Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal IV-A in the matter of the United States of America against Ernst von Weizsaecher, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 20 December 1947, 1000-1040, Justice William C. Christianon, presiding.
THE MARSHAL:The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal IV-A.
Military Tribunal IV-A is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal will now proceed with the arraignment of the defendants in Case No. 11 now pending before this Tribunal. Mr. Secretary-General, will you call the roll of the defendants.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Each defendant will rise and answer "present" when his name is called. He will then remain standing until the roll call has been completed.
Defendant Ernst von Weizsaecher Defendant Gustav Adolf Steengracht von Moyland Defendant Wilhelm Keppler Defendant Ernst Wilhelm Bohle Defendant Ernst Woermann Defendant Karl Ritter Defendant Otto von Erdmannsdorff Defendant Edmund Veesenmayer Defendant Hans Heinrich Lammers Defendant Wilhelm Stuckart Defendant Richard Walther Darre Defendant Otto Meissner May it pleas the Tribunal, the Marshal has informed me that Otto Meissner is sick in the hospital.
Defendant Otto Dietrich Defendant Gottlob Berger Defendant Waiter Schellenberg Defendant Lutz Schwerin von Krosigk Defendant Emil Puhl Defendant Karl Rasche Defendant Paul Koerner Defendant Paul Pleiger Defendant Hans Kehrl All the defendants will be seated.
THE PRESIDENT:Mr. Secretary-General, you will now call the defendants one by one for the arraignment.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: May it please this honorable Tribunal, the defendants are all present in the dock except Otto Meissner, sick in hospital.
Each defendant will rise when his name is called and answer the questions asked him by the Tribunal and speak directly into the microphone.
DR.KUBUSCHOK (for the defendant Rasche): Speaking in behalf of most of the defense counsel, and I have submitted a motion to the Court requesting them to regard the Indictment handed in by the Prosecution as inadequate. I have been informed that the Tribunal will -
THE PRESIDENT:Just a moment, counsel. Are you intending to speak on the merits of a motion this morning relative to the Indictment?
DR. KUBUSCHOK:The Secretary-General has informed me that the Tribunal does not wish me to discuss the motion today. I shall, therefore, confine myself to announce the motion here in Court and hand it to the Secretary--General.
In this motion, I have further stated that the individual defense counsels will deal with those counts referring to their defendants and will show that they do not regard the indictment to be duly substantiated. I would, like to point out briefly that the motion claims that the Indictment does not substantiate the counts of the Indictment sufficiently and that therefore the defendants are scarcely in a position to plead guilty or not guilty, such as it should correspond with the seriousness of this trial.
THE PRESIDENT:We are glad to advise that the motion has been made, but we will not hear an argument on the merits this morning. Defense counsel, of course, is entitled to a two day defense. We have not received the motions as yet. The Court dots not have them before us; so further than advising us that a motion has been made, we will not entertain any argument on that sort of motion this morning. Your motion will receive consideration when filed and when answered within the proper time by the Prosecution counsel.
DR. KARLHAENSEL (for the defendant Steengracht): May it please the tribunal, may I draw the Tribunal's attention to the fact that if the defendants are not to plead guilty or not guilty, they will rely on the summons which they received yesterday. This summons says that they are to express their opinion regarding the Indictment of the Secretary-General of 4 November 1947. I do not know whether it is intended that the later Indictment, dated 17 of November, has been left out in this connection; whether, in other words, the old Indictment of 4 November has perhaps been revived and the new one has been dropped. Perhaps a statement could be made about this before they plead guilty or not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:I think we will hear Prosecution counsel for just a moment on that.
GENERAL TAYLOR:May it please the Court, the Prosecution has filed a statement with the Tribunal that the amended Indictment of 15 November supersedes and replaces the one filed on November 1, and the Indictment filed on November 1 is to be disregarded. A written statement to this effect was filed with the Tribunal at the time of the amended Indictment.
THE PRESIDENT:Mr. Secretary-General, I think you may proceed with the calling of the defendants. Just a moment, apparently the defense counsel wish to say something.
DR.BECKER (for the defendant von Weizsaecker): I beg to make the motion to appoint Mr. Warren E. Macee, attorney of Washington as co-defense counsel for Herr von Weizsaecker.
I have brought along an exact explanation as to why I make this motion and shall hand it to the Court.
THE PRESIDENT:We will not pass on that matter at the moment. You are represetning the defendant named now, are you not?
DR. BECKER:Yes.
DR. ELIZABETHGOMBEL (Assistant to Dr. Achenbach for the defendant Bohle): At first I want to excuse Dr. Achenbach who has not been in a position to come into Court today, because his driver and one of his secretaries have been killed in a car accident at Neustadt last night.
THE PRESIDENT:Are you representing him?
DR. GOMBEL:Yes, I am representing him, I am his assistant defense counsel.
THE PRESIDENT:That will be noted.
DR. GOMBEL:On behalf of my clients I herewith submit to the record of the Court a motion to strike it out on the grounds that the Indictment is not sufficiently substantiated.
THE PRESIDENT:That will be taken up in the usual course.
Now, Mr. Secretary-General, you may proceed.
THESECRETARY*GENERAL: Each defendant will rise when his name is called and answer the Questions asked him by the Tribunal and speak directly into the microphone.
Defendant Ernst von Weizsaecker
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Ernst von Weizsaecker, have you counsel?
ERNST von Weizsaecker: Would you please repeat that?
THE PRESIDENT:Have you counsel to represent you?
ERNST von WEIZSAECKER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
ERNST von WEIZSAECKER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
DRNST von WEIZSAECKER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Ernst von Weizsaecker, how do you. plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
ERNST von WEIZSAECKER: Will you please repeat? I didn't understand you. Your are speaking too fast.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
ERNST von WEIZSAECHER: I am not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Gustav Adolf Steengracht von Moyland.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Gustav Adolf Steengracht von Moyland, have you counsel?
GUSTAV ADOLFSTEENGRACHT von MOYLAND: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
GUSTAV ADOLTSTEENGRACHT von MOYLAND: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
GUSTAV ADOLFSTEENGRACHT von MOYLAND: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
GUSTAV ADOLFSTEENGRACHT von MOYLAND: I am not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Wilhelm Keppler.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Wilhelm Keppler, have you counsel?
WILHELM KEPPLER:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
WILHELM KEPPLER:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
WILHELM KEPPLER:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
WILHELM KEPPLER:I am not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THEECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Ernst Wilhelm Bohle.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Ernst Wilhelm Bohle, have you counsel?
ERNST WILHELM BOHLE:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has a copy of the Indictment in the German language been served, upon you at least 30 days ago?
ERNST WILHELM BOHLE:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
ERNST WILHELM BOHLE:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
ERNST WILHELM BOHLE:Not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may he seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Ernst Woermann.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Ernst Woermann, have you counsel?
ERNST WOERMANN:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
ERNST WOERMANN:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
ERNST WOERMANN:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
ERNST WOERMANN:Not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Karl Ritter.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Karl Ritter, have you counsel?
KARL RITTER:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
KARL RITTER:Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
KARL RITTER:Not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Otto von Erdmannsdorff.
THE PRESIDENT:Defendant Otto von Erdmannsdorff, have you counsel?
OTTO von ERDMANNSDORFF: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
OTTO von ERDMANNSDORFF: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:Have you read the Indictment?
OTTO von ERDMANNSDORFF: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT:How do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
OTTO von ERDMANNSDORFF: Not guilty.
THE PRESIDENT:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Edmund Veesenmayer.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Edmund Vessenmayer, have you counsel?
EDMUND VEESENMAYER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
EDMUND VEESENMAYER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Have you read the Indictment?
EDMUND VEESENMAYER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Edmund Veesenmayer, how do you plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
EDMUND VEESENMAYER:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Hans Heinrich Lammers.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Hans Heinrich Lammers, have you counsel?
FANS HEINRICH LAMMERS:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
HANS HEINRICH LAMMERS:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Have you read the Indictment?
HANS HEINRICH LAMMERS:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Hans Heinrich Lammers, how do you plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
HANS HEINRICH LAMMERS:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Wilhelm Stuckart.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Wilhelm Stuckart, have you counsel?
WILHELM STUCKART:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
WILHELM STUCKART:Yes.
CourtIV -A-, Case XI
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Wilhelm Stuckart, how do you plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
WILHLEM STUCKART:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Richard Walther Darre.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Richard Walther Darre, have you counsel?
RICHARD WALTHER DARRE:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
RICHARD WALTHER DARRE:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Have you read the Indictment.
RICHARD WALTHER DARRE:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Richard Walther Darre, how do you plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
RICHARD WALTHER DARRE:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
DR.SAUTER (for the defendant Otto Meissner): The defendant Dr. Meissner should be the next one to be called in the dock. He is in a rather special position. It was only last month that he was operated on his eyes and he is now in the hospital. I saw him yesterday and I asked him how he intended to plead today. He requested me and authorized me to declare here on his behalf that he received the Indictment more than 30 days ago, that it was read to him, and that he wishes to plead here that he is not guilty. This is the statement I wish to make on behalf of Dr. Meissner, who is absent.
If the Tribunal please, I would appreciate it if in this connection I would be allowed to make amotion on behalf of Dr. Meissner connected with the further proceedings of his case. I stated before that the defendant Dr. Meissner was recently operated on his eyes and in January or February he will have to undergo a second operation on his eyes, which will be the main operation, because otherwise there is dnager of complete blindness. He, therefore, will not be in a position in the nest few weeks to appear in Court here, and I, therefore, on behalf of Dr. Meissner beg to make the motion that the Tribunal would kindly excuse Dr. Meissner from being present in these proceedings.
I shall take care that Dr. Meissner will daily be informed either through me or through one of my assistants of the records of these proceedings and also of the documents submitted by the Prosecution. They will be read to him. He will then either tell me or one of my assistants what his comments are regarding these documents either to me or to one of my assistants. He will dictate these things to me; otherwise there is no practical possibility of taking care of his case. This is how we shall be certain that in some time to come when Dr. Meissner's health will permit, he will be able to appear in person before this Tribunal and testify on the witness stand. This is how we shall on the one hand not prevent these proceedings from taking their course, and on the other, the interests of the defendant Dr. Meissner will be suitably safeguarded.
I believe that the Prosecution, in view of these conditions, will be agreeable to this idea, and I should be grateful to the Tribunal if they would express their agreement to this suggestion. I shall also inform the Court as soon as Dr. Meissner will be in a position to appear before this Tribunal and I shall see to it that this will occur as soon as possible.
JUDGE POWERS:Does the Prosecution have anything to spy on this motion?
GENERAL TAYLOR:The Prosecution, of course, has no objection to any course that the medical authorities recommend to the Tribunal as necessary. We think that in the defendant's own interests he should be present in the court as much as is possible under the medical circumstances, but beyond that, we concur with Dr. Sauter's recommendation.
JUDGE POWERS:I understand that the introduction of evidence will not be taken up for several days in any event, and the Court will take this matter under advisement and confer with counsel about their conclusions if that is agreeable,
DR. SAUTES:Thank you very much, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT:I understand that the Prosecution then wishes the Court to receive the plea of Dr. Meissner in his absence by his counsel?
GENERAL TAYLOR:Yes, Your Honor, with the further suggestion that when the defendant is able to appear in Court, the plea should be taken again so that it is entered in the record in his own person.
DR. SAUTER:Of course. Thank you very much, Your Honor.
JUDGE POWERS:You may proceed.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Otto Dietrich
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Otto Dietrich, have you counsel?
OTTO DIETRICH:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
OTTO DIETRICH:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Have you read the Indictment?
OTTO DIETRICH:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Otto Dietrich, how do you wish to plead to this Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
OTTO DIETRICH:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
THESECRETARY-GENERAL: Defendant Gottlob Berger.
JUDGE POWERS:Defendant Gottlob Berger, have you counsel?
GOTTLOB BERGER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Has the Indictment in the German language been served upon you in this case at least 30 days ago?
GOTTLOB BERGER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:Have you read the Indictment?
GOTTLOB BERGER:Yes.
JUDGE POWERS:How do you wish to plead to the Indictment, guilty or not guilty?
GOTTLOB BERGER:Not guilty.
JUDGE POWERS:You may be seated.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Walter Schellenberg.
Defendant, Walter Schellenberg, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT SCHELLENBERG:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least thirty days ago?
DEFENDANT SCHELLENBERG:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT SCHELLENBERG:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Walter Schellenberg, how plead you to this indictment? Guilty or not guilty?
DEFENDANT SCHELLENBERG:Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Lutz Schwering von Krosign.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Lutz Schwering von Krosign, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT KROSIGN:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least thrity days ago?
DEFENDANT KROSIGN:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT KROSIGN:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Lutz Schwering von Krosign, how plead you to this indictment, Guilty or not Guilty?
DEFENDANT KROSIGN:Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Emil Puhl.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Emil Puhl, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT PUHL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
DEFENDANT PUHL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT PUHL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Emil PUHL, how do you plead to the indictment, Guilty or Not Guilty?
DEFENDANT PUHL:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Karl Rasche.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Karl Rasche, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT RASCHE:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German Language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
DEFENDANT RASCHE:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Karl Rasche, how do you plead to the indictment, Guilty or Not Guilty?
DEFENDANT RASCHE:Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Paul Koerner.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Paul Koerner, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT KOERNER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
DEFENDANT KOERNER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT KOERNER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Paul Koerner, how plead you to the indictment, Guilty or Not Guilty?
DEFENDANT KOERNER:Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Defendant Paul Pleiger.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Paul Pleiger, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT PLEIGER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
DEFENDANT PLEIGER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT PLEIGER:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Paul Pleiger, how plead you to the indictment, Guilty or Not Guilty?
DEFENDANT PLEIGER:Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
THE SECRETARYGENERAL 1/4 General Hans Kehrl.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant Hans Kehrl, have you counsel?
DEFENDANT KEHRL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Has the indictment in the German language been served upon you at least 30 days ago?
DEFENDANT KEHRL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Have you read the indictment?
DEFENDANT KEHRL:Yes.
JUDGE McGUIRE:Defendant, Has Kehrl, how plead you to the indictment, Guilty or Not Guilty?
DEFENDANT HANS KEHRL:I am Not Guilty.
JUDGE McGUIRE:You may be seated.
The Pleas of the defendants will be entered by the Secretary General in the records of this Tribunal.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL:Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE McGUIRE:It is the intention of the Tribunal to recess until the 6th of January. At that time it is our understanding that the Prosecution will be ready to make its opening statement. Immediately following the completion of the opening Statements the Tribunal expects the Prose cution to be ready to proceed with the submission of its case.
Accordingly , the Tribunal will be in recess to the 6th of January 1948 at nine-thirty AM.
THE MARSHAL:The Tribunal will recess until 0930 hours 6 January 1948.
(Tribunal IVa in recess until 6 January 1948, at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal IV in the matter of the United States of America against Ernst von Weizsaecker, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 6 January 1948, 1000 hours, the Honorable William C. Christianson, presiding.
THE MARSHAL:The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal IV. Military Tribunal IV is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT:Mr. Marshal, are the defendants all present in the courtroom?
THE MARSHAL:May it please your Honors, all the defendants are present in the court except Meissner, sick in hospital.
THE PRESIDENT:Dr. Sauter, you are counsel for Mr. Meissner, are you not?
DR. SAUTER:Yes indeed.
THE PRESIDENT:And we understand that he is still hospitalized?
DR. SAUTER:Yes, he is still in hospital and he is expected to go to Munich in a few days so that he can undergo his second operation.
THE PRESIDENT:I understand it is agreeable to you that we proceed in his absence?
DR. SAUTER:Certainly, your Honor. I have seen my client about this. I have explained to him the Advantages and disadvantages of these proceedings. He himself is a legal expert and he has asked me to express his wish to the Tribunal that they should proceed in his absence, against him. As soon as he is in a position to appear before this Court he will do so without hesitation, in order to be at the Court's disposal. We are therefore quite agreeable to the suggested procedure.
THE PRESIDENT:Very well. He will be excused for the time being and we will proceed in his absence.
DR. SAUTER:Thank you very much, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT:Is the prosecution prepared to make its opening statement at this time?
GENERAL TAYLOR:Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT:Very well, we will now hear you.
GENERAL TAYLOR:May it please your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT:General Taylor.
GENERAL TAYLOR:This case is wider in scope and variety than any other which has been brought before these Military Tribunals. It is not limited to crimes charged against the leaders of a single agency of the Third Reich, such as the army or the SS, or of a single industrial enterprise, such as I. G. Farben or Krupp, or of a single German profession, such as the law or medicine. There are no members of the Wehrmacht in the dock, but with this exception the defendants are drawn from nearly every important sphere of activity under the Third Reich.
This case is concerned with the central political and economic administration of the Third Reich at Berlin. Krupp was based at Essen and Farben at Frankfurt-am-Main; hostages, partisans, and einsatzgruppen call to mind the unhappy territories recently occupied by Germany; medical experiments are associated with the concentration camps scattered all over Europe. In this case we return to the center of things Berlin is the symbolic common denominator of this case.
In fact, most of the acts which form the basis of this indictment occurred on or within a stone's throw of a particular street in Berlin called Wilhelmstrasse, the German counterpart of London's Whitehall and Downing Street and Paris's Quai d'Orsay. Again and again, during the last century, Wilhelmstrasse has been the focus of attention of the anxious capitals of the world. "What will Wilhelmstrasse say?" Europe asked in 1870, when Bismarck was brewing the France-Prussian war. "What will Wilhelmstrasse say?" the world asked in June 1914, when the successor to the Austrian throne was assassinated. "What will Wilhelmstrasse do?" everyone asked again in 1933 after the National Socialist regime came to power. Everyone realized that, ruthless and determined as were Hitler, Goering, Hess and the other party leaders, much would depend on the attitude of the top officials entrenched in the semi classic government buildings in the center of Berlin.
The gentlemen of Wilhelmstrasse could do much to obstruct or further Hitler's general plans.
After the establishment of the Third Reich in 1933, the grey eminences of Wilhelmstrasse entered upon a period of power such as was never accorded to them before. No longer did they have to consider parliamentary control because the German Reichstag was rendered impotent. No longer did they have to consider public opinion, because freedom of speech and assembly was trampled under foot and the press and radio became a chamber of mendacious echoes. But they were confronted with a historic decision: whether to support the evil designs of the adventurous Austrian paperhanger, or to endeavor to develop and enforce lawful, sane, and peaceful state policies. We will see what choice they made.
If, about ten years ago, we had walked along Wilhelmstrasse, we would have found most of these men at work behind its august facades. At 76 Wilhelmstrasse was the German Foreign Office itself; here we would have found the eight defendants -- including Bohle, Weizsaecker, Keppler, and Steengracht -- who were Ribbentrop's immediate deputies in the field of foreign affairs. Next door to the Foreign Office were the Reich Chancellery and the Presidential Chancellery. In the Reich Chancellery, second only to Hitler himself, we would have found the defendant Lammers. A few motors away, at the Presidential Chancellery, the defendant Meissner was reaching the peak of a Wilhelmstrasse career which dates back to the earliest days of the Weimar Republic under President Ebert.
Elsewhere on Wilhelmstrasse, we would have found the headquarters of the SS and the defendants Berger and Schellenberg; the Food and Agriculture Ministry, headed by the defendant Darre; and the offices of the Four Year Plan, the central Planning Board, and the Herman Goering Works, in which the defendants Koerner, Pleiger, and Kohrl were leaders. Nearby, at the Wilhelmplatz, was the Reich Treasury, under the charge of Lutz Schwerin von Krosigk, and the Press and Propaganda Ministry, in which the defendant Dietrich was second only to Goebbels. A block or two away stood the headquarters of the Ministry of the Interior, in which the defendant Stuckart functioned as Wilhelm Trick's deputy.
A five minute walk from Wilhelmstrasse was the great Reichsbank, of which the defendant Puhl was Vice President. And finally, near the Reichsbank, was the main office of the Dresdner Bank -- the second largest commercial bank in Germany -- Where the defendant Rasche was a principal member of the directorate. Thus, we have indicted in this case the chief civil executives of the Third Reich, other than those who were tried before the first International Military Tribunal. Here are the men who transferred the plans and ideologies of the Third Reich into action. Without their administration and implementation, and without the directives and orders which they prepared, no Hitler, no Goering, could have planned and waged aggressive wars; no Himmler could have wiped out 6,000,000 Jews and other victims of Nazi Aggression and ideology. Without some of these men, the little trigger men and concentration camp executioners would never have received the murderous orders which many have recently expiated with their own lives.
The charges to be tried before this Tribunal, accordingly, like those heard by the IMT, involve the whole sweep of politics and economy in the Third Reich. Unlike the case before the IMT the military leaders are to be tried separately in the twelth and last case before these Tribunals. Again unlike the IMT case, the evidence has obliged us to include here a leading private financier -- Karl Rasche of the Dresdner Bank. But in most respects, the charges in this case and in the IMT case are parallel, and the defendants are government and party officials of the same type.
For the most part, too, these man are of comparable importance. We must except, of course, the five or six men who were the closest personal associates of Hitler. The latter include the protean Hermann Goering, next in line of succession to Hitler and the leading rank and office holder of all time; Rudolf Hess, next in succession after Goering and the executive head of the Nazi party; Martin Bormann, who replaced Hess;
Heinrich Himmler, the main spring of the police state; Joseph Goebbels; and, probably, Joachim von Ribbentrop. Goering, Hess, and Ribbentrop sat in this dock before the first International Military Tribunal, Himmler and Goebbels were suicides at the end of the war, and Bormann is dead or a convicted fugitive. These men wielded the greatest political power.
Nearly as powerful, however, were other key government ministers and party leaders -- men such as Frick, Speer, and Rosenberg in the IMT case, and the defendants Lammers, Darre, von Krosigk, and Dietrich in this case. It will assist the Tribunal in understanding the role and responsibility of each defendant, we believe, to begin this statement with a very brief sketch of the structure of the Third Reich government and the Nazi party, in order to show how each defendant fits into the general scheme of things.
In theory, at least, Hitler derived his authority from two distinct sources. He was at once the "Fuehrer" of the NSDAP and the "Reich Chancellor" of the German state. As time went on, and after the Nazi party became the only political party recognized by law, the line between state and party grew more shadowy. Numerous high party officials were also the heads of government ministries. Particularly in the field of police and security matters, state and party were fused into a single organization by Himmler. But, in many other respects, the government and the party remained separate organizations, and clarity will best be achieved by discussing them separately.
It must be remembered, of course, that we are discussing a government in which the legislature lost all power and importance. During 1933, the German Reichstag became nothing but an audience for Hitler's state speeches. It ceased to be even the formal source of most legislation. Although the Weimar constitution, which safeguarded civil liberties and vested the law-making power in democratically elected legislature, was never repealed, it was largely superseded by a series of acts and decrees upon which the Nazi regime based its authority. A Presidential decree of 28 February 1933 suspended the constitutional guarantees of freedom, and provided a pseudo-legal basis for the arrest of numerous anti-Nazi members of the Reichstag.