Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-21/tgmwc-21-205.08
Last-Modified: 2000/12/04

DR. SERVATIUS CONTINUES:

The next document, No. 35, is an order of 1937. It says that
investigations and inquiries are in no way the task of the
Party. These are up to the State agencies which were created
to discover and eliminate these dangers.

In Document No. 36, on Page 37, this is stressed once more.
It is a document concerning the collaboration of Party
offices with the Gestapo. It says:

  "I prohibit all Party offices from making inquiries and
  interrogations in cases which are being dealt with by the
  Gestapo."

The next document, No. 37, shows that the "political
leader's" duty to report any incidents was not greater than
that of any civil servant. The German Civil Service law is
quoted here. Paragraph 3 says of the official:

  "All circumstances which may endanger the interests of
  the Reich or of the NSDAP, even if not discovered in the
  course of his official duties, should be brought by him
  to the attention of his superior in office."

Document No. 38 is on Page 39. It concerns the expert
agencies in the political staffs. It is a circular from the
official book Verfuegungen, Anordnungen and Bekanntgaben
(Orders, Regulations and Notices) Volume I. This deals with
reports to be made by experts on their activities. The
political situation report is to be rendered only by the
Hoheitstrager. A difference is made between the two kinds. I
am submitting it in defence of the experts in the political
staffs.

The following documents concern the common plan against
peace.

Document No. 39, on Page 41, is an excerpt from the
commentary on the Party programme by Gottfried Feder, which
is an authoritative commentary, of the year 1934. It says:

  "We declare, however, that we do not contemplate
  compelling by violence the Anschluss reunion of Germans
  living outside Germany under Danish, Polish, Czech,
  Italian or French dominion."

I will omit a sentence.

  "That demand, which has just been mentioned, thereby
  lacks any imperialistic tendency."

Document No. 40 is on gage 42. It is an excerpt from Journal
of Instructions of the Reich Leadership of the NSDAP and is
an announcement made by Hess in 1933:

  "In some foreign countries anti-German propaganda has
  recently made use of the untrue assertion that the NSDAP
  is contemplating the eventual annexation of parts of
  Switzerland, Holland, Belgium, Denmark, etc. Though that
  supposition is utterly ludicrous, nevertheless it is
  believed here and there. The Reich leadership, therefore,
  desires to state that no serious-minded person in Germany
  thinks of even touching the independence of other
  States."

Document No. 41 is on Page 43. Again, this is another order
of Hess, issued one year later, in October, 1934. It says
that there are other peoples and nations with whom the
Germans and their Fuehrer want to live together in peace and
mutual respect, and that they do not want any disagreement
with anybody.

In August, 1935, another year later, another order was
issued by Hess to the Party; that is Document No. 42. It
refers to Hitler's principal speeches in which he repeatedly
stresses his wish for a peaceful settlement of all unsettled
questions. Statements made in foreign countries are declared
to be malicious inventions.

                                                  [Page 243]

The next document, No. 43, is again by Hess, in January,
1937. It refers to armaments, the purpose of which was to
protect Germany against arbitrary actions coming from
abroad.

I will come to another subject, which is the question of
secrecy regulations, which militates against the existence
of a common plan. First of all, the well-known Secrecy
Order, issued to the Wehrmacht, also applies to the Party,
that no office and no officer may have more knowledge of any
matter than is absolutely necessary.

In Document No. 45 this order is extended to every agency,
every official, every clerk, and every worker.

Document No. 46 deals with the question of the Press. It
concerns the Secrecy Regulations to the extent that it says
important articles must be discussed with the Reich Press
Agency before publication.

Document No. 47 is on Page 49. This is an order that
discussions on the military situation are prohibited, and a
case is quoted of a Blockleiter disclosing his most
important instructions.

Document No. 48 is on Page 50. This document deals with the
law concerning the interrogation of members of the NSDAP and
its formations. Secrecy is again secured here by the
Official Secrets Order and interrogations were only to be
made when specially authorized and carried out only by an
Unterfuehrer of the Party. Document No. 48, on Page 51, is a
regulation for the execution of this law. It states who is
considered an Unterleiter (subleader) in the eyes of the
Party, and again I point out that the last link in the chain
of command is the Ortsgruppenleiter; Block- and Zellenleiter
are again omitted, not even receiving the designation of
"Unterleiter" (subleader).

Document 49 is on Page 53. This is confidential information
of the Party, dated 9th October, 1942. "Preparatory Measures
for the Final Solution of the Jewish Question in Europe.
Rumours Concerning Conditions of the Jews in the East." It
says as follows:

  "In order to be able to oppose the formation of rumours
  concerning the Jews, which are often of a wilfully
  tendentious nature, the following statements on the
  present state of affairs are made: "

On the next page a statement is made of what is intended.
First, to force the Jews out of the individual fields of
activity of the German people. Second, to endeavour to expel
the enemy from the Reich territory.

The next document is No. 50. It deals with the idea of the
common plan. Here the well-known Fuehrer principle is shown

LT.-COLONEL GRIFFITH-JONES: I hesitate to interrupt, but
before Dr. Servatius leaves that last document, No. 49, on
Page 53, it is a document to which the prosecution attaches
considerable importance. And at Page 54 it will be seen half-
way down in paragraph 2 that the elimination of the Jews is
no longer possible by emigration. I particularly draw the
attention of the Tribunal to the last sentence on the
following page, which is:

  "It is in the nature of the matter that these partly very
  difficult problems will, in the interest of the final
  protection of our people, only be solved with ruthless
  severity."

My Lord, on the first page of that document it will be seen
under the "Remarks" column, "Open only for G. and K." Dr.
Servatius will correct me if I am wrong, but I presume that
means for Gau and Kreis.

DR. SERVATIUS: I assume that the note "Open only for G. and
K." means what the Prosecutor has said, Gau and Kreis, but
now I should like to read the whole document, since only
then can the complete sense be shown. The writer's intention
is to conceal the actual situation, and if it is said that
there is no longer any possibility for emigration, the
document shows that a settlement area in the East is to be
created but not, as one might conclude, that extermination
is the aim.

                                                  [Page 244]

When it says: "Ruthless measures will be taken, in this we
will proceed with ruthless severity," that was the customary
expression found in Party writings, and this measure of
removal was to be carried out with ruthless severity, for I
believe that it was really ruthless to remove these people
even without knowing that they were to be exterminated. I do
not believe that I need read the whole document now, but I
think that is the correct interpretation of the meaning.

Document No. 50, on Page 56, shows that in foreign policy,
in particular, the Fuehrer was entirely in charge; that even
measures which struck every German as peculiar, as for
instance the giving up of Southern Tyrol, were agreed to as
no objection was permissible.

Document No. 51, on Page 57, is to the same effect. It is a
circular to the Party issued by the Party Chancellery in
November, 1942. It states that there can be "only one
binding Party opinion" and refers to an earlier decree.
Document No. 52, on Page 58, is to be understood in the same
sense. It states that the Hoheitstrager are to act only in
accordance with the directives received from the Fuehrer.

Document No. 53, on Page 60, deals with the position of
Bormann. It is stated here and I quote:

  "For years the Fuehrer has customarily empowered
  Reichsleiter Martin Bormann currently with special
  missions of the most varied kinds which do not come into
  the usual field of Reichsleiter Martin Bormann's
  activities in his capacity as Chief of the Party
  Chancellery but which concern affairs outside the Party's
  range in regard to instructions and opinions of the
  Fuehrer which have to be transmitted in the Fuehrer's
  name to various leading personalities of the State and
  governmental agencies."

This is of significance because Bormann decided very
essential things in his capacity as Secretary of the
Fuehrer, for example, the subject of euthanasia.

Document No. 54, on Page 62, gives general points of view on
political leadership as to avoidance of differences of
opinion among the leading Party members. A formation of
cliques is thus practically made impossible.

The next document, No. 55, on Page 64, deals with the
organizations abroad and explains the following document,
No. 56, wherein the Hoheitstrager are classified but in a
somewhat different way.Since they do not have any territory
of their own they are only given the rank of Gauleiter or
deputy Gauleiter. It is the same with the Kreisleiter,
Ortsgruppenleiter and Stutzpunktleiter.

Document No. 57, on Page 68, emphasises in this connection
the principle of "National Socialism is no export
commodity." It says that it is no one's concern to win over
other places abroad for National Socialism.

Document No. 58, on Page 69, is a circular on relations with
foreign political groups, of the year 1942. It says the
following:

  "Any communications of members of offices of the movement
  at home or abroad with political or allegedly non-
  political groups of other States is determined
  exclusively by the relation of those groups to their own
  governments with whom the German Reich entertains
  diplomatic relations. Any communication with such groups
  has to be discontinued without exception, if the groups
  do not support their official government or if they cause
  it difficulties. This holds good even if these groups
  describe themselves as National Socialist or Fascist."

Document No. 59, on Page 70, is from the
Reichsverfugungsblatt (Journal of Decrees). It is a decree
of 4th November, 1942, by Hitler. It says the following:

  "The living together of peoples demands a mutual, tactful
  consideration of their natural characteristics. The NSDAP
  and its organization, therefore, have no European or
  world-wide missionary task to fulfil."

That concludes Document Book No. 1.

                                                  [Page 245]

THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps that would be a good time to break
off.

(A recess was taken.)

THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, the Tribunal appreciates the
way in which you are dealing with these documents; but, at
the same time, are you not going over some ground which you
will have to cover in your final speech?

DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, Mr. President; but in my final speech I
shall only briefly touch upon these questions. First of all,
they have to be submitted and it has proved to be very
useful in the question -

THE PRESIDENT: So far as the formal submission or offering
of evidence is concerned, that can be done more shortly. If
you are going to deal with the substance of the documents in
your final speech, it is not necessary to take up time and
give us the substance of the documents when you offer them
in evidence. If you are going to deal adequately with it
subsequently for your own purposes in your final speech, it
means that you will do it twice over.

DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, Mr. President. The same questions will
reappear once more with the affidavits that I am going to
present. I cannot avoid at least mentioning the matters in
Court, for in my final speech I shall be very brief and
refer to them only in a few words. I did not intend to -

THE PRESIDENT: I expect you to offer the documents now in
evidence without dealing with the substance of them and then
to deal with the substance in your final speech.

DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, in my final speech, which has
been completed already, I deal with these matters very
briefly, as I assumed that I would be able to deal with the
substance now. In the beginning, I should have arranged
differently, if we were then told that the documents were to
be submitted and explained, and that we might refer to them
in the final speech. In that case my final speech would have
been constructed in a different way from the way in which I
have developed it now.

THE PRESIDENT: You will try to help the Tribunal, I am sure,
by being as short as you can.

DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, indeed.

Document Book No. 2 begins with Document No. 68 and deals
first of all, with the question of coercion in accepting an
office. First of all, there is a fundamental directive,
according to which every member of the Party is compelled to
collaborate and can be called upon.

The next document deals with the same problem, and Document
No. 62 again confirms the fact that besides his professional
activity, everyone is obliged to undertake Party tasks, and
it is significant that Party members who, without giving
solid reasons, refuse to assume Party office are thus acting
contrary to the interests of the Party and are to be
punished by the Party Courts.

The next document shows that in the State Law for the
Consolidation of State and Party this violation of duty will
be punished by the State. In paragraph 5 it says:

  "In addition to the regular service penalty, arrest and
  detention may be decreed."

This is important as here physical coercion is introduced in
the form of arrest.

The next document makes the Party Regulations into public
law. This is Document No. 63. On Page 77 the practical
conclusion is drawn that whoever acts contrary to the
Party's efforts can be expelled from the Party for lack of
interest.

The next document, No. 8, on Page 78, shows a verdict where
this actually took place when someone did not wish to accept
an office. On Page 82 the official

                                                  [Page 246]

dismissal is confirmed. There was an appeal in this case,
and the verdict was reduced from expulsion to release.

Document No. 64 contains a decision of the highest Party
Court; someone was expelled from the Party, for he
deliberately neglected his duties in order to be expelled
and to be dismissed from his post.

Of special significance is Document No. 65. It says:
"Expulsion from the Party as the greatest punishment."
Reichsleiter Buch has repeatedly emphasized that under
certain circumstances this now means the loss of all means
of existence and of all personal esteem. Everyone knows that
a definite punishment, of a certain duration, will come to
an end. But the loss of all means of existence also means
that the person expelled, and his family, can no longer get
any work or food.

In Document No. 66 conclusions are drawn for officials who
were expelled. Their appointments can be cancelled. Then
there are several documents dealing with the coercion
exerted on officials and employees by various Government
agencies. This is Document No. 67, issued by the Bavarian
Government, therefore not by the Party, saying what will
happen if a person refuses an office.

Document No. 68 is a copy of a decree by the Ministry of the
Interior; and this follows the same line. The official has
to prove where he is working and what he does for the Party,
otherwise a report has to be made.

Then Document No. 69 deals with teachers; it emanates from
the State Minister for Education and Culture, dealing with
Upper Franconia and Middle Franconia. Teachers who prove to
be disagreeable have to be mentioned by name.

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