCHACHT: Please do not interrupt me. The Prosecution has submitted this document, and this document shows that Goering directed the request for financial aid and not I.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: In this connection Defendant Funk declared that this speech was made by you and not by Goering. I ask you now, which statement represents the truth?
SCHACHT: I have just told you that Herr Funk is in error and that the evidence of the Prosecution is correct.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Then what part did you play in connection with this conference?
SCHACHT: This, too, I have already stated in detail. I am...
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has already heard a long cross-examination and it does not 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 in cross-examination?
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, in his statements the Defendant Schacht did not reply in sufficient detail, nor were his answers sufficiently clear. I am therefore obliged, in certain instances, to refer to these questions again. It is, in particular, not clear to us what part the Defendant Schacht played in this meeting of the industrialists. It appears to me that Defendant Schacht did not give a sufficiently clear or well-defined reply to the question which I had asked him. As for the other questions, they are few in number and I imagine that after the recess I can try and finish with them in about 30 or 40 minutes. All these questions are of interest to us since they enable us to determine the guilt of the Defendant Schacht.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The Tribunal is not prepared to listen to questions which have already been put.
GEN.ALEXANDROV: Perhaps now you will find it desirable to declare a recess, in order to continue the cross-examination after the recess.
THE PRESIDENT: No, General Alexandrov, the cross-examination will continue up to the recess.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Do you admit-that, while acting as President of the Reichsbank and as Minister of Economics and Plenipotentiary for War Economy, you played a decisive part in preparing the rearmament of Germany and consequently, in preparing for a war of aggression?
SCHACHT: No, I categorically deny that.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: You were Plenipotentiary for War Economy?
SCHACHT: Well, we have spoken about that here ten times already.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: I did not hear it from your own lips, not once.
THE PRESIDENT: He has admitted throughout and, of course, i. is obvious-that he was Plenipotentiary for War Economy; but `that 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 got to consider whether that is true. But that he said it is perfectly clear.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: In my subsequent questions it will be quite clear why I touch precisely on this question. How long did you occupy the post of Plenipotentiary for War Economy?
SCHACHT: I have just stated that I do not understand the question-for what duration? All this has certainly been stated here already.
THE PRESIDENT: We have got the date when he became Plenipotentiary for War Economy and the date when he ceased to be.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: I should like to remind you of the duties imposed on you as Plenipotentiary by the Reich Defense Act of 21 May 1935. I shall quote a brief excerpt from Section 2 of this law, entitled "Mobilization": "Point 1: For the purpose of directing the entire war economy the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor will appoint a Plenipotentiary for War Economy. "Point 2: It will be the duty of the Plenipotentiary for War Economy to utilize all economic possibilities in the interest of the war and to safeguard the economic well-being of the German people. "Point 3: Subordinate to him will be: the Reich Minister of Economics, the Reich Minister for Food and Agriculture, the Reich Labor Minister, the Chief Reich Forester, and all other Reich officials directly subordinate to the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor. "Further, he shall be responsible for the financing of the war within the sphere of the Reich Finance Ministry and the Reichsbank. "Point 4: The Plenipotentiary for War Economy shall have the right to enact public laws within his official jurisdiction which may differ from existing laws." You admit that this law gave you extraordinary powers in the sphere of war economy?
SCHACHT: This document is before the Court and I assume that you have read it correctly.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: I am not asking you whether I have read this document correctly; I am asking you whether you admit that by this law you were given extraordinary powers in the sphere of the war economy? Do you admit that?
SCHACHT: I had exactly the full powers which are described in the law.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: Do you admit that these were not ordinary powers, but quite extraordinary powers?
SCHACHT: No, I will not admit this at all.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: In other words, you considered that the Reich Defense Law of 21 May 1935 was just an ordinary law?
SCHACHT: It was simply an ordinary law.
GEN. ALEXANDROV: And you also considered the functions imposed on you by this law as Plenipotentiary for War Economy ordinary functions?
SCHACHT: As very common regulations which are customary with every general staff.
THE PRESIDENT: The Court will adjourn now. [A recess was taken.] Afternoon Session
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, General Alexandrov.
GEN. 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 number of questions in my examination. I have only two to put to Defendant Schacht. Defendant Schacht, on 21 May 1935 the Reich Government made a decision with regard to the Reich Defense Council. The decision was as follows, citing Point 1.: "It is the will of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor that the Plenipotentiary General for War Economy shall take over this responsible directorate (Leitung), and is, as with the Reich War Minister, holder of the executive power, independent and responsible for his own sphere of activity to the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor." Do you admit that you carried through actively this decision of the Reich Government; and that you took an active part in Germany's economic preparations for aggressive wars?