Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-16/tgmwc-16-156.06
Last-Modified: 2000/06/15

DR. KUBUSCHOK (Continued):

Then, on Page 48, just a little beyond the centre of the page:

  "But once a revolution has been completed, the government
  only represents the people as a whole and is never the
  champion of individual groups."

Then, a little further down, about ten lines from the
bottom:

  "It is not permissible, therefore, to dismiss the
  intellect with the catchword of 'intellectualism.'
  Deficient or primitive intellects do not justify us in
  waging war against intellectualism. And when we complain
  frequently today about those of us who are 150 per cent
  Nazis, then we mean those people who would like to deny
  the right of existence to scientists of world fame just
  because they are not Party members."

Then, on the first line of the next page - Page 49 - it
says:

  "Nor should the objection be made that intellectuals lack
  the vitality necessary for leaders of a people. True
  spirit is so vital that it sacrifices itself for its
  conviction. The mistaking of brutality for vitality would
  reveal a worship of force which would be dangerous to a
  people."

In the next paragraph he speaks of equality before the law.
I read the last few lines:

  "They oppose equality before the law, which they
  criticise as liberal degeneration, whereas in reality it
  is the prerequisite for any fair judgement. These people
  destroy that pillar of the State which always - and not
  only in liberal times - was called justice. Their attacks
  are directed against the security and freedom of the
  private sphere of life which the German has won through
  centuries of hardest struggle."

In the next paragraph he speaks against Byzantinism; the
second sentence reads:

  "Great men are not made by propaganda, but rather grow
  through their deeds and are recognized by history. Even
  Byzantinism cannot make us believe that these laws do not
  exist."

He deals with education in the next paragraph, and I should
like to begin with the second sentence:

  "But we must have no illusions regarding the biological
  and psychological limits of education. Coercion, too,
  ends at the will to self-expression of the true
  personality. Reactions to coercion are dangerous. As an
  old soldier I know that the most rigid discipline must be
  balanced by certain liberties. Even the good soldier who
  submitted willingly to unconditional authority counted
  his days of service, because the need for freedom is
  rooted in human nature. The application of military
  discipline to the whole life of a people must remain
  within limits compatible with human nature."

Then on the next page - Page 50 - I should like to read the
second sentence of the last paragraph:

                                                  [Page 296]

  "The movement must come to a standstill some time; a
  solid social structure must eventually come into
  existence which is held together by an impartial
  administration of justice and by an undisputed
  governmental power. Nothing can be achieved by means of
  everlasting dynamics. Germany must not drift to an
  unknown destination."

As my last quotation, I shall read the first paragraph on
the following page:

  "The government is well informed on all the
  self-interest, lack of character, want of truth,
  unchivalrous conduct and arrogance spreading out under
  cover of the German revolution. It is also not deceived
  as to the fact that the rich store of confidence bestowed
  upon it by the German people is threatened. If we want a
  close connection with and a close association among the
  people, we must not underestimate the good sense of the
  people; we must return their confidence and not try to
  hold them everlastingly in tutelage. The German people
  know that their situation is serious, they feel the
  economic distress; they are perfectly aware of the
  deficiencies of many laws born of emergency; they have a
  keen antipathy to violence and injustice; they smile at
  clumsy attempts to deceive them by false optimism.
  
  No organization and no propaganda, however good, will in
  the long run be able to preserve confidence. I therefore
  view the wave of propaganda against the so-called foolish
  critics from a different angle to that of the
  propagandists. Confidence and readiness to co-operate
  cannot be won by provocation, especially of youth, nor by
  threats against helpless segments of the people, but only
  by discussion with the people and having trust on both
  sides. The people know what great sacrifices are expected
  from them. They will bear them and follow the Fuehrer in
  unflinching loyalty, if they are allowed to have their
  part in the planning and in the work, if every word of
  criticism is not taken for ill-will, and if despairing
  patriots are not branded as enemies of the State."

BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:

Q. Witness, what were the consequences of the Marburg
speech?

A. This speech was banned at the instigation of Propaganda
Minister Goebbels. Only one or two papers were able to
publish the contents, but that sufficed to attract attention
to it both at home and abroad. When I heard of the ban
placed on it by the Propaganda Minister, I went to the Reich
Chancellor and tendered my resignation. I told him:

  "It is an impossible situation for the Vice-Chancellor of
  your Government to be forbidden to open his mouth. There
  is nothing for it but to take my leave."

However, Hitler said:

  "That is a blunder on the part of the Propaganda
  Minister; I shall speak to him and have him rescind this
  decree."

In that way he put me off for several days. Today I know
that even at that time he lied to me because my co-defendant
Funk has stated, that he was instructed by Hitler to go to
Hindenburg and tell Hindenburg that the Vice-Chancellor had
uttered sentiments contrary to the policy of the cabinet and
of Hitler, and must be dismissed. If the witness Gisevius
has testified here on this matter to the effect that Herr
von Papen was silent and that he should at least have
mobilised the diplomats, then I should like to point out
that Mr. Dodd in his diary makes it very clear that the
world - the outside world - was well informed of this last
appeal of mine.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: I should like to refer to the last remark
made by the witness, which may be found in Document 17,
Pages 71 and 72, in Ambassador Dodd's diary.

I beg your pardon, it is on Pages 69 and 70 of the English
text. I quote from the second paragraph, the first line:

  "There is great excitement everywhere in Germany."

He had previously mentioned the Marburg speech.

                                                  [Page 297]


  "All the older and more educated Germans are highly
  delighted."

Then, under the date of 21st June, he reports that the
speech was cabled to the New York Times, and that the papers
in London and Paris were featuring the "von Papen episode,"
as he calls the Marburg speech. I refer in this connection
to the beginning of Page 72, Page 70 in the English text.

As regards the government's measures with regard to the
Marburg speech and its propagation, I want to refer you to
Document 15, Page 66, an affidavit by Westphalen, which
shows that even possession of a copy of the speech was
sufficient to cause disciplinary action to be taken against
an official.

BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:

Q. Witness, the events of the 30th of June, 1934, took place
in the meantime. To what extent did these incidents affect
you personally?

A. On the morning of 30th June, I received a telephone call
from Herr Goering asking me to come to have a talk with him.
I went to see him, and he told me that a revolution had
broken out in the Reich - an SA revolution - that Hitler had
gone to Munich to put down this uprising there, and that he,
Goering was charged with restoring law and order in Berlin.
Herr Goering asked me, in the interests of my own safety, as
he said, to return to my apartment and stay there. I
protested quite vehemently against this demand, but Herr
Goering insisted. On my way back to my apartment, I went
first to my office in the Vice-Chancellery. On arriving
there, I found my office occupied by the SS, and I was
permitted only to enter my own room and get my files. I then
went home, where I found a large number of SS. The telephone
was disconnected; the radio was disconnected; and I was
completely cut off from the outside world for three whole
days.

Q. What measures were taken against your staff?

A. I naturally did not hear about the measures taken against
my staff until 3rd July, after I had regained my freedom. I
learned that my Press adviser, Herr von Bose, had been shot
in his office. I further learned that two of my male
secretaries, Herr von Tschirschky and another gentleman, had
been taken to a concentration camp and, a few days later, I
learned of the death of my friend and colleague - a private
colleague of mine - Herr Edgar Jung.

Q. Did you try to inform the Reich President?

A. I finally succeeded, on the third day of my arrest, in
contacting Goering by telephone. I demanded to be set free
at once. Herr Goering apologised and said that it was due to
a mistake that I had been kept under arrest for this long
period of time. I then went immediately to the Reich
Chancellery. There I met Hitler, who was about to start a
cabinet session. I asked him to step into the next room so
that I could speak to him and I refused to comply with his
request that I should attend the cabinet meeting. I said to
him:

  "What has happened here to me, a member of your
  government, is so incredible and fantastic that there is
  only one reply, a repetition of my request to resign -
  and at once."

Herr Hitler tried to persuade me to remain. He said:

  "I will explain to you in the cabinet and later in the
  Reichstag how everything happened, and why it happened."

I said to him:

  "Herr Hitler, there is no explanation and no excuse for
  this incident. I demand that the fate of these members of
  my staff be made the subject of immediate investigation
  and that the whole matter be cleared up."

I demanded that the news of my resignation be published
immediately.

When he saw that I could not be persuaded to remain, Herr
Hitler told me that he could not announce my resignation
publicly at the moment because the agitation among the
German people was too great, but would do so in three or
four weeks' time.

When I left Hitler, I tried personally, and through one of
my secretaries, to get in touch with Hindenburg, but that
attempt failed. My secretary found out - I

                                                  [Page 298]

must add that Herr von Hindenburg was then in East Prussia -
my secretary, who had gone to East Prussia, found that it
was impossible to reach Hindenburg. He was completely cut
off. My own telephone calls did not get through.

I went to my friend General von Fritsch, the Chief of the
Wehrmacht, and said to him:

  "Why does not the Wehrmacht intervene? The Wehrmacht is
  the only factor for maintaining order that we still have
  in the country. When General von Schleicher and his wife
  were murdered, as well as other officers, it would, in my
  opinion, have been quite proper for the Wehrmacht itself
  to try to restore order in this situation."

Herr von Fritsch said to me:

  "I can take action only when I have Field Marshal von
  Hindenburg's order to do so in my hands."

But Hindenburg was not accessible to us. He had obviously
been informed by the other side of the complete legality of
the events which had taken place, and which Hitler declared
in the Reichstag to be in conformity with the law. I did not
attend that session of the Reichstag, either, as the witness
Gisevius testified; and during the time that elapsed between
30th June and my appointment to Austria, I did not
participate in a single act carried out by the government.

I should like to add that at the same time I asked the Reich
Chancellor to hand over to me the body of my friend Bose. We
knew that the Gestapo had cremated the bodies of the others.
I succeeded -

THE PRESIDENT: I believe it would be a good time to recess
now.

(A recess was taken.)

THE MARSHAL: May it please the Tribunal, the defendant Hess
is not present in this session.

BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:

Q. Will you please go on. You were just answering the last
question.

A. I was only going to finish the question by saying that I
succeeded in having the mortal remains of my friend Bose
properly buried and that on that occasion, at his grave, I
made a speech emphasizing that one day justice, the absence
of which had resulted in his murder, would be
re-established.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: In this connection I draw your attention to
Document 14, Pages 62 and 63, an affidavit by Maria Rose,
who for years was the private secretary of the witness. On
Page 63 she refers to Bose's funeral service.

I further refer to Document, 19, Pages 77 and 78, affidavit
by Schaffgotsch, who devotes particular attention to the
witness's vain attempts to reach Hindenburg in Neudeck.

BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:

Q. Witness, you were offered at that time the post of
Ambassador to the Vatican. Will you please tell us the exact
circumstances?

A. It is true that Hitler tried to keep me attached to his
staff, and that about a week after the incidents I have
described he sent State Secretary Lammers to ask me if I was
prepared to accept the post of Ambassador to the Vatican. Of
course I refused this unreasonable request, which I mention
here only because a few weeks later I accepted the Vienna
post for a particular reason. To prove that I was not
interested in obtaining a post as such, I refused this
request of Hitler most bluntly at the time.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: I refer you to Document 18, Pages 75 and 76
of the Document Book; an affidavit by Martha von Papen, the
wife of the witness, who describes Lammers' visit. I further
refer -

THE PRESIDENT: My Document Book appears to go from 74 to 79.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: That is quite true; they are in different
languages. One is in German and one is in French, Pages 75
and 76.

                                                  [Page 299]

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but I have not got 75, 76, 77, or 78.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: Are they missing? I shall supplement them,
Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: In the English Document Book it is on Pages
73 and 74.

With regard to the subject with which the witness has been
dealing, namely, non-participation in the Reichstag meeting
of 13th July, I refer to Document 21, Page 79, an extract
from the Volkischer Beobachter, regarding the Reichstag
meeting.

The names of the ministers present are listed there. The
name of the witness von Papen does not appear.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor