This settlement would make it possible for me to compare the photostat with the original copy.
May I ask you to permit me to put a few questions to the witness? And perhaps Mr. Lafollette will give his views of my suggestion.
THE PRESIDENT: It would seem that the request just made by Dr. Schilf is really addressed to Mr. Lafollette instead of to the Tribunal. You may work that out between yourselves, and the Tribunal will be agreeable to any plan you have.
Now, I did not know that Dr. Schilf was going to make any objection, and I had ruled that it would be admitted. I will now state that admission will be subject to further application on the part of Dr. Schilf if he has any objections to make, or any corrections to make, I should say.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: May Your Honor please, I certainly think that Dr. Schilf should have a photostatic copy of this document. As far as I am concerned, I certainly have no objection to his having access to the original. However--
THE PRESIDENT: As I said a moment ago, you can work that out between yourselves.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I would just like to say, however, that in a sense the original is -- This is not completely within the control of the prosecution. It was delivered to this man in Berlin out of what may be a general section. If I can possibly arrange to comply, I shall, or perhaps I may ask support for my desire to comply by a subsequent ruling of the Tribunal. I simply want to state my position so that Dr. Schilf will know that if I don't comply, it is not a pure arbitrary decision on my part. That is all I want to say.
I understand now that Dr. Schilf wants to cross-examine this witness.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY DR. SCHILF:
Q. Witness, in my questions I can only keep to the copy which I have before me in the German document book.
First of all, I would like to ask you this. According to the copy before me, a chronological order has not been adhered to all the time. Does that correspond to the original?
A. The first two pages are not in chronological order. Except for the first two pages, the rest is in chronological order.
Q. I would ask you to tell me which page numbers are given in the original for those which are 2 and 3 in my document book.
A. Those are the same pages 2 and 3.
Q. The original has the numbers 2 and 3* although it is not chronological? Then I have to ask you another question. Was the pagination of the whole of this original done - afterwards by your department, or was this pagination given on the original when this exhibit was found?
A. The enumeration had to be done for the purpose of photostating those pages. It is not a part of the original document.
Q. In my copy which I have before me here, as I have already mentioned, there are very many typing errors. During the past two days while you were making comparisons, did you also make a comparison between the original in the German language and the copy in the German language such as we have in the document book room?
A. No, I had no access to the German document book.
Q. May I ask you, according to the original which you have before you, are many lines difficult to read, and are some of them quite illegible?
A. No, that is not exactly true; I can read practically everything on the original.
Q. Do you know the German language?
A. Yes.
Q. By virtue of your knowledge of the German language, you can decipher every annotation in the original here? You did not have any difficulties with any symbol or anything which cannot be recognized at first glance, but you could give a meaning to it all?
A. I have had to study the handwriting, but I was able to decipher every word.
Q. In my copy I have found several figures, and I will give you an example. In the copy there is the figure 1237. That figure does not make any sense. I have asked myself whether this sequence of figures 1237, may perhaps in part represent German letters, so that the phrasing might be 1, 2, g Z. Did you find anything like that, where such comparisons could be made, where it was difficult to see whether those were letters or figures?
A. No.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Just a minute; perhaps it might help if Dr. Schilf will refer to the page, if he has it, of the original where he found it. I do not know whether it is paged that way in the German book.
DR. SCHILF: At the moment I am, unfortunately, unable to immediately state the page number in the German copy. I am concerned with a number of cases where, in the copy I have before me, there are four figures.
That is why I am asking whether during the analysis of this document, the witness had difficulty in establishing the meaning of these figures or letters, and whether these figures were meant for letters. I shall be able immediately to quote an example. In the German document book it is on page 101. I do not know whether the German document book corresponds to the original in its pagination. Therefore, I quote the heading of page 101 so that every one here can follow and find the page in the translations.
Page 101, "F". It has already been settled, it is page 113 in the English document book, 101 of the original. Under "a" there is the number 1. I can only read out what I have here: "Aigner", a line, and it says "8 3 2".
BY DR. SCHILF:
Q. May I ask you to tell me, witness, what it ways in the original?
A. I disagree. In the original is the figure "8", the letter "J" and the letter "Z", which stands for the German words "Acht Jahre Zuchthaus", meaning "Eight Years Penitentiary".
Q. Witness, may I ask you to tell me exactly what it says there? Does it say "eight years in the penitentiary" written out in letters?
A. No, there are only the figure "82, the letter "J", and the letter "Z".
Q. From that I can tell that the hieroglyphs which I have in front of me here are merely typing errors. Below the name of Aigner it says "Waffer". Well, in my copy it says "8, 3, 2". What does it say there in the original?
A. "8, J, Z".
DR. SCHILF: Thank you.
I have no further questions to put to the witness, Your Honor, I could go on questioning the witness for hours if I do not have the photostatic copy made available to me. In that case, I would like to know whether Mr. Lafollette himself has any objection to letting me have a copy. I only want to know whether it will be technically possible to lot me have a photostatic copy. That is why I am putting the question now. If I cannot have a photostatic copy, I will have to continue my cross-examination.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I was informed the other day by Mr. Fartena that finally a method had been worked out whereby the defense center may send up to the document room and obtain a photostatic copy.
If that has been worked out, that is a matter in the Secretary General's office.
I will also say that as far as document NG-414 is concerned, in the original exhibit -- if this will help the defense center get a copy out of the document room -- I think Dr. Schilf should have a copy, and I will do everything I can to try to get it. I don't blame Dr. Schilf. I had thought before that I could work out some technical matters that I haven't been able to do, but I am relying on what Mr. Wartena said to me, that that can be done, and I will do everything to help Mr. Wartena get it for Dr. Schilf, because he ought to have it.
THE PRESIDENT: No copy has yet been made then, as I understand it?
MR. LaFOLLETIN: If pour Honor please, of course, we have got one here.
THE PRESIDENT: I mean, one copy for him.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: No, that was never provided for, as I understand it, under the rules. I haven't the power to do anything except to go to the document room and get one of these to bring in here in the courtroom, like a little boy. That is all I can do. However, I will certainly try to find out how this machinery works, and do everything I can to get him one.
JUDGE BRAND: Is it possible for Dr. Schilf to examine the photostatic copy which will actually be put in evidence?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Again, I am advised by Colonel Nesbit that once I give one of these things to him, it goes to the Secretary General's office and, within 48 hours, they have to re-deposit it in the archives. Now, if we withdraw it, it is certainly possible for me to give this copy to Dr. Schilf to have for 48 hours, and I am perfectly willing to do that.
JUDGE BRAND: You mean withdraw it physically, or withdraw it from evidence?
MR. LAFOLLETE: I will withdraw it from evidence, hold it in my hand physically, and give it to him.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: And now I charge him with guarding that with his life, because if I don't have another copy, I don't know when I will get it into evidence.
DR. SCHILF: Will you forgive me if I put another question, just one single question to the witness, although I have said that I had finished the cross-examination? My question concerns merely the circumstances which arise from the document.
BY DR. SCHILF:
h I want to ask you, witness, on various pages of this document there a.re so-called file numbers. For example, here on page 4 in my copy it says "Wednesday, 24 January 1945, 4, G, 11". Then there is a series of figures, and the stroke "21". I only want to ask you: When you were analyzing the document, did you have an opportunity to see the files of which we see the numbers here? Did you have an opportunity to see the files concerned, or did you read, through the document without referring to the other files mentioned in it?
A. I have not examined other records in connection with this document.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Do we understand that it is agreeable to the prosecution to revoke the order admitting this in evidence?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Yes, I withdraw the offer to introduce it, with that understanding.
Now I think I must say also that unless I can work it out with Berlin, I will not be able to promise that I can comply with the request to examine the original. But certainly, if Mr. Schaeffer should be here for another 24 hours, and if Dr. Schilf finds something in the photostat that is not legible, Mr. Schaeffer and I and Dr. Schilf can get together and he can look at the original page where the photostat is not sufficient. Therefore, we will not offer the document.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess at this time until 1:30.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours).
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. KING: The Prosecution calls at this time as a witness Mrs. Hanna Self. We ask that she be sworn at this time. She will testify in the German language.
HANNA SOLF, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE BRAND: Will you plea so stand, raise your right hand, and repeat after me the oath:
I swear by God, the Almighty and Moniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withheld and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE BRAND: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KING:
Q. Will you please give us your name?
A. Lanna Self, nee Dotty.
Q. You are appearing here voluntarily, are you not, to testify to the treatment you received following your arrest and trial before the People's Court?
A. Yes, I appear voluntarily, also in the name of my daughter, and first of all in the name of all my friends who have been murdered and cannot testify here today.
A. You are, are you not, the wife of the late Wilhelm H. Self?
A. I am the widow of Dr. Wilhelm Heinrich Self.
Q. Mrs. Self, even at the risk of reviving memories which may cause you some sadness, will you tell us briefly some of the more outstanding positions which your late Husband held in the German government prior to his retirement?
A. I was married when my husband was Governor of Samoa, where, after Samoa had become a German colony, he had contacts with the Anglo-American world and maintained them for ten years with great success.
Before Samoa became a German Colony he was president of the municipality and as such under oath not only to the German Emperor, but also to Queen Victoria of England and President McKinley. After he left Samoa, having been Governor, he became Under Secretary in the Reich Colonial Office in Berlin. In this function he was a cabinet minister when the war of 1914-1918 started. Since his ideology prescribed the exercise of justice, he was in favor of an understanding among all nations and peoples and continuously during the war he strove for that and fought against those elements which made war more severe and intended to prolong it.
Q. Mrs. Solf, when you speak of the war, you refer, of course, to the first war, do you not?
A. Yes. Against the more severe U-boat warfare he conducted a violent battle. He attempted at the last moment to save the life of Edith Cavell and tried to fight against many other perpetrations. At the end of 1918 he was appointed as Foreign Minister to the last wartime cabinet. It was he who upon the request of Hindenburg and Luddenderff sent the telegrams to President Wilson in order to ask for an armistice. Then in order to save the unity and peace of the country he tried to move the Emperor to resign. Later under the government of the first president of the Republic, Ebert, he tried to save what still could be saved. Then for one year he left all of his offices, but in 1920 he was recalled to assume the post of ambassador in Japan. There he remained until 1928 and took care of economic, but especially cultural relations with the Far East. He esteemed those and and attempted to improve the relations between Japan and the United States.
He warned time and 'again that they should not continue in the path of materialism in Japan. I have had the satisfaction of seeing that now, after the collapse of Japan, the American Government, that is to say the Government of the United States, has recalled all those gentlemen in Japan with whom my husband worked together, the former Foreign Minister Shydehara and Yoshito.
Q. Mrs. Solf, may I interrupt here for a moment. The liberal humanitarian principles for which your husband stood you have recited in part. Are there any other characteristic examples of the humanitarian manner in which your husband lived his distinguished career?
A. My husband, after he had left his office in 1928, not only devoted himself to scientific work, and in all these works played an important role, but first of all when the Nazis came to power he tried to help those who were persecuted; first of all, those who were persecuted on racial grounds. He tried once to make it clear to Goebbels just what the cultured Jews who had been patriots had done for Berlin and for Germany. Goebbels had no understanding for that, and said, "That this poison has penetration even you, Your Excellency, shows how dangerous it is."
Q. May I ask when your husband died?
A. My husband died on 6 February 1936.
Q. From the time of the Nazi rise to power in 1932 until the death of your husband in 1936 did you as a family live according to the precepts which had dictated your conduct before the Nazi rise to power? In other words, did you carry on or try to carry on in the same liberal tradition?
Of course I lived according to the ideology of my husband and I have raised my children in that ideology. My husband was a liberal. He was, as someone said about him once, "open to the world and still true to his country," and that is low the atmosphere in the entire hero was best described. Since my husband had served for forty years of his life in the entire world in America, in England, in Europe, in the Far East, Africa, and was known throughout for his ideology of love of human beings, of respect for the individual and respect for the opinion of the individual, I have tried to continue in this vein. The circle of people that gathered in our home was very large and it included members of all nations. That brought it about that our house , our home, was a natural adversary to the ideology of the Hazis.
Q. Will you please tell us when you were arrested?
A. I was arrested on 12 January 1944 together with my sister, in whose house I lived, her housekeeper and my daughter.
Q. So far as you know, what was the overt act which led to your arrest?
A. I did not quite understand this.
Q. What was the cause of your arrest, as far as you were told by the people who arrested you? Were you ever given any reason at the time of your arrest or afterwards?
A. Then I was arrested there were four officials of the Gestapo and criminal police officials. I asked and I was told I would find out later.
Q. I seem to remember in the accounts which I have read of your arrest that one of the charges brought against you was that you, at one time in the fall of 1943, attended a certain social tea; do you remember that to party and what if any connection it had with your eventual apprehension by the Gestapo?
A. There was a tea party at Miss von Tadden's on 10 December 1943.
Q. One moment please, who was Miss von Tadden?
A. Fraulein von Tadden was the principal of a finishing school near Heidleberg. Her idealogy was outspoken Christian ideology. The school was dissolved in 1942 by the Ministry. Miss von Tadden was then unemployed. Later, she took a job with the Red Cross. She was, at that time, in Paris, but she came here on vacations together with friends. She was, first of all, interested in church matters. She had invited the Under secretary Zarben who under Bruening was in the Reich Treasury at the time of the seizure of power by the Nazis. He had to relinquish his office because his wife was Jewish. Besides him, General Consul Kieb was invited. He had been General Consul in New York. He hold a side job at OKW in Berlin. Among those present was also Legationsrat Scherpenberg from the Foreign Office, Auswaertige Amt, Miss von Kurowski and Fraulein Zarben who was there with her father.
I had been invited by telephone after the tea party had already started. They all had the same ideology and were good friends. There were several other gentlemen, one was a stranger who was introduced to mo as Dr. Reckzeh. I think I was with him for half an hour. The conversation, of course, was about the general condition. All of us were of the opinion that something had to happen to end the war. I spoke very little. I mentioned during the course of the discussion that it was really impossible to speak of victory at a time when Italy was lost. The submarines did not work any more. The secret weapon which had been promised for a long time did not appear. It did not materialize.
Q. Did you not, also, at this time, have with you letters which you gave to Dr. Reckzeh for delivery to Switzerland? Will you elaborate upon that phase of the party please?
A. In my handbag, by coincidence, I had three letters for Switzerland. It that time, we had to bring letters to the Post Officer personally with our passport, and that took quite some time. Therefore, I had the letters in my handbag for several days, and when Miss von Tadden said that Dr. Reckzeh was going to Switzerland, and could also take along my letters which were un-political, I told him quite openly if he had any difficulty, he should just thrown them away. He took them along. On account of these letters, during the interrogations by the Gestapo, I had no difficulties because they found them quite uninteresting. They thought I should be reprimanded. President Freisler, however, later spoke about these -
Q. I think, perhaps, Mrs. Solf, we are getting ahead of our story a little. May I ask you, again, who this individual was to whom you gave the letters?
A. Dr. Reckzeh. He was a young doctor from Charity Hospital in Berlin. I did not know anything about him. Miss von Tadden had introduced, me to him as a young man, who for scientific medical reasons, had an opportunity to go to Switzerland frequently to take up contacts with neutrals and immigrants, opponents of Nazis, at any rate.
I did not see him either before or after except as a witness in my trial.
Q. You previously said that the letters which you handed to him were only personal, they contained nothing whatsoever that could be construed as political, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. After you were arrested by the Gestapo, where were you taken? Incidentally, where were you arrested?
A. I was arrested in the morning at 8:30 together with the three persons I have named before. We were put into two cars and brought to Munich to the -
Q. From where?
A. Partenkirchen. We were brought into the RSHA, the Reich Security Main Office, the Gestapo Prison in Munich. I separated immediately from the other three and I was taken to a room where Criminal Counselor Struebing questioned me. I was questioned in the morning and in the afternoon and in the evening. I believe that was the first day for about eight hours. Our cells were very primative. Two female detectives were in one room. The next day I was again interrogated by Struebling. In the evening he told me that he was compelled to send me to Berlin. My daughter, my sister and housekeeper remained in Munich under arrest.
First I was put into barracks for three weeks at Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen near Oranienburg. From there I was taken to Berlin for interrogations, first to Prinz-Albrechtstrasse and then when that had been bombed out, to Kurfuerstendamm.
Q. One moment please. May I get clear where you went from the Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen? Did you move from Sachsenhausen to Berlin or did you move to some other camp first?
A. From Sachsenhausen, no. From Munich we arrived in Sachsenhausen in the evening. Every two or three days, I was taken for interrogations to the R.S.V.A.
Q. Were you later transferred to another concentration camp prior to the time you were moved to Berlin?
A. On the fifth of February, together with Miss von Tadden, and another lady who was later released. I was brought to Ravensbrueck. Ravensbrueck was the large concentration camp for women. We were brought to a prison consisting of individual cells. From that day on, I was always in an individual cell.
Q How long did you remain at Ravensbrueck?
A It must have been the tenth of June. Until the tenth of June, I was in Ravensbrueck, Q Were you interrogated further by the Gestapo during your period of stay at Ravensbrueck?
Can you tell us about that?
A Yes. There, the difficult, severe, long interrogation started, and in March my daughter also was brought there and was subjected to the same interrogations as I was.
Q What were the nature of the interrogations? I mean by that, the interrogations conducted at your convenience or under what conditions were they hold?
A We only had harshops, and if I may say so, everybody was against us. Mostly we were interrogated during the night. In the evening, we were taken out after we had fallen asleep. We had to dress quickly and were taken about 20 kilometers to the police school at Dreegen by automobile where the Reich Security Main Office of the Gestapo had its office, after the office in Berlin had been bombed out.
Q Approximately how long did these interrogations continue at each session, on the average, would you say?
A They never took less than eight hours-- mostly ten hours, fourteen hours without food. They were cross examinations. We were treat ened and severe measures were threatened. I had one night interrogation where three weeks in advance I had been put on a hunger diet. In the evening I received a sleeping pill, and then an hour or an hour and a half later they woke me up. All these things were quite obvious in order to intimidate us and in order to make us insecure. My daughter had the same hardships and interrogations and suffered from the same threats and intimidations.
Q What point did the Gestapo seem to be driving toward in these interrogations? What admissions were they attempting to get from you?
A The first interrogations which referred to my first trial continue until the end of March or the beginning of April. They all had to do with the conversations at that tea party, and I was to be forced to state in particular what Miss von Tadden and Consul General Kieb had talked about.
From the very beginning, one was asked how one's feelings toward national socialism was, and I never left any doubt in the minds of the Gestapo officials that I rejected it. There points I emphasized at all times: One was the right for free expression of opinion; the second was persecution of the Jews; and the third was persecution of the Christian religions. Consequently, at the end of my interrogations for the first trial, these points were brought out as the essence, and forwarded by the Gestapo to the People's Court. It was hold against me and I had to deny it, otherwise I would be brought before the People's Court for reasons of my attitude, and as I was told, that would be the decisive factor for the People's Court.
Q Mrs. Solf, I have the full appreciation for the delicacy of the next question which I am about to ask. You have referred several times to your sympathy with and aid in behalf of persecuted Jews in Germany. May I ask you a personal question? What is your religion?
A I am Protestant.
Q Now during the time that you were hold at Ravensbrueck, were you permitted to communicate with friends or consult legal counsel at any time up to the time you were removed from Ravensbrueck?
A I was permitted to write letters to my children, also business letters, and I also received mail, I could never have any visitors As a prisoner of the Gestapo, I could not have any counsel. It was only due to the great concern of my youngest son who had returned from the front to Berlin in order to see me and found out there that his mother had been imprisoned by the Gestapo-- it was due to this concern of my son that he sent me a gentleman whom he knew in order to get news from the outside. Apart from that, I had no connection with the outside.
Q When did your first learn officially that you were to be tried by the People's Court?
A I was never notified officially. Until the very last moment I was not aware of it. In the beginning of July, we were told that we would be brought away, but not where we were to go, and not for what purpose. Only through rumors and from other prisoners, I received information that I was to be brought before the People's Court together with the friends I have mentioned before.
Q Excuse me, may I have that date again? When were you told by rumor that you right be tried by the People's Court? Did you say the beginning of July?
A The beginning of June.
Q Now, prior to the time that you were actually brought before the People's Court for trial, were you removed from Ravensbrueck, and if so, to what prison, please?
A Miss von Trodden, Miss Kurowski, Miss Zarden and I were taken by two Gestapo officials into the prison at Cottbus. The men in our trial, Kiep and Herr von Scherpenberg were brought into the penitentiary in Brandenburg.
Q Cottbus is a penitentiary for women inmates and Brandenburg is an equivalent institution for men, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q They are both in the vicinity of Berlin?
A Cottbus is net far-- I don't know how many kilometers from Berlin, and Brandenburg is closer to Berlin and is west of Berlin. Cottbus is to the south of Berlin.
Q From Cottbus, where were you transferred prior to the trial?
A. From Cottbus, where I tried to make an application to be brought before an investigation judge, which was not even answered, on the 30th of June, we were taken to the prison at Koabit pending trial. We arrived in the afternoon, the usual processing took about an hour, and then we were handed the indictment which had been dated a few days before but had not been given to us at the time.
Q Before we get into the question of the indictment, may I ask you under what circumstances were arrangements made for defense counsel for yourself pending trial?
A It was extremely difficult since I had no idea that I was to be brought before the People's Court, I had not made any preparations. My oldest son who happened to be in Berlin at that time then asked Dr. Dicks to be my defense counsel.
Q Excuse me. That is Dr. Rudolf Dicks?
A. Yes. He had done that already in May. A letter in answer to the request of my son was sent by Dr. Dicks to Ravensbrueck saying that he was prepared, of course if necessary, to take over my defense. That letter was not given to me by the Gestapo. It was about three weeks later when by accident it was found among my files, and Criminalrat Lauer gave it to me with thin excuses. At Cottbus later I tried to give him my power of attorney. There were difficult conditions concerning mail and I owe the fact that I put the signature of that power of attorney to the coincidence that a relative of Miss Kurowski who had come to Cottbus for that purpose made it possible that I could affix my signature for Dr. Dicks on that document.
All four of us were standing in the doors of Moabit, of course full of fears, looking for our defense counsel. I owe it only to the care of Dr. Dicks that we found each other.
Q Mrs. Solf, may I interrupt you here and ask when you first met Dr. Dicks, your defense counsel; I mean in connection with this trial.
A Yes, it must have been that afternoon at about five o'clock; the afternoon of June 30th.
Q The afternoon of June 30th?
A On the afternoon of the 30th of June; we had arrived, it may have been three o'clock when we arrived, and then there were several formalities to take care of; then we looked for the defense counsel; it may have been five o'clock, or later, when I found him.
Q You arrived there on the 30th of June; is that correct?
A Yes, indeed.
Q And shortly after your arrival you first met in connection with this trial your defense counsel. When, may I ask, was the indictment served on you?
A The indictment was handed to us between the formality after the arrival, which took about one hour, and the time when we found, I can only say when we found Dr. Dicks. I may have had a chance to read it for about ten minutes, then I could talk to Dr. Dicks for one hour.
Q That is the total time that you spoke with him prior to going to trial the next morning; is that correct Or approximately one hour?
A Yes. Defonse Counsel as much as I know had to leave the prison at seven o'clock; I can not remember the time precisely, but it was a very short time.