Q Do you recall who signed your indictment? On behalf of the Ministry of Justice?
A It was Chief Reich Prosecutor Lautz who signed my first, and also my second indictment.
Q Do you recall when your first indictment was dated? That is, the date appearing on the document?
A. I do not remember the date precisely, but I know it was several days before it was handed to me.
Q Can you tell us generally, and very briefly, what you were charged with in this indictment?
A. I can not tell you the paragraphs, but the text was high treason, treason and undermining of defensive spirit.
Q How many of the others arrested as a result of this tea party wore tried with you in the first trial?
A. There were three who were with me in the main charge; Miss von Tadden, Mr. Otto Kieb and myself, and in the subsidiary indictment there were Mr. Scherpenberg, Mr. Kurowski, and Miss Zarden.
Q Do you recall before what senate of the People's Court your trial was hold?
A It was the first senate, and the presiding judge was Freisler,
Q Will you describe briefly the manner in which Freisler conducted the trial?
A. I believe since others who were present, as I was told, have seen the film, which was made about these convicted after the 20th of July, and
Q Mrs. Solf, just tell us what you, yourself, observed in the trial, in the First Senate of the People's Court held on 1 July, 1944.
A The presiding judge Freisler first examined Miss von Tadden and in very severe words attacked her attitude.
No had very little time in that manner to answer at all. It began in the morning at nine o'clock and ran until ten o'olock in the evening. After the noon recess, when we get three pieces of dried broad, witnesses were brought in; there were two quite unimportant witnesses who had been arrested at the same time we were arrested, and then the main witness, Dr. Reckzeh, was brought in; and Dr. Reckzeh charged me with having given him the orders, or requested him to get in touch in Switzerland with neutrals and immigrants in order to prepare peace negotiations with the western powers.
Q One moment, this doctor which you have referred to new, is ho the same individual you met at Miss Tadden's tea party and to whom you handed the three letters for delivery to Switzerland, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Continue, please.
A Presiding Judge Freisler asked me about my ideology and the ideology of my husband, and when I told him about the ideology of my husband, that during his entire life he had been a great humanist that he had served his entire life, he had served his country; and apart from that he always tried to help all non, he shouted: then he was a liberal, which I confirmed. Then he reproached me that I had spoken well of the Quakers, who under the guise of brotherly love acted politically, and as a woman of distinction I should know that. When he accused me that I had tried to make Dr. Rechzeh my agent, I could only answer that he emphasized ny international contacts and, therefore, it wouldn't be necessary for me to give that order to a man whom I didn't know at all, that is Dr. Rechzeh.
MR. KING: Your honors, I wonder if at this time we night recess for a short time. The witness is a woman not as young as she used to be, and she has been under a great physical strain coming from London to appear here. I do not wish to overtax her strength, and I think it would be better from her point of view if we could at this time recess, until waiting until the usual time of three o'clock.
THE PRESIDENT: What length of time do you suggest?
MR. KING: I suggest a normal recess period. I anticipate at this point we are approximately half way through, a little more, of the direct examination, and following the direct examination, it might be well to take another short recess prior to the commencement of cross examination.
THE PRESIDENT: We will now recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the Court will find seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY MR. KING:
Q You have already told us that Dr. Reckzeh appeared as a witness for the prosecution in your trial. Were there other witnesses as well for the prosecution?
A There were three ladies, Mrs. Braune, Miss von Tadden, and Mrs. Ruehle, a friend of Mrs. Braune. They had been arrested, but had been discharged after two months, and did say things that counted against me to some point.
Q Did your defense counsel, Dr. Dix, have an opportunity to examine either Dr. Reckzeh or the other three witnesses?
A I do not know about that.
Q You have already told us that you were permitted to make a statement to the court, and on the basis of the statement, Freisler replied. The net result of Freisler's reply to your question, an explanation of it was that your trial was postponed; is that correct?
AAt the end of the trial towards the evening, it must have been about nine, Freisler said to me, "Defendant Solf you can leave the courtroom. You are under a heavy charge; that I need further investigations made. I have heard you were a friend of a man and you had discussion with him -- a man who already had been in conflict with the Peoples Court." At that moment I did not know who he meant. Besides, he said to me, "I hear that you kept a political drawingroom" to which I replied, "I do not know what you mean by political drawing room. That my husband's world-wide reputation and his contact all over the world -- that my husband's political diplomats and scientists of all kinds called on us."
Q Can you tell us what sentences the others who were tried with you on 1 July 1944 received?
A Yes. I was in the room next to the Courtroom and I was able to hear as Miss von Tadden and Mr. Otto Kiep were sentenced to death. Mr. Scherpenberg was sentenced to two years imprisonment counting the time spent in prison prior to his trial. Miss Kurowski and Miss Zarden were acquitted.
Q Do you know until this very moment that Scherpenberg was a son-in-law of Dr. Hjalmar Schact?
A Yes, I knew that.
Q Where were you taken after the first -- after the trial ended?
A The same evening together with Miss von Tadden, who had been sentenced to death, I was moved back to the Moabit Prison and about a week later the Gestapo officials took me away from Moabit and carried me back to Ravensbrueck where my daughter was there and also my friend Count Bernsdorf and Kuntze and several others.
Q Were living conditions for you personally at Ravensbrueck the second time you were there any better or as good or worse than they were when you were first incarcerated there?
A No, they were worse. While at first we were treated comparatively well except at the interrogations, conditions worsened and particularly after the 20th of July they became almost unbearable.
Geheimrat Kuntz and I were put into the cell in the cellar where we slept. Sometime later my daughter was moved there too. I, myself, for about five days after the 20th of July was moved from Moabit and was moved to the Cottbus Penitentiary.
Q This Ravensbrueck of which we have been speaking is the same concentration camp, is it not, that later became known to the world as an extermination center?
A Yes.
Q And when you speak of the 20th of July to what particular event in the recent history of Germany do you refer?
A On 20 July the attempt by Count Stauffenberg on Hitler's life in his headquarters took place.
Q You have already indicated that from Ravensbrueck you were again returned to Cottbus -- Moabit. This was in preparation for the second trial; is that correct?
A Yes. Naturally after the attempt of 20 July there were cases -- concerning cases involving the 20 July attempt and consequently I had to wait.
Q When was the second trial originally scheduled to be held?
AAt the end of November 1944 I received my second indictment in which I was the chief defendant and it stated -- a five other persons. The five other persons were my nearest friends and collaborators. They were Geheimrat Kuntze Count Albrecht Bernsdorf, my own daughter Countess Erksleben and in the secondary indictment Dr. von Hagen.
Q And you say the indictment was delivered to you at the end of November. When was it scheduled to be held?
A The trial was scheduled for the 14 December.
Q Fourteenth of what month, please.
A The 14 December.
Q The 14 December. Now, I take it that the second trial was postponed?
A The second trial was postponed shortly before hand and we were told because Presiding Judge Freisler had to conduct trials at Nurnberg.
Q And by the time the second trial was again scheduled what had occurred to Judge Freisler in the meantime?
A The next trial took place -- had been scheduled for 18 January but again was postponed shortly before hand. The final date was fixed for the 8 February but was again postponed because on 3 February in an Allied attack by the American and British Air forces the Special Court in _______________ strasse was destroyed and Presiding Judge Freisler as far as I know, with his collaborators, were buried under the ruins.
Q Following perhaps the untimely demise of Freisler what was the next scheduled date of your trial?
A The next date was the 28 April.
Q And before the 29 April what occurred to interrupt that?
A The seige of Berlin progressed so fast that the justice authorities began to evacuate prisoners from the prison. If I remember correctly, from February onward -- I must interpolate here -that since October 1944 my daughter, too had been sent from Ravensbrueck to the Moabit Prison. At first the criminal cases were discharged from Moabit then the light political cases and every day large transports left. At the beginning of April only about 40 to 50 prisoners were left. I had made inquiries several times of the prison as to whether we too could not be discharged but there were strict orders that we were to be kept. There were attacks by day and night, not only air-raids but also artillery. During all of that we were located on the second floor of the prison where with the officials and some criminal prisoners went to the cellar. There was no heating all winter. There was so little food that we all had become very weak.
Then, approximately on the 22nd of April, I made another attempt to get us discharged, but again I was met with a refusal.
Late in the afternoon, on the 23rd, my cell was unlocked. The head wardress of the prison entered and said "Get ready quickly, you will be discharged." In all hurry, everything was collected together; formalities were settled. I saw my daughter for the first time in sixteen months, I could talk to her. A fellow prisoner, who had also been discharged -- her name is Frau Elsass; her husband had been murdered a few months previously--told as that we could drive off with her, as Berlin was surrounded by fighting. We did not know where to go, we had no home, we had no money, we had no food, and we had no clothes but those that we had worn for eighteen months. We succeeded in getting into the car, and only then we were told by the man who was driving the car that it was he who, by a courageous coup de main, had rescued us. He was Dr. Heuss, who knew the Elsass family and us, and who had been very anxious all the time lest perhaps at the last moment we, as one used to say in Nazi terminology, might be exterminated.
Q. Mrs. Solf, may I interrupt you here? Can you tell us from your own personal knowledge of the fate of some of the people you have mentioned thus far in your direct examination?
A. Yes. Geheimrat Richard Kuntze, and Count Bernsdorf, who were both co-defendants of mine at my second trial, were also in Berlin, since October, at the prison in Lehrter Strasse, which was under the Administration of Justice, but where two Gestapo officials had the supervision.
Neither of them had been sentenced yet, and both men, during the night in which we were rescued, around the Lehrter Station, were shot dead by SS detachments, and with them a number of other persons whom I knew, among them a friend whose name was Staehle, who had been sentenced to two years' imprisonment, and who was liquidated all the same.
There were various flying squads who had come down to the cellars where these men were housed. Some of these flying squads numbered three, some seven, and some eight, and all the people whom the SS detachments found were shot dead on that night.
Q. Mrs. Solf, one final question. On the 20th of April, 1945, which was the anniversary of Hitler's birthday, you were in Cottbus Prison. What, if anything, did you hear about mass executions of political prisoners held as prisoners in Brandenburg prison?
A. May I correct you? I was not in Cottbus, but in Moabit on the 20th of April. You said "Cottbus" just now. On the 20th of April 1945 I was in Moabit. Afterwards I heard from friends, who at that time were in the Brandenburg penitentiary, that on the 20th of April-
Q. (Interposing) One moment, please. Can you give us the names of those friends at this time who were in Brandenburg, from whom you heard the story which you are about to relate?
A. The name of the man who told me that in Berlin a few weeks later? His name is Hohlanberg. I don't know him well, but yesterday I had an opportunity here in this building to speak to a man who had the same information.
On the 20th of April a public prosecutor of a Reich prosecutor, I can't say for certain, was sent to Brandenburg by car, because trains no longer ran, and there, among other things, concerning a friend of ours, a Mr. von Mund, who had been sentenced to death a year previously but who, after very severe torture, did make statements against me at my trial -- I was told that apart from him, thirty other persons were murdered there.
I cannot say for certain whether they were shot dead or whether they were hanged, but at any rate they were murdered on the 20th of April.
Q. Do you have any information from these sources as to who may have ordered the executions, the murders, to take place?
A. I assume that the Gestapo, who was in charge of political prisoners, gave the order and handed to the Ministry of Justice the lists of the people concerned, but I cannot say so for certain; it is only an assumption on my part.
Q. Do you know of any Ministry of Justice official who went to Brandenburg to order the execution?
A. No.
Q. I wish to retrace my steps briefly for the final question. You have said previously that you now know that the concentration camp Ravensbrueck was used as an extermination center during the period while you and your daughter were held there. Can you tell us, from your own personal knowledge, of any evidences of such extermination which went on while you were there and which you as a prisoner were able to observe?
A. I was not able personally to see the cremations, but only because the chimney of the incinerator was immediately outside our windows.
Q. When you speak of the incinerator, do you refer to the crematorium?
A. Yes; the chimney of that crematorium ran up the wall of our cells. Naturally, like all of us who were there and who can all testify to it, we observed that during the later months of our stay there, that chimney chimney was hardly ever without smoke.
That was not accounted for by natural death from illness in the camp. Furthermore, I heard from Frau Heuss--that is the wife of the gentleman who rescued us, and who was there until the end--that as the allied troops were approaching, thousands of women were done away with. She saw it herself and told me herself. They were moved into the woods and into places where mines had been laid, and those places were blown up.
Furthermore, I have a personal friend who sat in the Cottbus prison for six years and who, after those six years, was taken back by the Gestapo and was moved to Ravensbrueck at Christmas 1944. Her husband never heard about her and when, in February of 1945, he asked about her again, he was simply told that she had been transferred to Belsen. I had investigations made to help the husband, and owing, to the kindness of the British Red Cross I made inquiries, but she was one of those who was exterminated without name or number.
Q. Are there any other indications, from your personal observations while you were in Ravensbrueck, of exterminations which went on there? Did you hear or see any other evidence which may have led you to believe that exterminations were being conducted?
A. I personally did not see anything, and I cannot say anything about it. I can only give information about the torture to which my friends were subjected.
MR. KING: With one exception, Your Honor, this concludes the direct examination on the part of the Prosecution of the witness Solf. That exception is in the form of a document which only come to our attention this morning. It is a series of the Fuehrer Information Bulletins, the original of which is dated July 18, 1934. We have not, because of the lateness of its coming to our attention, been able to process this document. We have only succeeded in having a translation made which at the moment is not ready for official presentation to the Court. However, because of certain statements which appear in this document I would line to ask the Court's permission for the following procedure: I would like to submit this document to the witness and have her read it to the court, and after reading it to comment as she wishes upon what it contains. I will tell the Court now that it involves the testimony which she has made this afternoon. Will that procedure be agreeable with the court? We will later have both the original German and an official translation.
THE PRESIDENT: Which particular defendant does it affect?
MR. KING: It affects, in the first place, all of them, and in the second place it affects particularly the defendant Lautz.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Grube, have you any comment to make on that?
DR. GRUBE (Counsel for Defendant Lautz): I have no objection against the introduction of the document at this moment, but I would like to reserve the right to myself to summon the witness once again and possibly to ask her for cross examination, and I then do not want to cross examine her as a witness for the defense, but as a witness for the prosecution on the direct examination.
MR. KING: We have a German copy of that available, which we would be glad to make available to counsel for the defendant Lautz. And I assume from the statement made that after seeing the document -- it is very short-- that he could proceed immediately with his cross examination.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, may we confer a minute?
DR. GRUBE: May it please the Court, I do not intend to delay the proceedings here unnecessarily in any way. I would therefore ask you to let me have the document for my perusal and to allow me to hand the document on to the defendant Lautz, and after a discussion with the defendant Lautz, if it is possible then to have cross examination on the document, in that case I would not ask for the witness to be summoned again, but I would cross examine her today on this document. It would probably be helpful if a short recess were taken for that purpose.
MR. KING: We have the document available, or will have it available here very shortly in German and will be glad to, as I said before, make it available to counsel. It is perfectly agreeable to us if the counsel for the defendant Lautz wishes to recall the witness tomorrow morning if we finish, otherwise this afternoon.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I just want to make this observation. I just came in, and as I gather, all that we seek to do is to place before this witness the statement in a Fuehrer report which refers to her and ask her whether or not the facts stated in there apply to her case. In that event, she simply is identifying the authenticity of that Fuehrer report, and anything that the counsel would like to ask her, he can ask her right now as to her identifying it.
We are not offering the document. We are simply identifying it when we offer it.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness has not yet seen the document you refer to?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: No, not as far as I know she *******
THE PRESIDENT: There is no reason in the world ****** you can't show it to her now that I can see, even ******** it has not yet been shown to counsel, since they are ***** insisting on it. The rights of counsel for cross examination must be properly observed, and they will be.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: We find that Mr. Burger left with German translation. I will go and try to find him. Your Honor, it will be very simple, if will indulge us for a minute while we get this.
MR. KING: I have here the English translation, but for purpose of Mrs. Solf's reading of it, I think we should have the German before that begins. I will, however, with a short explanation, hand tne English translation now to Mrs. Solf.
THE PRESIDENT: English? Does she read English?
MR. KING: Very well.
THE WITNESS: Shall I read it by myself, or ---
MR. KING: Will you please read it to yourself now and ascertain the truthfulness of the statements therein. Later we may ask you to read it aloud.
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
MR. KING: The document, when introduced in evidence, will be NG1249. I now hand the German original of Document NG1249 to the translators to be read simultaneously with the reading of the English, which Mrs. Solf will now do. This is the Fuehrer Information Bulletin, 1944 No. 181.
BY MR. KING:
Q. Mrs. Solf, would you read the document which you have.?
A. Which one? The English?
Q. If you would prefer to read the German you may.
A. I don't mind.
Q. Will you proceed, please.
A. Reich Minister for Justice. Information for the Fuehrer, 1944. No. 181. On July 1 -- I can't understand a word. What shall I do?
Q. Take your earphones off when you read.
A. On July 1, 1944, the people's Court sentence ***** Minister Dr. Otto Kiep to death for seditious undermining of the German defense strength. He was, prior to this criminal procedure, foreign policy expert in the OKW as a major of the reserve. At a tea party on 10 September 1943 on day after the treason by Badoglio, given by Elizabeth von Thadden, who was also sentenced to death, Kiep in the course of a longer discussion voiced the opinion that, barring a miracle, the war was lost. Kiep furthermore stated that the time had come to look out for new men, since one had to come to terms with England and America. Thereupon the condemned Elizabeth von Thadden, through a physician, Dr. Reckzeh, got in touch with Professor Sigmund Schultze, whom she had known before, and who in the meantime had emigrated to Switzerland. This Professor Sigmund Schultze arranged Reckzeh's contact with former Reich Chancellor Joseph Wirth, who also lives in Switzerland and occupies himself with the formation of a government in readiness for Germany's expected collapse. Legationsrat Dr. Hilger von Scherpenberg, son-in-law of the former Minister Dr. Schacht, also attended the above-mentioned tea party.
"Van Sherpenberg, who was a member of the SPD until 1933, contradicted Kiep's statements, but since he did not report the incident, he also was sentenced to two years imprisonment.
"Co-defendant was Frau Solf, the wife of the former German Ambassador in Tokyo. She too is charged with having made ******** hostile to the State on this occasion. Proceedings against ****** Solf, however, were detached from the case because investigation** that were conducted in the meantime, produced new evidence ******* her. In the opinion of the Chief Reich Prosecutor of ************ Court, the death penalty is to be taken into consideration ******* in the case of Frau Solf. Her defense counsel raised the question if for foreign policy reasons proceedings against Frau Solf are advisable since the deceased Ambassador Solf was a particularly successful and respected representative of German interests with the Japanese Government."
Q Before asking you to comment, generally, on this, I ask you this question. The original of this Information Bulletin is dated 18 July, 1944. That was some 17 days after your first trial had been concluded. Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q You have not seen it until today, perhaps not at all until the last few minutes, the Fuehrer Information Bulletin from which you have just read?
A No.
Q What do you have to say generally as to the facts reproduced in this Fuehrer Information Bulletin by the Reich Ministry of Justice and sent to Hitler for his edification?
A I was always of the opinion that my arrest, as a result of that tea party was merely a cause, not a reason. At that tea party, I exposed myself comparatively slightly. My attitude toward the National Socialist Government, however, was clear. The attitude of my husband toward the world was well known. My efforts to help persecuted persons were well-known.
So it seemed to me that an arrest was a welcome cause. The name of my husband still stood very high. I had the feeling that they did not like to lay their hands on me, in particular, because they did not wish to injure the feelings of the Japanese because in Japan, there was a large movement against the militarists and against those who started the war without any cause. The interrogations to which I was subjected, about the subject of the tea party, had brought to light comparatively few points actually; only my own attitude, but not the previous history. When the interrogations were concluded, the interrogations about that tea party, at the end of April and May, my most difficult interrogations came. They were mainly connected with my activities connected with those friends who were in my trial proper, Branstock, Cooper, Dr. Metzger, Harnak and many others, none of whom are alive today.
Q Mrs, Solf, may I interrupt you here, once again to ask you this question? During the course of your testimony this afternoon, you have made certain statements which would appear to be in conflict in some respects with this official Information Bulletin. Do you say now that the testimony you have given so far as far as facts are concerned, is correct, and any deviation indicated in this Fuehrer Information Bulletin is not the fact?
A It does correspond to the facts.
Q My question, which perhaps was not clear, is this: There are deviations in the Fuehrer Information Bulletin from which I have read, deviations in fact, from the statements which you have given this afternoon. Now, where those deviations occur, it is your position, is it not, that your testimony as to the facts is accurate, and that the Fuehrer Information Bulletin is incorrect?
A I did not quite understand that.
Q Let me try again. You have made this afternoon, numerous factual references to the Trial and your treatment before the People's Court?
A Yes.
Q In this bulletin, from which you have read, the Fuehrer Information Bulletin, supposedly sent to the Fuehrer to inform him correctly of certain facts, were the facts, the alleged facts in the Fuehrer Information Bulletin different from your testimony? You wish us do you not to regard your testimony as correct?
A Naturally, my testimony was correct.
MR. KING: That is all of the direct examination. The defense may begin their cross examination.
DR. GRUBER: (Counsel for the defendant Lautz) May it please the Tribunal, I would ask you to permit me to discuss briefly with the Defendant Lautz the document which has been introduced so that I can deal with it in my cross-examination. I will waive the 24hour rule.
THE PRESIDENT: How much time do you think you would like for that interview.
DR. GRUBER: I should think at the utmost, five minutes.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take a ten minute recess at this time to afford you that opportunity.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess for ten minutes.
(A short recess was taken.)
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. GRUBE:
Q May it please the Court, I would ask you to permit me to begin with the cross examination. First of all, Your Excellency, I would like to apologize to you for being compelled to refer to facts which naturally meant great difficulties for you, but unfortunately I cannot avoid it. Your Excellency, you said that your husband until 1928 was in the service of the German Reich?
A Yes.
Q May I ask you, did he held any position after '28 in the service of the German Reich?
A No.
Q Further, you said you entertained a great many people, and at your homes all nationalities were represented. May I ask you what nationalities were represented there?
AAll the ambassadors and ministers who were accredited in Berlin. It is difficult to enumerate them.
Q Were Russians among them?
A No.
Q Is it right that concerning the whole matter one must distinguish between two different sets: one is your set and then von Tadden's set?
A Miss von Tadden did not have a set of her own, as far as I know. She was the head mistress of a school at Heidelberg until the beginning of the war, and later she only lived in Berlin for a few months in a two room apartment where she could not entertain properly -not entertain in the technical meaning of the word. She came and went for a time. She was a teacher at Tautzenberg. Her school was taken away from her. Even at that time she had been interrogated several times, and then she stayed in Partenkirchen for a few months where I met her. I didn't know her very well. It was through Under-Secretary Staden that I came to meet her.
Q You said just now and you said it before under direct examination that she was prohibited from continuing to run a school of her own. You said just now that she was repeatedly interrogated. May I ask who interrogated her?
A I cannot tell you who interrogated her. She only told me -I believe it was in Munich -- that she was interrogated and was asked whether she had anything to do with the Oxford Group and other church matters. She comes from a family which is very interested in church matters and she, herself, was very much interested in them. I only know a few casual things about that.
Q Do you know that she had previously been interrogated by the Gestapo?
A Yes, she told me that once -- I believe it was in Munich -that she was interrogated on the matters which I mentioned just now. But nothing further happened.
Q Miss von Tadden at Partenkirchen gave tea parties regularly?
A No.
Q When was that tea party given which became the cause for your arrest?
A On the tenth of September 1943.
Q May I ask you whether it was correct, as you stated before, that you were asked to come to this tea party by telephone?
A Yes. I had not been invited, and in the afternoon while the tea party had started, at about five o'clock, I was rung up and was asked whether I would not like to come because friends had met there to celebrate the 50th birthday of her sister. Therefore I came much later and Mr. von Scherpenberg left when I came, and the party had been going for an hour and a half, and consequently I was only about half an hour with Dr. Reckzeh.
Q Had you previously been repeatedly invited to her tea parties?
A She had no proper home of her own and she only stayed for weeks or months at the home of a friend.