The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)
Nuremberg, war crimes, crimes against humanity

The Trial of German Major War Criminals

Sitting at Nuremberg, Germany
9th August to 21st August 1946

Two Hundred and Fifth Day: Friday, 16th August, 1946
(Part 8 of 10)

[Page 242]


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.

[ Previous | Index | Next ]

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

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.