Q. Ferber.
A. I do not know of any other Ferber.
Q. That is to say, you were the only justice official of that name?
A. Yes.
Q. To avoid a misunderstanding, I should like to repeat the most important dates of your prosecution career, and if there are mistakes, I would like for you to point them out immediately. In 1929 you made your state examination. From 1929 until 1935 you worked in the insurance concern; and on the 1st of March 1935 you began work as an assessor with the prosecution of Nuernberg. On the 1st of February 1936 you became public prosecutor. From the 1st of June until the 1st of October 1939 you were temporarily active in the high prison administration service. From the 1st of October 1939 until the 1st of November 1940 you were public prosecutor. From the 1st of November 1940 until the 1st of January 1943 you were Landgerichtsrat at a special court. On the 1st of January 1943 you became Landgerichtsdirector. From the 1st of May 1943 until the 1st of October 1943 you Were the presiding judge at the special court. From the 1st of October 1943 until the end of 1945 you were the presiding judge of the first penal chamber. Is my statement correct?
A. Yes.
Q. From the 1st of October 1943 until 1945 were you always active in the first penal chamber?
A. From the 1st of October 1943 there were only two penal chambers with the district court, Nuernberg-Fuerth. The first penal chamber was under my jurisdiction; the second chamber under that of Landgerichtsdirector Seifert.
Q. The penal chamber in which you worked - did it take over the task of the fourth penal chamber?
A. The second penal chamber was only the juvenile penal chamber.
Q. Just a moment. Witness, you said you were in the first penal chamber.
A. Yes.
Q. Did the first penal chamber take over the task of the fourth penal chamber?
A. Yes.
Q. Thank you. From what point of view was such service depending upon prior to 1933?
A. From general suitability and qualifications for such service.
Q. How were the qualifications for such service proven?
A. By the state examination and by the qualifications for the service.
Q. After 1933 was it the same?
A. There was a change in so far as I, myself, was concerned for an appointment to the state service.
Q. That was not my question --
A. But I wanted to give that answer and I wanted to give an additional explanation. There was one special political qualification. I did have to get the approval for my appointment from the Reich Supervision Service in Berlin to the Reich service. I did not need special political qualifications for the appointment.
Q. That was not my question, witness. I asked you very Plainly whether the professional career after 1933 depended upon certain conditions, and I believe you said yes?
A. Yes.
Q. After 1933, so you said, in addition there was the political aspect, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Only in 1935 you entered the state service. Why did you not ask for the state service before that?
A. This question I answered when I gave the exposition and I answered it clearly.
Q. No.
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Just a moment. In 1929 you passed your big state examination;
according to your own statement you received your first appointment only in 1933?
A. Yes.
Q. Why not in 1929?
A. I have the document here according to which ay appointment was put back, and that was for the state service in Bavaria, because the Reich Supervision Service in Berlin was the service for which I was interested in. There is my document for proof. I was a candidate for the high court and I was immediately interviewed for such but for my activities in that office I needed a general experience and had to give proof of such experience, and for that reason Bavaria gave me the commission regarding an earlier appointment, but I would not have to take it up immediately. The date was the 1st of January 1934. And when that appointment coincided at the last examination for Grundruch, Bamberg. I refused that appointment. The Bavarian Minister of State for Justice told me that now my name would have to be cancelled from the list of candidates. The documents concerning proof for that period are in my possession.
Q. If I understood you correctly, already in 1929 you would have had the possibility to enter the Bavarian state service as a reward of your state examination in 1929 and which already merited your appointment --
A. In 1929 --
Q. Just a moment --
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q That's sufficient for me. Why, after 1933 did you again try to enter the State Service?
A I did not then try to enter the State Service but merely had to put my intention to enter the State Service because on account of the Bruening Emergency Decree the Reich Office of the Reich Supervision Office in Berlin were cut down and because an earlier appointment for the Reich Supervision Office could no longer be expected. I was in private industry. I was in the insurance concern and I had much better pay there and yet immediately regarding my candidacy for the Bavarian State Office was reacquired by me because I wished to serve in the State Service.
Q Your activity from 1929 until 1935 was, however, an activity in private service and not in State Service; is that correct?
A That is in itself correct but the Reich Supervision Office which exercised supervision of the insurance system could only do to such an higher official who were able to judge our practical work.
Q You therefore regarded your service with the insurance concern as a training for the State Service which you wished to enter later?
A I actually came under the control -
Q Just a moment.
A Yes.
Q Yes or no?
A Yes. I came under the Reichsgerichtdirector of the District Courts in Franken and Munich I.
Q For what reason were you under their supervision?
A I would come under that supervision because my candidacy for the higher State Service ha.d been recognized -- my document and because I had to give proof of my work.
Q Well, you said that you had become a member?
A Correct.
Q At what place and in what unit did you join and who was the leader of that unit?
A The leader of the unit I do not know at all. I describe the occurrence as follows: The person who is taking part at this trial -he was a Ministcrialrat at the time, Engert, told me -- I got in charge of those affairs at the Bavarian Ministry when I presented myself at the Ministry -- that regarding the previous conditions, that is, prior to 1933, no longer applied fully but that political reliability had to be proved as well, in some form.
Q Did you then tell the Ministerialrat Engert at the time -did you present proof that you were a member of the SS?
A I had to produce two witnesses as guarantors of a general nature concerning my positional attitude and in addition I had to prove my political reliability. I did that in writing.
Q As regards your membership in the SS, that is to say, your membership in the sponsoring member, did you prove that to the State Ministry of Justice after your discussion with Engert?
A In an application I mentioned that.
Q Did you not submit that application before your discussion with Engert?
A No, at first I just presented myself and had a discussion at the Ministry which I had with the Ministcrialrat at the time, Kallenbrunnen. Kallenbrunnen made that discussion possible for me and only after that I submitted my written documents.
Q Summarizing, you want to say that the political attitude had considerable significance since 1933 for political service?
A Yes.
Q If I follow your statement, you never worked in the department concerned with civil law but only in the field of criminal law. Do you admit that such exclusive work in the field of penal law thus constituted an exceptional case?
A The exception from the rule I have already mentioned and I have given reasons for it.
Q Would you briefly give us reasons for that action? I can not remember your reasons.
AAfter I had entered the service as an Assistant Judge with the prosecution at Nurnberg-Furth, the Reich Office for Centralization of Justice followed very soon. From then on according to the previous Bavarian custom conditions could not be compared with those after my appointment as a prosecutor. I was kept longer. The prosecution has my application for a transfer to a judge's position particularly at my home in the Palatinate here but aside regardless -- that was also the reason why the prison service -- I wished to get out or as a prosecutor.
Q Now, witness, I never knew that in the Reich Justice Service that work in penal law only was usually. I only know that judges attached to that jurisdiction should work both in that sphere of civil law and criminal law. Am I right?
A No, the centralization of the Reich Service produced the very opposite. For instance, the task of the Centralization Office was that of centralizing the careers. Only Reich Minister of Justice Buettner later achieved -- changed from prosecutor to judge and that such a judge was looked upon with more understanding during the war from 1939. Anyhow, quite different viewpoints were decided.
Q Is it correct, however, that in the sphere of criminal law you worked nearly exclusively on political matters?
A That is not quite correct. Naturally, as assistant judge with the prosecution I was trained in all departments. Therefore, on the basis of my experience in another court, for several months I worked in the Department for Economics and that department in particular was an independent concern and not as a prosecutor.
Q Did you not, yourself, always say loudly that you were the oldest judge and prosecutor and the most experienced judge in political penal matters here in Nurnberg?
A I was in a better position at that time and none of that corresponds to the facts for there were others who had been active for a much longer time.
Q Between 1936 and 1945 when did you not work on political penal matters?
A From 1936 until about the end of the year I did not work on political penal cases. Then I joined that department when Prosecutor Buettner was called up for military training. After his return I stayed in the department because Buettner intended to go on a second exercise. The department was not made my responsibility. I was only prosecutor on duty. The first official appointment I received when Prosecutor Engert left, when I became Landgerichtsdirektor of the district court, and at that time, about '37, two political departments were made into three. Then comes my time in the prison service, and after my return that was the task which called me back. I again came to the Special Court, then the Prosecution Special Court.
Q In effect, between 1936 and 1944 you were for at the utmost only five months not active on political penal cases.
A I estimate the period at a little more than six months.
Q Do you admit that within this sphere of your work on political penal cases you made an unusually fast political career?
A I do not admit that, because by comparison other gentlemen who are not older than I, who did no better work than I, received the same promotion as I.
Q I will now talk to you about Landgerichtsrat Roth. Roth, according to my information, at about 1923 entered state service and stayed Landgerichtsrat, is that correct?
A That was because Landgerichtsrat Roth wished that to be so.
Q Is it not correct that Roth, compared with you, was considerably at a disadvantage?
A No. Landgerichtsrat Roth was -- concerning Landgerichtsrat Straubing, he had long been suggested for that, but he did not accept it because of the fact that he had lost a leg in the war and he said he wanted to stay longer. Furthermore, Gauleiter Streicher disqualified him in a very unpleasant manner, but not through us, but from Rothaug, and that animosity accounted for it that in fact between Rothaug and Roth it resulted in difficulties being male to Roth.
That made it difficult for him to get a promotion from Nurenberg. Outside the Gau Franconia he could long have promotion.
Q He was evidently a judge who expressed a different opinion from the opinion of the others. The case shows that you evidently never expressed a. different opinion; is that correct?
A That is wrong. It is only wrong.
Q In that case I don't understand why you, with the same attitude here in Nurenberg became Landgerichtsdirektor in Nurenberg and Roth did not.
A That is a case which, in the last resort, had to be decided by Landgerichtsrat Roth. That does not concern me personally.
Q Is it correct that your promotion from Landgerichtsrat to Landgerichtsdirektor on 1 January 1943 was a definite preferrment?
A No, there were others before me, some of whom had played a considerable part in the Party, but without any undue pride. They were not stupid in comparing them with others. They had long been promoted. There is a man here who was promoted to Landgerichtsrat when he was only 35, definitely because he was preferred by the administration, and nobody made any noise about it.
Q Witness, you are talking about a man here who evidently had been particularly active for the National Socialist movement. I am merely saying if it is correct that you did not approve the tendency of that day, did you in that case not have treatment of favoritism, comparing your case with that of others of equal standing?
A No. In Munich a man was promoted Landgerichtsdirektor -
Q I do not want to hear of exceptional cases.
A They are not exceptional cases. The Reich administration of justice wanted younger people to come in.
Q Is it correct that usually one only became Landgerichtsdirektor when first of all one had been promoted from Landgerichtsrat to first prosecutor?
A No, you are mistaken about the conditions of the time concerning personalities -- conditions concerning personnel.
Q But you must admit that at least you were treated in the same way as those persons who were considered absolutely unexceptionable, those judges and prosecutors; is that correct?
A What do you mean by "completely unexceptionable"?
Q When I say "completely unexceptionable" I am talking of those who offered no resistance but followed the course.
AAt no time did I fail to speak my mind. What matters is whether in one's statement one has the effect of conviction or not. And Oberlandgerichtspresident Doebig and Landgerichtspresident Keller concerning me personally, they had no difficulties to make.
Q But you said in the course of the examination that it was important that one should be politically unexceptionable.
A The defense counsel is ignoring one point completely. The ministry, concerning suggestions for promotion, asked the political authorities who were locally constant who informed the authorities that it was intended to appoint that person or the other person, to use them on the scheduled opening. If no counterproposal was received at a certain time, the Ministry was free to make its own appointment.
Q Such a counter proposal was bound to come if you had openly expressed your distaste for the National Socialist cause in the administration of penal law?
A That depends on whom you mean by somebody.
Q I mean persons of decisive important for the service.
A The Oberlandgerichtspresident and the Landgerichtspresident Keller will confirm that I at any time when I was only with one person I openly expressed my criticism also concerning the attitude of Rothaug and that I knew that these ministry authorities at the higher places in Berlin tried to bring about a change, to remedy matters.
Q You said that you know Rothaug since 1937. Did you have an opportunity to observe Rothaug's individual character both at work and personally before you were transferred to his office?
A You mean before the time when I joined the Special Court?
Q Yes.
A Yes. Yes.
Q Is it correct that in that time during the time during which you held the position of Landgerichtsrat during which you wanted to become a Landgerichtsrat at the Nurenberg District Court that during that time you went to see Rothaug again and again so that you would make sure that you would be used at the Special Court Nurenberg while Rothaug was at that time the presiding judge?
A No.
Q In other words, you seriously dispute the fact that you more than once went to see Rothaug to try everything, particularly with him to try everything to be allowed to work with him in particular, that is, with Rothaug a.t the Special Court?
A Concerning my transfer, I spoke to the Oberlandgerichtspresident Doebig, and I spoke to him more than once. It is particularly due to his initiative at Berlin that I received a scheduled vacancy, and it was customary--you yourself put that in your question -- to use some body who came from the prosecution, to use him on penal cases. It was customary to do that for one reason alone, because I was excluded from a number of penal cases owing to my work as a prosecutor.
Q But in that case it should have been particularly easy for you to get into a civil chamber, in particular, as you say yourself that you had the President on your side.
A Yes, Oberlandgerichtspresident Doebig at the end of 1940 told me he referred to the decree from the ministerial council for the Reich Defense, that he believed that he could use me best if my experience -if I placed my experience in the service of the Special Court. In that context Oberlandgerichtspresident Doebig personally told me he hoped for my cooperation. Owing to my personal behavior, he was hoping for a conciliatory and moderating influence on Rothaug.
Q. What attempt did you undertake to exercise a moderating influence on Rothaug?
A. That I did make attempts is evident quite clearly from that the fact that nearly all other associate judges repeatedly told mo. "If he listens to anybody, it's you. You might tell him this thing or another thing. At least ho doesn't bark at you".
Concerning the administration of justice, as such, I had always expressed that the administration needs recognition; and when Undersecretary Schlegelberger, after the death of Guertner, was in charge of the administration of justice and Rothaug spoke only Schlogelbellarism of the Reich Ministry of Justice, at that time I said in front of witnesses, "Now this man has become our supremo chief. Who else is to go? Is Himmler by any chance to be placed in charge of the administration of justice? Are we to be made to wear uniforms? Is the SS Leader of the SS to police to become our Lord?" Rothaug said, "Let me be the minister. I have ideas."
Q. We will revert to those questions at the proper opportunity during this cross examination.
A. Yes.
Q. Do you admit that your work in the civil chamber in the -- What has been done in the interests of your general training?
A. Yes, that would have been so.
Q. But, above all, I would like to know from you whether the view you have today of the political problems with which the German jurists were occupied before the catastrophe -- whether it corresponds to your views before 1945.
A. I never left anybody in any doubt about that, Rothaug, himself, drew my attention that the associate judge who had sat at the special court -- the so-called SS-Meier -- that it had been him who was the SD Office Nurnberg -- had pointed out that after Oeschey the next deputy president at the special court -- that was myself, -- was practicing Roman Catholic. Rothaug said to me at the tin, "Concerning this report by Meier, he had tried to reproduce it to the gentlemen on a very mutual form". But concerning Meier's statement, he appeared to be rather more reserved with me after he had had that report from Meier, but that did not prevent Rothaug, even during the trip from Kamm to Nurnberg, to say in my presence to Meier, "Don't you try and get Ferber to leave the Church; Ferber won't do that."
Q. Well, you admit that Rothaug did not make any difficulties for you although ho knew that you wore a very convinced Roman catholic -that you were one and that you arc one?
A. His understanding of my church attitude -- I never left anybody in doubt that ho understood it.
Q. Furthermore, is it correct that Rothaug never placed any obstacles in the way of anybody who had held different religious views from his own?
A. Concerning this question, I have had two experiences. When the associate judge Pfaff was described once by Haberkern as "soiled by Catholicism," it was Rothaug who settled that matter -- rather, who ironed out that crease. On tho other hand, I know from statements by Grobe and Fross that that was very true. He had spoken about leaving their church, their religious community.
Q. He held discussions with them but he did not harm them in any way. Is that a fact? Furthermore, can you tell mo that the so-called SS-Meier, of all people -- that is to say, that judge who was the only one who held a rank as an SS officer -- was removed from the chamber by Rothaug?
A. The fact is correct, and I do also know the reasons.
Q. Is it correct that Rothaug removed that SS-Meier, criticized that SS-Meier, and one of many as a judge, for the very reason that he had behaved badly toward people who held different religious views?
A. Between Rothaug and Meier there were considerable divergences for the first time when Rothaug found that Meier, in his capacity as a member of the SS, made reports on tho special court to the SD office, and.
also about the members of the special court. It was put in this way: Rothaug did not want Meier to interfere in the scene which Rothaug claimed to be his own. Meier's rude way of behaving with persons who had different religious views -- and that in his personal contact with persons that Rothaug did not like, as he, himself, said -- Meier was too unskillful about it, and ho was too provocative.
Q. Well, you said that Rothaug did not like ti when the SD was informed about the judges, and gave his own reports. Is that correct?
A. You did not put the question the right way. You contradicted yourself. You meant to say something quite different. I think you wanted to ask whether Rothaug did not approve if Meier spoke about the judges.
Q. Witness, I do not want you to correct my questions, but I want you to answer my questions. I an asking you again: Did Rothaug refuse the estate dealing with political assessments of the judges?
A. I don't know that, because concerning the activity of the SD, the SD Office, I had no insight into that.
Is it correct that at any rate that SS-Meier was removed from tho office?
A S.S. Meier asked in the case of two or three corrections. Oh, sometimes he had difficulties, differences of opinion with Rothaug. He received an appointment on civil cases.
Q Now, we are going to revert to your own political activity. On the direct examination you stated that you joined the party because Denzler, concerning all those who were not members of the party, that he later talked to the Gauleadership and thereby made them members of the party, is that correct?
A Yes, it is correct.
Q Do you remember, witness, that all the same several judges and prosecutors in Nurnberg did not become members of the party?
A There were seven or eight of them.
Q But at any rate there were seven or eight jurists who were not members of the party who had not been reported by Mr. Denzler. Did you personally, concerning your complement or local group, did you send in an application for joining the N.S.D.A.P. party?
A No, I was asked, and I was asked by the Gauleiter of the Opferring, Farth, the secretary, and it seems to me with me there came Mr. Denzler, Mr. Rauch, and I think also a Mr. Roth you mentioned, yes, it is possible, and at that time we were told that through the N.S.R.B. Gauleader our membership in the N.S.D.A.P. had been suggested for reasons which were to be given. We were asked whether there were any reasons which might be against reception in the party when we were outside. For example, we were asked immediately whether we belonged to the Free Masons and we were also asked about Jewish origin.
Q Witness, you are giving a rather complicated state ment on this.
Do you admit that all party members were received into the party in the same manner?
A It was not the same. It was not the same until Farth. Some of those who had been reported for some time had been members of the Opferring, and Herr Roth was one of them.
Q Just a moment, don't evade the question.
A I am not evading the question. I am not evading that question.
Q It was a voluntary application to sign, you had to sign a voluntary application, and in signing that voluntary application you had to give an assurance that one had never belonged to a Free Masons Lodge and that one was a lawyer within the meaning of the law.
A That is correct. This is the appearance as it was quite simple.
Q. Just a moment, for the record it was perfectly voluntary, is that correct?
A Voluntary except for the fact we were asked to appear.
Q But only those were asked to appear who had voluntarily reported to Denzler for joining the party?
A No, no. Roth did not voluntarily report to Denzler to be received into the party.
Q And the other seven or eight public prosecutors and judges who never became members of the party?
A, Denzler, for personal reasons, did not report them.
Q Did he perhaps not wish to pay that tribute to them, that tribute of joining the party? Do I express myself correctly?
A Denzler said at that time -
Q Yes or no.
A I can't answer the question that way. It was not a case of paying tribute to anybody but Denzler said that it was the desire of the Gauleiter, that after he, gem rally speaking, considered us worthy of wearing the party badge he would like us to join the N.S.D.A.P. as far as we were not yet members, that he would suggest to the Gauleiter that we should become'members. These wore Denzler's own words.
Q At any rate it is certain now that the Gauleiter Julius Streicher, who is very well known here, considered you worthy of belonging to his party, is that correct?
A Gauleiter Streicher did not even know me by name.
Q But you said that the Gauleiter considered those persons who were worthy.
AAfter, up above our 600, at the invitation of Denzler, he had made a confounding speech. We believed that.
Q At your local group, did you engage in any activity?
AAt the local group of the N.S.D.A.P. I engaged in no activity at no time.
Q Did you say once that work had been offered to you at the Gauleadership office, that you would prefer an occupation in the Gauleiter's office to mechanical work you had done before in the local group?
A That question refers to a different activity. We are coming to that in a moment.
Q Just a moment, I only want to know about your activity in the local group.
A In the local group of the N.S.D.A.P. I never engaged in any activity.
Q Please don't confuse us. Just actual work.
A No, in the local group of the N.S.D.A.P. I neither hold an office nor did I do any work for them.
Perhaps you are speaking of the N.S.V.
Q Of course, I did not want to confine my question merely to a party function, but I am speaking, I wanted to extend it to the whole method.
A That is tremendous.
Q According to your statement then on direct examination Rothaug suggested you to Oeschey for corporation within the Gauleadership office. Am I repeating your statement correctly?
A I would like to put a previous question myself.
Q Tell me, have we finished now with the N.S.V., and you admitted to me you did work for the N.S.V.
A In the N.S.V. I worked for ten months, from 1937 to 1938. That is to say I collected subscriptions,and for the winter work, winter aid scheme, I deducted collections, and at the beginning of the new winter in 1938, concerning the cell warden of the N.S.V., I told him, "Now, for a whole year -" Actually it was only ten months, because the two summer months we will exclude. That makes ten months. "I have done it now for a year, and now it is time for somebody else to take over that activity." That was the mechanical work which I mentioned once before.
Q You can admit such details without any to-do, and if you do that we get on much faster. With what office of the Gauleadership were you to take up work?
A The three documents in my possession say the following: The first letter signed Oeschey, addressed to me. "I have suggested to the head of the race political office of the N.S.D.A.P., Gauamtsleiter Trappner, I have suggested you to him as collaborator on the information office for population policy at the suggestion of Gapgruppenwalter for judges and public prosecutors."
Second letter, letter from Gauamtsleiter Trappner to me. "According to an information which I have received from the head of the Gauleiter office, Oeschoy, you are prepared to take charge of the office concerned with population policy. I would ask you to come to an interview to my office." Third letter, "Since you have talked to me," meaning Trappner and myself, "Since you have talked to me, in a the enclosure I hand you a questionnaire. Please complete it and return it to me so that I can achieve first of all your provisional and later on your possibly permanent appointment,to the office as head of the Gau office for information, office on population policy."
Q So that is evident.
A I completed the questionnaire. The third question was, "Do you belong to a Christian church?" After I had submitted the questionnaire concerning a provisional appointment, let alone a permanent appointment, I did not hear another word about it. That is the pure truth.
Q Did you engage in any activity?
A In three cases here at the courthouse, in Room 138. In one case it was a war widow. In the other two cases it was the case of two women who wanted to marry. They were announced beforehand by telephone, and they were then sent to me, and these three women were from the N.S.S. Welfare Office in tho courthouse here. I sent them in one case on to the Justizrat and the other two to attorneys at law, Hunsinger and Grosser, at Fuerth, and I sent them on to these gentlemen.
Q Your activity at the office for racial policy, did you make that known to your authorities so that that should- be entered in your personal files?
A We were under an obligation to make a report on any collaboration to the authorities; as well the appointment; that is to say, the suggestion, I did report that. The date can be seen on the copy of that document and is in my possession. A provisional appointment or permanent appointment I never could report because I never received such an appointment.
Q Under direct examination you mentioned repeatedly public prosecutor Duettner who was the Secretary of the Rechtswahrerbunal, the Jurists League. What was your relation to Duettner?
A Duettner was my neighbor in 127-126 in this house. Because he was my neighbor at the Courthouse we had an association which was quite pleasant and which arose from our official connection, but as Duettner was called up during the Austrian campaign, and then in 1939 immediately was called up again, I never heard of him since that time.
THE PRESIDENT: We will have the morning recess at this time.
(Recess was taken)