dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
SCHACHT: How can you say such a thing? I certainly did not now that Hitler would use the army in order to threaten other nations.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: After he had done it, you turned in and took over the Czech bank, did you not?
SCHACHT: Of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes. You followed to clean up economically just so far as Hitler got the territory, did you not?
SCHACHT: But I beg your pardon. He did not take it with violence at all. The Allies presented him with the country. The whole thing was settled peacefully.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we have your testimony on the part the Wehrmacht played in it and what part you played in the Wehrmacht.
SCHACHT: Yes, I have never denied that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: No. What I mean is this, referring to your interrogation of 17 October (Exhibit US-616): "Question: 'Now, after the Sudetenland was taken over by the Munich agreement, did you, as the President of the Reichsbank, do anything about the Sudeten territory?' "Answer: 'I think we took over the affiliations of the Czech Bank of Issue.' "Question: 'And you also arranged for the currency conversion, did you not?' "Answer: 'Yes.' " That is what you did after this wrong and reprehensible act had been committed by Hitler, did you not?
SCHACHT: It is no "wrong and reprehensible" act "committed" by Hitler, but Hitler received the Sudeten German territory by way of treaty and, of course, the currency and the institute which directed financing had to be amalgamated with this field in Germany. There can be no talk of injustice. I cannot believe that the Allies have put their signature to a piece of injustice.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: So you think that everything up to Munich was all right?
SCHACHT: No. I am certainly of a different opinion. There was much injustice.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Were you in this Court when Goering testified to his threat to bomb Prague-"the beautiful city of Prague" ?
SCHACHT: Thanks to your invitation, I was here.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes. I suppose you approved that use of the force which you had created in the Wehrmacht?
SCHACHT: Disapproved; disapproved under all circumstances.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You did not think that was right dealing, then?
SCHACHT: No, no, that was an atrocious thing.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we have found something we agree on, Doctor. You knew of the invasion of Poland?
SCHACHT: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You regarded it as an unqualified act of aggression on Hitler's part, did you not?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: The same was true of the invasion of Luxembourg, was it not?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And of Holland?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And of Denmark?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: And of Norway?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: And of Yugoslavia?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: And of Russia?
SCHACHT: Absolutely, sir, and you have left out Norway and Belgium.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes, well, I got to the end of my paper. The entire course was a course of aggression?
SCHACHT: Absolutely to be condemned.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And the success of that aggression at every step was due to the Wehrmacht which you had so much to do with creating?
SCHACHT: Unfortunately.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I intend to take up another subject and perhaps it would be . . . it is almost recess time.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
MARSHAL (Colonel Charles W. Mays): If it please the Tribunal, the report is made that Defendant Von Neurath is absent.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Dr. Schacht, in your direct testimony you made reference to a film, which was taken and exhibited in Germany for propaganda purposes, of your demeanor on the occasion of Hitler's return after the fall of France.
SCHACHT: May I correct that? Not I, but my counsel, spoke of this film; and it was not mentioned that it was used for propaganda purposes. My counsel merely said that it had been run in a newsreel, so it probably was shown for about one week.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask to exhibit that film to the Tribunal. It is a very brief film, and the movement in it is very rapid. There is very little of translation involved in it, but the speed of it is such that for myself I had to see it twice in order to really see what it is.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to put it on now?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I would like to put it on now. It will take only a moment, and Dr. Schacht should be placed where he can see it for I want to ask him some questions and [Turning to the defendants] particularly I may ask you to identify the persons in it. I will ask, if I may, to have it shown twice, so that after all has been seen you can once more see it.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly. [Moving pictures were then shown.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that I, in mentioning this exhibit which I wish to offer in evidence, spoke of it as a "propaganda film." That was not the language of Dr. Dix. Dr. Dix described it as a "weekly newsreel" and as a "weekly film." [Turning to the defendant.] While our memory is fresh about that, will you tell the Court as many of the defendants as you recognized present in that picture?
SCHACHT: In glancing at it quickly I could not see exactly who was there. However, I should assume that almost all were present-I say that from memory, not from the film-either in Hitler's retinue or among those who received him.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: While you were still President of the Reichsbank and after the action in taking over the Czechoslovakian Bank you made a speech, did you not, on 29 November 1938?
SCHACHT: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It is Document EC-611, Exhibit USA622. I am advised that the film became Exhibit USA-835, and before I pass from it I would like to offer the statement as to the personality of Hermann Goering, which is Document 3936-PS, as Exhibit USA-836. [Turning to the defendant.] In this speech of 29 November 1938, Dr. Schacht, if I am correctly informed-and b y the way, it was a public speech was it not?
SCHACHT: Inasmuch as it was made before the German Academy. It was entirely public, and if it passed the censorship it certainly was also mentioned in the papers. It was public; anyone could hear it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You used this language, did you not?: "It is possible that no bank of issue in peace times has carried on such a daring credit policy as has the Reichsbank since the seizure of power by National Socialism. With the aid of this credit policy, however, Germany has created an armament second to none, and this armament in turn has made possible our political successes." (Document EC-611) Is that correct?
SCHACET: That is absolutely correct, and-would you please mind letting me talk in the future? That is correct and I was very much surprised that it was necessary to do this in order to create justice in the world.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The taking over of Czechoslovakia representing your idea of justice?
SCHACHT: I have already told you that Germany did not "take over Czechoslovakia," but that it was indeed presented to Germany by the Allies on a silver platter.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Are you now saying that that was an act of justice, or are you condemning it? I cannot get your position, Doctor. Just tell us, were you for it? Are you today for it, or against it?
SCHACHT: Against what? Will you please tell me against what and for what?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Against the taking over of the Sudetenland by the method by which it was done.
SCHACHT: I cannot answer your question for the reason that, as I said, it was no "taking over," but was a present. If someone gives me a present, such as this, I accept it gratefully.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Even though it does not belong to them to give?
SCHACHT: Well, that I must naturally leave up to the donor.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And although it was taken at the point of a gun, you still would accept the gift?
SCHACHT: No, it was not taken "at the point of a gun."
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will pass on to your speech. Did you say also: "Instead of a weak and vacillating government a single, purposeful, energetic personality is ruling today. That is the great miracle which has happened in Germany and which has had its effect in all fields of life and not last in that of economy and finance. There is no German financial miracle. There is only the miracle of the reawakening of German national consciousness and German discipline, and we owe this miracle to our Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler." (DocumentEC-611) Did you say that?
SCHACHT: Certainly. That was what I was so greatly astonished at.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: As Minister without Portfolio, what did your Ministry consist of?
SCHACHT: Nothing.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: What employees did you have?
SCHACHT: One female secretary.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What space did you occupy?
SCHACHT: Two or three rooms in my own apartment which I had furnished as office rooms.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: So the government did not even furnish you an office?
SCHACHT: Yes, they paid me a rental for those rooms.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Oh, and whom did you meet with as Minister without Portfolio?
SCHACHT: I do not understand. Whom I met with?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, did you have any meetings? Did you have any official meetings to attend?
SCHACHT: I have stated here repeatedly that, after my retirement from the Reichsbank, I never had a single meeting or conference, official or otherwise.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did anybody report to you, or did you report to anybody?
SCHACHT: No, no one reported to me, nor did I report to anyone else.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then I take it that you had no duties whatever in this position?
SCHACHT: Absolutely correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you were Minister without Portfolio, however, at the time that Hitler came back from France, and you attended the reception for him at the railway station? And vent to the Reichstag to hear his speech?
SCHACHT: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, notwithstanding your removal as President of the Reichsbank, the government continued to pay you your full salary until the end of 1942, did it not?
SCHACHT: I stated yesterday that that is not correct. I received my salary from the Reichsbank, which was due to me by contract, but a minister's salary was not paid to me. I believe that as Minister I received certain allowances to cover expenses, I cannot say that at the moment; but I did not receive a salary as a Minister.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I will return to your interrogation of 9 October 1945 and ask you whether you gave these answers to these questions on that interrogation: "Question: 'What salary did you receive as Minister without Portfolio?' "Answer: 'I could not tell you exactly. I think it was some 24,000 marks, or 20,000 marks. I cannot tell you exactly, but it was accounted on the salary and afterward on the pension which I got from the Reichsbank, so I was not paid twice. I was not paid twice.' "Question: 'In other words, the salary that you received as Minister-without Portfolio during the period you were also President of the Reichsbank was deducted from the Reichsbank?' "Answer: 'Yes.' "Question: 'However, after you severed your connection with the Reichsbank in January 1939, did you then receive the whole salary?' "Answer: 'I got the whole salary because my contract ran until the end of June 1942, I think.' "Question: 'So you received a full salary until the end of June 1942?' "Answer: 'Full salary and no extra salary, but from the 1st of July 1942 I got my pension from the Reichsbank, and again the salary of the Ministry was deducted from that, or vice versa. What was higher, I do not know; I got a pension of about 30,000 marks from the Reichsbank.'" And on 11 July 1945, at Ruskin, you were questioned and gave answers as follows: "Question: 'What was the date of your contract?' "Answer: 'From 8 March 1939, 1940, 1941, 1942. Four years. Four years' contract.' "Question: 'You were really then given a four-year appointment?' "Answer: 'That is what I told you. After 1942 I got a pension from the Reichsbank.' "Question: 'What was the amount of your salary and all other income from the Reichsbank?' "Answer: 'All the income from the Reichsbank, including my fees for representation, amounted to 60,000 marks a year, and the pension is 24,000. You see, I had a short contract but a high pension. As Reich Minister without Portfolio, I had another, I think also 20,000 or 24,000 marks.' " Now, is that correct?
SCHACHT: The salaries are stated on paper and are correctly cited here and I have indeed claimed that I was paid by one source only. I was asked, "What salary did you receive as Reich Minister?" I stated the amount, but I did not receive it, as it was merely deducted from my Reichsbank salary. And the pension, as I see here, is quoted wrongly in one case. I believe I had only 24,000 marks' pension, while it says here somewhere that it was 30,000 marks. In my own money affairs I am somewhat less exact than in my official money affairs. However, I was paid only once, and that is mainly by the Reichsbank up to-and that also has not been stated here correctly. It was not the end of 1942, but the end of June 1942, that my contract expired. Then the pension began and it too was paid only once. How those two, that is, the Ministry and Reichsbank, arranged it with each other is unknown to me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, you were entitled to a salary and a pension both, and one was offset against the other; is that what you mean? And that arrangement continued as long as you were a part of the regime?
SCHACHT: It is still in effect today. It has nothing to do with the regime. I hope that I shall still receive my pension; how else should I pay my expenses?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, they may not be very heavy, Doctor. When General Beck resigned, he asked you to resign, did he not?
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute; it is quite unnecessary for anyone present in Court to show his amusement by laughter.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Were you asked to resign when General Beck resigned?
SCHACHT: No, he did not say that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Have you in mind the testimony given by Gisevius here?
SCHACHT: Yes. It was a mistake on the part of Gisevius.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Oh, well, in any event, when General Beck resigned, it was called sharply to your attention?
SCHACHT: He paid me a visit and told me about it a few days before his retirement. I assume that was about the end of August or the beginning of September of 1938.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you say that no proposal was made to you at that time that you should resign along with Beck?
SCHACHT: No, nothing was said about that. Beck saw me in my room; he did not mention anything of this sort, and it was not discussed by us.
MR.JUSTICE JACKSON: Did it ever occur to you that resignation would be the appropriate way of expressing your protest against these things which you now say you disapprove?
SCHACHT: No, I do not at all believe that a resignation would have been the means to achieve that which had to be done, and I also regretted it very much that Beck retired. That which happened, Mr. Justice, was caused by an entirely false policy-a policy that partly was forced upon us, and partly, I am sorry to say, was not handled properly by us. In February, Neurath was dismissed. In the fall Beck stepped out; in January 1939 I was dismissed. One after the other was gotten rid of. If it had been possible for our group-if I too may now speak of a group-to carry out a common action, as we hoped for and expected, then that would have been an excellent thing. However, these individual retirements served no purpose whatsoever; at least, they had no success.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You felt that Beck should have stayed at his post and been disloyal to the head of the State?
SCHACHT: Absolutely.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And, in all events, you continued in every public way throughout the period, until the fall of France, to hold yourself out as a part of the government and a part of the regime, did you not?
SCHACHT: Well, I never considered myself a part of the regime exactly, because I was against it. But, of course, ever since the fall of 1938 I worked towards my own retirement, as soon as I saw that Hitler did not stop the rearmament but continued it, and when I became aware that I was powerless to act against it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, when did you start working towards your own retirement?
SCHACHT: Pardon me; I did not understand-to work towards what?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: When did you start working towards your own retirement from office.
SCHACHT: After Munich and after we realized that we could no longer expect disarmament or a stopping of rearmament by Hitler and that we could not prevent a continuation of the rearmament; so, within the circles of the Reichsbank Directorate, we began to discuss this question and to realize that we could not follow the further course of rearmament. That was the last quarter of 1938.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And all of these events of which you disapproved never were of sufficient consequence to cause you to resign and withhold a further use of your name from this regime?
SCHACHT: Until then I had still hoped that I could bring about a change for the better; consequently I accepted all the disadvantages entailed with my remaining in office, even facing the danger that some day I might be judged, as I am today.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You continued to allow your name to be used at home and abroad despite your disapproval, as you say, of the invasion of Poland?
SCHACHT: I never was asked for my permission, and I never gave that permission.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You knew perfectly well, did you not, that your name meant a great deal to this group at any time and that you were one of the only men in this group who had any standing abroad?
SCHACHT: The first part of your statement I already accepted yesterday from you as a compliment. The second part, I believe, is not correct. I believe that several other members of the regime also had a "standing" in foreign countries, some of whom are sitting with me here in the prisoners' dock.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Any foreign observer, who read affairs in Germany, would have obtained the understanding that you were supporting the regime continuously until you were deprived of the office of Minister without Portfolio, would they not?
SCHACHT: That is absolutely incorrect. As I have stated repeatedly yesterday and also during my direct examination, I was always referred to in foreign broadcasts as a man who was an opponent of this system, and all my numerous friends and acquaintances in foreign countries knew that I was against this system and worked against it. And if any journalist can be mentioned to me today who did not know this, then he does not know his business.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Oh, do you refer to the letter which you wrote to the New York banker Leon...?
SCHACHT: Leon Fraser.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, at the time you sent that letter to Switzerland, there was a diplomatic representative of the United States in Berlin, was there not?
SCHACHT: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you knew he had a pouch communication at least once a week and usually once a day with Washington?
SCHACHT: Yes, I did not know it, but I assumed it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And, if you wanted to communicate with the Government of the United States or with an official of the United States, you might have communicated through the regular channels?
SCHACHT: I did not desire to communicate with the American Government or with an American official. I merely desired to re-establish my connection with a friend who had invited me in January to come to the United States, and I made reference to this previous correspondence between him and me in January.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That disposes of the Fraser matter then. Now, Dr. Schacht, while you were Minister without Portfolio, aggressive wars were instituted, according to your testimony, against Poland, against Denmark and Norway in April of 1940, against Holland and Belgium in May of 1940; in June there was the French armistice and surrender; in September of 1940 there was the German-Japanese-Italian-Tripartite Pact; in April of 1941 there was an attack on Yugoslavia and Greece, which you say was aggressive; in June of 1941 there was the invasion of Soviet Russia, which you say was aggressive; on 7 December 1941 Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, and after the attack declared war on the United States; on 8 December 1941 the United States declared war on Japan, but not on Germany; on 11 December 1941, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States; and all of these things happened in the foreign field and you kept your position as Minister without Portfolio under the Hitler Government, did you not?
SCHACHT: Mr. Justice . . .
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you not and is that not a fact?
SCHACHT: Yes, and I wish to add something to this. From dozens of witnesses who have testified here, and from myself, you have heard again and again that it was impossible unilaterally to retire from this office because, if I was put in as a minister by the head of a government, I could also be retired only with his signature. You have also been told that at various times I attempted to rid myself of this ministerial office. Besides the witnesses' testimony from countless others, including Americans, to the effect that it was well known that Hitler did not permit anyone to retire from office without his permission. And now you charge me with having remained. I did not remain for my pleasure, but I remained because I could not have retired from the Ministry without making a big row. And almost constantly, I should say, I tried to have this row until finally in January 1943 I succeeded; and I was able to disappear from office, not without danger to my life. MR. JUSTICE
JACKSON: Well, I will deal with your explanation later. I am now getting the facts. You did not have an open break with Hitler, so that you were not entirely out of office until after the German offensive broke down in Russia and the German armies were in retreat and until after the Allies had landed in Africa, did you?
SCHACHT: The letter by which I brought about the last successful row is dated 30 November 1942. The row and its success dates from 21 January 1943, because Hitler and Goering and whoever else participated in discussing it, needed 7 weeks to make up their minds about the consequence of my letter.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then by your letter it plainly shows that you thought the ship was sinking, was it not; that means that the war was lost?
SCHACHT: My oral and written declarations from former times have already shown this. I have spoken here also about this. I have testified on the letter to Ribbentrop and Funk; I have presented a number of facts here which prove that I never believed in the possibility of a German victory. And my disappearance from office has nothing whatsoever to do with all these questions.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, meanwhile, while you were remaining as Minister without Portfolio because you thought it might be dangerous to resign, you were encouraging the generals in the army to commit treason against the head of the State, were you not?
SCHACHT: Yes, and I should like now to make an additional statement to this. It was not because of threatening danger to my life that I could not resign earlier. For I was not afraid of endangering my life because I was used to that ever since 1937, having constantly been exposed to the arbitrariness of the Party and its heads. Your question as to whether I tried to turn a number of generals to high treason, I answer in the affirmative.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you also tried to get assassins to assassinate Hitler, did you not?
SCHACHT: In 1938 when I made my first attempt, I was not thinking as yet of an assassination of Hitler. However, I must admit that later I said if it could not be done any other way, we would have to kill the man, if possible.