dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR. DIX: I ask you to take judicial notice of the rest of this affidavit. The next Exhibit Number 36 (Document Schacht-36) is an affidavit by Oberregierungsrat, Dr. Von Scherpenberg, formerly Embassy Counsellor at the Embassy in London, afterwards departmental chief at the Foreign Office and now at the Ministry of Justice in Munich, the son-in-law of Dr. Schacht. I have read a passage and I ask that judicial notice be taken of the unread portion. The next is Exhibit Number-37(a) (Document Schacht-37(a)). It has been submitted. Here also a passage on Page 154 of the German text has been read, about the warning signal given abroad when Schacht resigned as Reichsbank President. I ask that judicial notice be taken of the remainder. The next affidavit is by the same gentleman, who was also a colleague of Dr. Schacht in the Reichsbank Directorate at the same time as the witness Vocke, whom we have just heard. I submit it. There is no need to read anything. I only ask you to take judicial notice of its contents. The next affidavit, Exhibit Number-37(c) (Document Schacht-37(c) ) is by the same gentleman and has already been submitted. I ask you to take judicial notice of its contents. There is no need to read anything. The next is Exhibit Number 38 (Document Schacht-38), an affidavit by General Thomas. It has not been submitted yet, and I submit it now and ask to be permitted to read one passage, beginning on the first page; that is Page 172 of the English text and Page 164 of the German text: "Question: Schacht claims to have influenced Blomberg to delay rearmament. Can you give any information on this matter? When was it? "Answer: I was Chief of the Army Economic Staff, that is the Army Economic and Armament Office at the High Command OI the Wehrmacht (OKW) from 1934 to the time of my dismissal in January 1943. In this capacity I had connection with the Reich Minister of Economics and Reich Bank President Hjalmar Schacht. Up till 1936 Schacht undoubtedly promoted rearmament by making available the necessary means.
DR. DIX: From 1936 on he used every opportunity to influence Blomberg to reduce the tempo and extent of rearmament. His reasons were as follows: "1. Risk to the currency. "2. Insufficient production of consumer goods. "3. The danger to the foreign policy, which Schacht saw in excessive armament of Germany. "Concerning the last paint he frequently spoke to Blomberg and me and said that on no account must rearmament be allowed to lead to a new war. These were also the reasons which led him to hold out to Blomberg in 1936 and again in 1937 the threat that he would resign. On both of these occasions I was delegated by Blomberg to dissuade Schacht from carrying out his threat to resign. I was present during the conference between Blomberg and Schacht in 1937." I ask you to take judicial notice of the remainder of that affidavit by General Thomas. The next Exhibit is Number 39 (Document Schacht-39); parts of it have been read, that is to say, the part Schacht played in the incident of the 20th of July together with General Lindemann; it is the affidavit by Colonel Gronau. I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of the remainder. The same applies to the next Exhibit Number 40 (Document Schacht-40). That is a sworn statement, also by a colleague of Schacht in the Ministry of Economics, Kammerdirektor Asmus, now in retirement. I have also read parts of this already, namely, the passages concerning the happenings at the time of the dismissal as Minister of Economics; and I ask you to take judicial notice of the remainder. Then we come to Exhibit Number 41 (Document Schacht-41), which is the affidavit by State Secretary Carl Christian Schmid, also in retirement. I have not yet read anything and I ask to be permitted to read two passages. The first one is on Page 182 of the German text; Page 190 of the English text: "When the Bruening Cabinet, which had been arranged by General Von Schleicher. . ."-That is not legible.
DR. DIX: I think that should be different, but it is not legible.-"When that was torpedoed by Schleicher himself, Schacht considered the early appointment of Hitler as head of the Government to be unavoidable. He pointed out that the great mass of the German people said 'Yes' to National Socialism, and that the Left as well as the Center had come to a state of complete passive resignation. The short life of the transition cabinets of Papen and Schleicher was clear to him from the very beginning. "Schacht decisively advocated the co-operation in National Socialism of men experienced in their respective fields, without acceptance of its program as a whole, which he always referred to ironically, later frequently calling it 'a really bestial ideology' in conversation with me; but he held that the influencing of developments from important inner power positions was an absolute patriotic duty, and he strongly condemned emigration and the resort to easy armchair criticism." And then on Page 184 of the German text, 192 of the English text, two very short passages: "I recall numerous talks with Dr. Schacht in which he stated that war was an economic impossibility and simply a crazy idea, as, for instance, when he was in Muelheim at the house of Dr. Fritz Thyssen, who was closely associated with Goering and Hitler before 1933 but was in strong opposition from 1934 on and also opposed any idea of war as madness." And, then, further down on the same page, only one sentence: "When Schacht spoke to me he used to refer ironically to the Himmler-Rosenberg Lebensraum plans against Russia as an example of the mad presumption of extremist Party circles. Schacht's special fad was an understanding with England," and so on; and I ask you to take judicial notice of the remainder of the document. The same applies to the whole of Exhibit Number 42 (Document Schacht-42), an affidavit by the director of the Upper Silesian Coke Works, Berckemeyer. I come now to Exhibit Number 43 (Document Schacht-43). That has already been submitted and read in part.
DR. DIX: It is the correspondence between the publisher of Ambassador Dodd's Diary and Sir Nevile Henderson. I ask you to take judicial notice of the part not yet read, and whatever comes after Exhibit 43 has been submitted. I ask you to take judicial notice of its contents, and I forego the reading of it. That brings me to the end of my presentation in the case of Schacht.
THE PRESIDENT: Now the Tribunal will continue the case against the Defendant Funk.
DR. FRITZ SAUTER (Counsel for Defendant Funk): Mr. President, with your permission I call first the Defendant Dr. Funk himself to the witness box. [The Defendant Funk took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name, please?
WALTER FUNK (Defendant): Walter Emanuel Funk.
THE PRESIDENT: 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 defendant repeated the oath in German.]
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I begin with one observation: The Defendant Funk has been a sick man for many years now, and before he came into the prison he had been in hospital for some time. He was supposed to undergo an operation, which, however, due to conditions at the time, could not be carried out. He still is under medical treatment. In consideration of that fact, and because the defendant is extremely anxious to conclude his own interrogation as soon as possible, I shall put only those questions to the defendant which are absolutely necessary to give you a clear picture about his person and his activities. [Turning to the defendant.] Witness, when were you born?
FUNK: On 18 August 1890.
DR. SAUTER: So you are now 56?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: First, I want to put to you the most important particulars of your life, and to simplify matters you may answer only with "yes" or "no." You are 56 years old. You were born in East Prussia?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: You come from a merchant's family in Konigsberg?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Then you studied in Berlin at the university, 1a\v and political science, literature and music. You also come from a family which has produced a number of artists.
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: During the World War you were first in the Infantry, and in 1916, because of a bladder ailment, you became unfit for service?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Then you became an editor with several large newspapers, and you told me that for a long time you could not make up your mind whether to become a musician or a journalist. Then you decided for the latter, and in 1922, I believe, you became editor in chief of the Berliner Borsenzeitungt. Is all that correct?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Now perhaps you will tell us what were the political tendencies of that paper on which you worked for about ten years as editor in chief?
FUNK: The tendency of the paper was somewhere between the Center and the Right. The newspaper was not tied to any party. It was owned by an old Berlin family of publishers.
DR. SAUTER: What was the attitude of that paper to the Jewish question before you took on the editorship and during the time when you were editor in chief?
FUNK: Absolutely neutral. It did not deal in any way with the Jewish question.
DR. SAUTER: From an affidavit by Dr. Schacht, I have seen that at that time-that is to say, during the twenties-you moved in circles which were also frequented by Jews, and where economic and political matters, such as gold currency, et cetera, were often discussed. Is that correct?
FUNK: I do not know anything about that.
DR.SAUTER: Dr. Schacht has asserted that in an affidavit of 7 July 1945 (Document Number 3936-PS).
FUNK: I had a lot to do with Jews. That was in the nature of my profession. Every day at the stock exchange I was together with 4,000 Jews.
DR. SAUTER: Then in 1931 you resigned your post as editor in chief?
FUNK: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: What were the reasons for that?
FUNK: I was convinced that the National Socialist Party would come to power in the Government, and I felt called upon to make my own political and economic opinions heard in the Party.
DR. SAUTER: Would you like to explain a little more in detail what kind of opinions you had, Dr. Funk, especially concerning the clashes between parties, between classes at that time?
FUNK: The German nation at that time was in sore distress, spiritually as well as materially. The people were torn by Party and class struggle. The Government, or rather the governments, had no authority. The parliamentary system was played out, and I myself, for 10 or 12 years before that, had protested and fought publicly against the burden of the Versailles reparations, because I was convinced that those reparations were the chief cause of the economic bankruptcy of Germany. I, myself, have fought all my life for private enterprise, because I \vas convinced that the idea of private enterprise is indissolubly bound up with the idea of the efficiency and worth of individual human beings. I have fought for the free initiative of the entrepreneur, free competition, and, at that time in particular, for putting an end to the mad class struggle, and for the establishment of a social community on the basis of the industrial community. All those were ideas to which I found a ready response in my conversations, particularly, with Gregor Strasser.
DR. SAUTER: Who was Gregor Strasser, would you tell the Tribunal briefly?
FUNK: Gregor Strasser at that time was leader of the Reich Organization Office of the National Socialist Party and was generally considered to be the second man after Adolf Hitler. I have...
THE PRESIDENT: This is the time to break off. [The Tribunal adjourned until 4 May 1946 at 1000 hours.]
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I continue the examination of the Defendant Funk? Dr. Funk, yesterday you gave us a brief account of your life, told us that you are 56 years of age, that you have been married for 25 years, that you were editor of the Berliner Borsenzeitung for 10 years; and in conclusion you told us yesterday what your convictions were regarding the future development of Germany. Perhaps you can again tell us something of your viewpoint, since you were interrupted by the recess yesterday and since your health was in such a poor state yesterday evening that you could scarcely remember what you had told the Court. Well, what were your views on Germany's economic prospects at the time when you entered the Party? Perhaps you can go over it briefly again.
FUNK: At that time Germany was in the midst of a very difficult economic crisis. This crisis was caused chiefly by the reparations, the way in which these reparations had to be paid, and by the inability of the governments then in office to master the economic problems. The most disastrous feature of the reparations policy was that German mark credits in immense sums were transferred to foreign countries without receiving any equivalent in return. As a result there was a tremendous surplus and overpressure of Reichsmark abroad. It led to inflation in Germany and the countries with stable currencies bought Germany out. German industry incurred heavy debts and consequently came temporarily under foreign control; German agriculture became indebted. The middle classes, who were the chief representatives of German culture, were impoverished. Every third German family was unemployed, and the Government itself had neither the power nor the courage to master these economic problems. And these problems could not be solved by means of economic measures alone. The first essential was the presence of a government possessing full authority and responsibility; and then the development of a unified political will among the people. The National Socialists at that captured 40 percent of the seats in the Reichstag; the people streamed to this Party in ever increasing millions, especially the young people who were animated by idealism. The fascinating personality of the Fuehrer acted as a giant magnet. The economic program of the Party itself was vague; and in my opinion it was drawn up mainly with an eye for propaganda purposes. There were lively arguments about it in Party circles with which I came in contact in 1931.
FUNK: At that time, therefore, I decided to give up my position as editor of a paper with a large circulation among the middle classes and to start on my own by editing an economic and political news service which went to the most diverse sections of economy, to leading Party circles as well as to economically interested parties siding with the German National Party, the People's Party, and even the Democrats.
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Funk, you said before, approximately, that according to the opinion you expressed in 1931, only a government with full authority and full responsibility, that is, only a strong state and a unified political will, could lead Germany out of the crisis of that time, which was, of course, merely a part of the world crisis. Did you at that time ever reflect as to whether the Leadership Principle which was later developed to an increasing extent-whether this Leadership Principle could be made to harmonize with your ideas of economic policy? Or, putting it negatively, did you at that time anticipate great wrongs as a result of this Leadership Principle? What can you say on this point?
FUNK: As to a principle of government, well, that is, a Leadership Principle, one can never say a priori whether it is good or bad. It depends on existing circumstances and, above all, on those who do the governing. The democratic-parliamentary principle had not been successful in Germany. Germany had no parliamentary and democratic tradition, such as other countries had. Conditions, finally, were such that when the government made decisions, the few votes of the economic party were decisive; and these were mostly bought. Therefore, another principle had to be made the dominant one; and in an authoritarian government, if those who bear the authority and the responsibility are good, then the government also is good. The Leadership Principle meant, in my opinion, that the best men and the best man should rule and that authority would then be exercised from above downwards and responsibility from below upwards. And in conversations with Hitler and other leading personalities of the Party in 1931 and, as I said, from the faith and enthusiasm which the German people brought to this political movement, I formed the opinion that this Party would have to come into power and that through it alone salvation could come. I, myself, wanted to put my own economic ideas into practice in this Party.
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Funk, you have just been speaking of the personality of Hitler. Through whom did you meet Hitler?-that is, who were persons in the Party by whom you were first won over to the Party?
FUNK: Chiefly, Gregor Strasser, as I said yesterday, who arranged my first meeting with Hitler. Not until much later, in Berlin, did I meet Hermann Goering. Apart from them I had very few acquaintances in the Party at that time and played no role in it myself.
DR.SAUTER: When you met Hitler what impression did he make on you at that time? I should like to say beforehand, you were at that time-1931, I think-a mature man of over forty. What impression did you have at that time of Hitler's personality and aims, et cetera?
FUNK: My first conversation with Adolf Hitler was very reserved. That was not surprising as I came from a world which was entirely strange to him. I immediately received the impression of an exceptional personality. He grasped all problems with lightning speed and knew how to present them very impressively, with great fluency and highly expressive gestures. He had the habit of then becoming absorbed in the problems, in long monologues, so to speak, in this way lifting the problems to a higher sphere. At that time I explained to him my economic ideas and told him especially that I upheld the idea of private property, which for me was the fundamental tenet of my economic policy and which was inseparable from the concept of the varying potentialities of human beings. He, himself, heartily concurred with me and said that his theory of economics was also based on selectivity, that is, the principle of individual productivity and the creative personality; and he was very glad that I wanted to work on those lines in the Party and to arrange contacts and support for him in the economic field- which I actually did. In the meantime, however, my relations with the Fuehrer became no closer then, because he said to me himself, "I cannot, at present, commit myself to an economic policy; and the views expressed by my economic theorists, such as Herr Gottfried Feder, are not necessarily my own." The economic policy section which existed at that time was directed by a Dr. Wagner.
DR. SAUTER: The economic policy section of what? Of the Reich Party Directorate?
FUNK: The economic policy section of the Reich Party Directorate was directed by a certain Dr. Wagner. I was not invited to political talks. A close connection with the Fuehrer-or a closer connection with the Fuehrer-I really had only in the year 1933 and the first half of 1934, when, as press chief of the Reich Government, I reported to him regularly. At that time it once even happened that he suddenly interrupted the press conference, went into the music room with me, and made me play the piano for him. Then our relations became a little cooler again, and when I became Minister of Economics the Fuehrer kept me more and more at a distance-whether he had special reasons for this, as Lammers testified here, I do not know. During my office as Minister, I was called in by the Fuehrer for consultations perhaps four times-five at the most. But he really did not need me because his economic directives were given to the Reich Marshal, the responsible head of economic affairs, and later, from 1942 on, to Speer, since armament dominated the entire economy; and, as I said, I had close connections with him only in 1933 and in the first half of 1934 until the death of Reich President Von Hindenburg.
DR.SAUTER: Dr. Funk, you have got a long way ahead. We would like to return now to 1931 or 1932, to the time when you entered the Party. When was that?
FUNK: In the Summer of 1931.
DR. SAUTER: The summer of 1931. You have already told the Court that you did not object to the Leadership Principle for the reasons you have stated.
FUNK: No, on the contrary, the Leadership Principle was absolutely necessary.
DR.SAUTER: On the contrary, you considered the Leadership Principle necessary for the period of emergency that then obtained. Now, I would be interested in knowing: There were other points of view, of course, also represented in the Party program which worked out unfavorably later on and have, in the course of this Trial, been used extensively against the defendants. I point out one example, for instance, the slogan of "Lebensraum"; you have heard it again and again during this Trial. The Defendant Dr. Schacht dealt with this problem also. Perhaps you can give us briefly your own position on this problem and on this question?
FUNK: The problem of living (Lebensproblem) is no slogan; and the problem of living was really a problem for the German people at that time. By "Lebensproblem"...
DR.SAUTER: You mean "Lebensraum"?
FUNK: . . . or "Lebensraum"-I did not mean the conquest of foreign countries at that time; the thought of war was just as strange to me as it was probably to most other Germans. By "Lebensraum" I meant the opening up of the world for the vital interests of Germany, that is, the participation of the German people in the profitable utilization of the world's goods of which there was a superabundance. Whether that was to be done by colonies, or concessions, or international trade agreements, I did not trouble to find out at that time. The expansion of Germany in the world economy before the first World War was the decisive factor which determined me to become an economic journalist. The participation of Germany in the Rumanian petroleum industry, the concession of the Bagdad Railway, the growing German influence in South America, in China, generally in the Far East-all this inspired me very much. At that time already I became acquainted with such men as Franz Gunther of the Discount Bank, Arthur Von Gwinner of the Deutsche Bank, Karl Helferich, the big Hamburg importer, Witthoft, and many other German economic pioneers, and started on my profession with all the enthusiasm of the young journalist. "Lebensraum" was thus for me at that time the fulfilling of these economic claims, that is, Germany's participation in the world's goods and the abolition of the restraints which hemmed us in on all sides. It was sheer nonsense that Germany on her part should have to pay reparations and debts while the creditor nations on their part refused to accept payment in the only form possible, that is, payment in goods and products, That period marked the beginning of a great wave of protective tariffs in the world. I recall the American economic policy at that time; I recall the Ottawa agreements, and this mistaken economic policy led to a world economic crisis in 1929 and 1930 by which Germany also was badly hit.