have to stay with the other. I also said, during that conference, that the individual Jew, under the conditions which would be created for him now, could not exist alone.
Q In that connection, Mr. President, may I be permitted to point out two affidavits which I included in the document book Funk under No. 16 and No. 3, and may I ask to take official notice of their contents as evidence?
The affidavit No. 3, that is, Exhibit No. 3, in the document book on Page 12 of the German text was made by the wife of the accused, of the Defendant -- page 14 of the English text, my Lord -- and it was offered at the beginning of the trials on 5 November 1945. From that affidavit which I shall give here in substance, we can see that at the time of the perpetrations of November, 1938, against the Jews, the Defendant, together with his wife, and his niece, stayed in Berlin, and besides, that was not Munich where the so-called "Old Fighters" were assembled and where Minister Dr. Goebbels quite suddenly and to the general surprise of everyone, proclaimed the proposals for the Jewish programs.
Mrs. Funk confirms in her affidavit that her husbank, as soon as he heard of such perpetrations, very excitedly called Dr. Goebbles over the telephone and asked him, "Have you gone crazy to commit such outrages? One has to be ashamed to be a German. Our whole prestige abroad is getting lost. Here I era trying day and night to preserve the national patrimony and you throw it recklessly out of the window. If this beastly mess does not stop immediately, I will throw the whole matter overboard." And that was the telephone conversation which at that time the defendant had from Berlin with Dr. Goebbles. And the further contents of that affidavit are concerned with interventions and stops which the defendant took for Jewish acquaintances of his, and in a similar sense, gentlemen, we find in the affidavit by Heinz Kallus, who had been Ministerialrat in the Ministry of Economy under the defendant Funk.
I submitted this affidavit as No. 15 of the document book Funk. It was made out on the 9th of December, '45, and this witness also confirms that Funk, of course, was extremely surprised by those perpetrations and that he got immediately in touch with the competent offices in order to prevent any further perpetrations which the defendant Funk has given himself. In connection with that affair concerning the Jews, I should like to refer to document 3489-PS; I repeat, 3489-PS, which can be found, on page 19 of the trial brief against Funk. That is a circular letter by Funk of the 6th of February, '39, published in the Ministerialblatt of the Ministry of Economy of the Reich, and here we find and I quote:
"Just to what extent and what speed one has to use the authorities of the Four Years Plan depends on the orders given by me, according to the directives by the Plenipotentiary for the Four Years Plan." of that time the defendant Funk expresses clearly that, even in this field, he only had to pass on and to execute the directives of the Four Years Plan.
Is that correct, Dr. Funk?
Q Dr. Funk, you have said before that in keeping with your entire past and your principal attitude and in keeping with your entire philosophy, the reproach concerning the elimination of Jews from public life, that you have considered that reproach a very severe one. And in that connection I should like to put to you that during an interrogation in Nurnberg on the 22nd of October, 1945, you have told the interrogating officer --you finally broke into tears and you told him at that time: "At that time I should have resigned. I am guilty." That Quotation is a literal quotation which was mentioned in the course of the proceedings once before. Perhaps you can tell us how it came to that remark and that collapse on your part which I believe I can read from that record? into the prison.
Q Dr. Funk, one question-murderer and a thief; I can't know of what else. I was sick for nine or ten weeks, and I came straight from the hospital bed; I was brought here daring the night. During these days my interrogations started right away. I have to admit that the American officer who interrogated me, Colonel Gurfein, took care of my interrogation with extreme consideration and again and again he interrupted when I was unable to go on. And when these measures of terror and violence against Jews were put up to me, I suffered a nervous breakdown because at the moment it came to my mind, with all clearness that from here on the catastrophe took its course all the way up to the terrible and atrocious things about which we have heard here and about which I know only in part from the time of my captivity. I felt ashamed and the feeling of guilt at that moment and I do feel the same way today, but too late.
orders and directives that came down to me. That is no crime against humanity. I have merely carried out the will of the state and put that before my inner voice of conscious because I was obliged to serve the state. I considered myself also obliged to act according to the will of the Fuehrer, the supreme leader of the state, especially since these measures were necessary just for the protection of the Jews, in order to save them from absolute lack of legal protection and further arbitrary acts of violence. They were compensated, I felt, and, as it can be seen from the circular letter which you have just quoted, I gave strict directives to my functionaries to carry out these legal measures in a just and correct way.
It's a particularly tragic fact that I was charged with these things. I have said already that in perpetrations against Jews, I took no part. From the first moment I disapproved severely of these and they shocked me seriously. I have done everything, as much as it was within my power, to continue to help the Jews. I have never thought about an extermination of the Jews. At that time I did not participate in any way in these things, as far as these happenings are concerned.
Q Dr. Funk, you have just mentioned that you had not thought of an extermination, that is, an annihilation of the Jews. I should like to refer to a document which has been quoted before 3545-PS, which at the time had been submitted by the Prosecution and that, as you may recall, is the photostat of the "Frankfurter Zeitung", of the 17th of November 1938. That is of an issue which appeared after the incidents, the happenings with which we are now concerned. In that issue of the "Frankfurter Zeitung", a speech held by you was published, which was concerned with the legal measures for the exclusion of Jews from German economic life and you certainly recall that the prosecutor, in his presentation of the 11th of January 1946, has accused you, and I quote: "That the economic program, the program of economic persecution of the Jews were merely a part of the large program of extermination". And that is in conformity with a remark in your trial brief, where it said, and I quote: "It was merely a part of a larger program of extermination of the Jews." Now, in all the proclamations which were issued by you during that time, I find no reason to think that you agreed with an extermination, that is, an annihilation of the Jews or that you had demanded such. What can you say about that opinion of the persecution? I ever demanded an extermination of the Jews or made any statement of the kind. Apparently this expression by the prosecutor, in my opinion, is only based on imagination or a temperament with which he viewed these things. I myself have never suggested the extermination of the Jews and of the atrocious happenings which have been mentioned here, I did not know anything and I had nothing to do with it; and later, even as much as I recall, I have never taken part in any measures against the Jews since these things were no more in my province of work; with the exception of those legal measures, I do not believe that in all my work, in my position, I had done or caused anything that had anything to do with Jewish matters.
Q Is it correct, Dr. Funk, that in connection with the carrying out of these directives which you had to issue, that you yourself intervened for a large number of people, of individuals who at that time had to suffer from these directives and who approached you personally for aid and that you did so that in this way the execution of these decrees could be moderated?
A Yes. I had seen to it that these decrees were handled in a fair way and according to the basic laws but, of course, the carrying out of these directives was not so much a matter to be taken care of by the Ministry but it demanded a great deal on the attitude of the government officers and Gauleiters and offices dependent on Gauleiters, and many complaints have reached me about the manner in which aryanization was carried out and my assistants will confirm that in every single case where I was informed about persecutions, I intervened. I even dismissed an official in that department when I heard about the incorrect way in which matters were handled.
Q Why?
A Because these incorrect ways occurred. As I have said before, I have done everything in my power to aid the Jews in the my of foreign currency an also in carrying out these directives, I did everything in my power within the framework of whatever was possible to modify them.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, this question as to how Funk in fact stood as to the carrying out of these decrees and how he himself as an official disapproved of them, that question I also treated in an interrogatory which was sent to the former State Secretary Landfried. That interrogatory was returned some time ago but we found out that a wrong interrogatory had been sent out and the correct answer had been received on Saturday. It is now in translation and I assume that these answers in the right interrogatory which are the answers by the State Secretary Landfried, will be submitted in the course of the day and that it will then be submitted as document No. 16 of the appendix, Exhibit No. 16. I assume, however, that you will approve if I sue the answers of the witness Landfried now in connection with this.
Landfried was from 1939 to 1943 -
THE PRESIDENT: Has the prosecution seen the Document?
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
MR DODD: We haven't seen this document. We have seen the German text. I don't read German and I haven't had an opportunity to read it. It hasn't been translated.
THE PRESIDENT: The document can be submitted after the prosecution had seen it. You needn't submit it al this moment. Have you any other witness or not?
DR. SAUTER: Not for that.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, but are there any other witness at all?
DR. SAUTER: One witness, Dr. Heidler, but for other subjects.
THE PRESIDENT: I presume the defendant will be cross-examined.
DR. SAUTER: I beg your pardon
THE PRESIDENT: Presumably the defendant will be cross examined.
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents will be translated by then.
DR. SAUTER: Yes. Mr. President, if you so desire, then I will have to submit that document later, separately.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. BY DR. SAUTER:
Q Dr. Funk, I come now to a reproach which, according to my knowledge, has not been mentioned in the trial brief yet and that is the problem of Occupied Territories. That is the question of exploitation, of plunder of Occupied Territories costs of occupation, clearing agreements, stabilization of currency and such. The prosecution asserts that you had actively participated in a program for criminal plunder of Occupied Territories. That can be found on page -- this is the record of the proceeding of the 11th of January 1946; that accusation is not further specified, but during the session of the 21st of February, page 4770 -- I repeat, 4770 of the German transcript -- there is reference made to a decree of the Reichs minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, the defendant Rosenberg, and that decree was submitted by the prosecution on No. 1015-PS, and it represents the copy of a decree by the Minister for the East Rosenberg to the Reich Commissars in the Occupied Eastern Territories.
The decree tells the Commissars about the task of the "Special Staff Rosenberg" for securing of cultural property; as such, may I assume cultural treasures, with such cultural treasures, the Reich Minister for Economy had nothing to do but we Can see that that letter -- and that is very peculiar -- from that letter of Rosenberg of 7 April 1942, that the letter did not only go to various other offices but also to you; that is to say, to the Reich Ministry for Economy and from that fact alone, apparently from that fact alone, the Soviet Prosecutor has accused you that you had actively participated in the plunder of the Occupied Territories. I had to explain the connection to you in such detail so that we know what we are confronted with and maybe you can speak only briefly about it.
A. Up to the time when these proceedings started, I didn't even know what the Einsatzstab Rosenberg, the Special Staff Rosenberg, was, what its task was, what its extent was. I have no knowledge that the Ministry of Economy had anything to do with the safeguarding of cultural treasures. I can't say a thing to it.
Q. You can't say anything about this point, about the Einsatzstab Rosenberg?
A. About the policy in the occupied territories I can say a great deal.
Q. Then, Dr. Funk, in the interrogatory of Dr. Landfried which I have mentioned before, there were five or six questions concerning your attitude on the economic policies in the occupied territories as he knew it. Then, I put questions to him as to whether you had given directives to the military commanders or the Reich Commissars for the occupied territories, or to the chiefs of the civil administration in Alsace-Lorraince. Furthermore, I asked whether it was right that economic directives for occupied territories also did not come from you as Reich Minister for Economics, but from the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan. Then I put questions concerning your attitude on the question of exploitation and plunder of occupied territories, particularly in the West, about currency policies, devaluation of currency, and other such things.
Now, D.r Funk, I cannot use the statements by the witness Landried at this moment, and that is because, by a mistake made by the particular office, the answers from Landfried arrived only last Saturday. Will you please, since this is your personal testimony, add anything to these questions, or would you like to refer to whatever I shall submit to the Tribunal as soon as I have received translations? for you to refer to that chapter.
A. I should like to state my position on various questions, but the details of these problems will naturally be better explained by the State Secretary than by myself.
well as Reichsminister Lammers, have stated here that I, as Reichsminister for Economy, had no authority to issue directives. The Reichsmarshal, during his testimony, stated -- and I marked it down:
"As to the directives and the economic policy of the Minister for Economy and Reichsbank President Funk, for these I only was responsible." special directives which had to do with the ministries and the offices in occupied territories, then they came from the general directives of the Reichsmarshal, were based on them, and as he said, they were based on his personal responsibility. economic fields could only be given by the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan. The carrying out of economic policy was the task of the military commanders or the Reich Commissars who were directly subordinate to the Fuehrer As far as the military commanders were concerned, as well as the Reich Commissars, they had under them officials for the various departments. Among them, of course, were also officials from the Ministry of Economy and the Reichsbank. There were even people from private industry who were active with them, and there was, of course, close cooperation between the offices of the military plenipotentiaries and the Reich Commissars and the various departments back home, with the exception of occupied territories in Russia where the Reich Commissars were subordinate to a special minister, that is, the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories. There, therefore, there was a special regulation, but if we in the Ministry wanted to have anything done by the military commanders or the Reich Commissars, we had to ask them for it or we had to get a directive from the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan. Alsace-Lorraine, and in other territories where they were, and here also, departments such as the Ministry for Economy and the Reichsbank had no direct authority to issue directives.
operation and traffic existed between the offices in the occupied territories and the respective departments back home. and in person -- tried as hard as I could to save the occupied territories from exploitation. I fought a desperate fight indeed, a desperate struggle for the maintenance of a stable currency in these territories, because again and again it was suggested to me that I reduce the exchange rate in the occupied territories so that Germany could buy more easily and more cheaply in these countries, and I did everything that could be thought of to maintain economic order in these territories. succeeded in carrying through an increase of the exchange rate of the Danish krone, because the Danish National Bank and the Danish Government, for good reasons, asked for it. 1942 as in 1944. The memorandum of the Reichsbank for the stabilization of the cose of occupation, which I caused, was quoted here by the American Prosecutor. of Finance, the General Quartermaster, that is, the highest positions in the armed forces, and in the case of France and Denmark and other countries, also the Minister for Foreign Affairs.
territories in good order. I was successful finally in making the Reichsmarshal tissue a decree, which prohibited all German officers from buying on the back market; but that occurred after it had come to pass that in many territories many had sinned against that. of order in the occupied territories it was necessary that the social life should not be disturbed; and that, therefore, as a matter of principle I had always been against the forced deportation of foreign workers from the occupied territories to Germany. and my State Secretaries will be able to confirm that -- that it was clear to me that Sauckel was in a very difficult, indeed, desperate, situation. Again and again he demanded manpower for German; economy. But I, myself, and particularly after I had turned over the entire armament production to Speer and entered into the Central Planning, I had not only no more interest, officially speaking, that workers should be brought to Germany from abroad, but, on the contrary, I had a great interest to see that the workers remained in the occupied territories. into these territories, and particularly for that reason, as the Minister who was responsible for securing consumers foods for the population, I had a great interest to see that in the occupied territories orderly work should be done and no economic or social disturbances should occur. State Secretaries and the vice president of the Reichsbank should make their statements on this problem, because, with the carrying out of these principles and policies, they had more to do than I. plundered occupied territories and other countries, I can only say that the clearing arrangement was not introduced by us first in connection with the occupied territories or during the war, but that that was the normal way of trade between Germany and her business or trade partners, a system which had been forced upon us when -- and that has been pointed out by Schacht -- when other nations resorted to it, to use the results of German exports for payment of German debts.
real debts for merchandise, and that is important. I have said again and again that each clearing debt is a true debt of Germany and it will be repaid at the purchase value which was necessary at the time when these obligations were taken. That especially I had stated in my last speeches in Vienna in March of 1944, and in Koenigsberg in July 1944, in detail and as clearly as possible. the war that debt should be transformed into a European bond, a loan, so that it should not remain on the narrow platform of a bilateral arrangement but should be actually commercialized, from which it can be seen clearly that I considered that clearing indebtedness necessary as a true debt, such as arises from shipment of merchandise, so that the nations who had such demands on Germany could be satisfied after the war. care of at the same rates that existed at the time when that debt occurred. If, however, in peace treaties, countries would have had to pay reparations, if any such tiling would have come up, then these reparations of course could only have been paid in merchandise. Then, reasonably, it would have been necessary to establish a relation between the German debts and German demands. a true debt. That is why I have to reject the accusation that with the aid of the clearing I intended an exploitation of the occupied territories, and even stronger I have to reject the accusation that I was also responsible that the occupied territories suffered from tremendous expenses, such as the expenses for the occupation expense for the occupation troops.
I can prove that I have always objected against these charges against occupied territories, and the witnesses who will still testify can confirm this.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, the defendant has referred to two speeches before, which he held in Vienna and in Koenigsberg. These are two addresses which are concerned in part with the subject of the treatmebt of clearing debts, and deal also with the favorite subject of the defendant Dr. Funk, that is, a European economic community between Germany and her neighbor nations, that is to say, an economic community on the basis of full equality. notice of these speeches, the content of which we have mentioned, the defendant and I. That is, the speech at Vienna of the 10th of March 1944. It is Number 10 in my document book, and the speech held in Koenigsberg at the occasion of the 400th anniversary of the University in his home town, the 7th of July 1944. I repeat, 7th of July, 1944. In my document book it is Number 11, Funk Number 11.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, if this document number 11 is offered by the defendant for the purpose of showing what this defendant's policy was toward the occupied countries, I think it is proper for me to point out that the speech did not refer to the occupied countries but rather to the satellite states of Germany.
DR. SAUTER: Furthermore, I point to document 3819-PS, which has also been submitted by the Prosecution. That is the minutes which the defendant has mentioned before of the meeting with Minister Lammers on the 11th of July 1944. meeting and mention is made of him only in one sentence, and I quote, on page 8 on the bottom:
"Reichsminister Funk expects considerable difficulties of inconsiderate raids, difficulties of production in non-German territories."
understand, but if one considers the entire connection, one can see that the defendant Funk wanted to warn against violent action in the recruitment of foreign workers for German production and for German armament. He warned against any violent action, against raids, Razzien, as it is called in the protocol, because thereby, in his opinion, production in the occupied territories had been seriously disturbed.
Then, Mr. President, may I mention another document. That is Document 2149 - PS, and it contains the following:
"An expert statement by the Reichsbank of the 7th of December 1942 concerning the question as to whether the expenses for the French occupation troops should be increased or not." the suggestion made by the defendant Funk, but in spite of his protests, And that expert opinion to which the defendant Funk has referred before, and which I have just quoted, was written on the 11th of December 1942. In utmost detail it presents the reasons why Funk and his Reichsbank very definitely protested against any increase in the cost of occupation. Funk concerning the cost of occupation in Greece. BY DR. SAUTER:
Q Did you hear the testimony by the witness Dr. Neubacher, who was ambassador in Rumania and Greece, and who confirmed that there, also, you tried to reduce the cost of occupation?
THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to be much longer?
DR. SAUTER I believe that I have to put some more questions. I think it would be better if we adjourned now.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn this afternoon at half past four.
**LTHER FUNK - Resumer BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Professor Funk, I would like to return to the question of the socalled plundering of the occupied countries. You as Reichsminister of Economics, which you were at the time, can certainly give us information as to how, in your opinion and from your observation, the productivity of the occupied countries and their production were for Germany and her carrying on of the war.
A. The achievements of the occupied countries for the joint carrying on of the war were without doubt of great significance. As far as the occupied countries are concerned, I considered the occupied country together with the total German economy; I considered it as a joint community of production for the carrying on of the war, a joint effort for the bringing about of a new order in Europe. Even in the occupied countries, the same basic economic principles applied and were maintained, in the occupied countries as in Germany herself. the occupied countries had produced in the years 1941, 1942, and 1943, and just how much they had contributed to the joint effort. The figure I arrived at was 90-billion Reichsmarks. That certainly is an extraordinarily high figure. Of course, in this connection, one must take into consideration the fact that the currencies of the various countries were figured in Reichsmarks. That is, the decreased purchasing power of these figures cannot be expressed. In truth, therefore, the achievement of the production is of a smaller extent than these figures would show.
about two-thirds, that is-- raised about 260-billion marks. This sum was raised by Germany; in other words, almost three times as much as the occupied countries raised. the monetary system were concerned, practically until the time of the invasion, in regulating and stabilizing the currency system, in such a way that French finances at the end of the German occupation were much healthier than German finances, and that France, if those circumstances had not taken place which actually did arise later on, would have been able to reconstruct her financial system on a healthy basis. submitted here. This is document R.S.22. This is a document which deals with French deliveries to Germany. It is an official report to the French Government about forced labor in France. duced the figures which show French delivereies to Germany and the importance they had in the entire French production. These figures show that out of the entire French production with which we are dealing in these three years, on the average, 30% to 35% was sent to Germany for the joint carrying on of the war. These figures in some aspects, and especially those figures which deal with the welfare of the French economy, such as textiles, gas, electricity, and so forth, in some cases average only 5% or 6%, But that, to someone interested in social problems, if he does not look at these matters from the point of view of the carrying on of the war, but from a siphoning off of 35%, is important, and would bring about stronger repercussions for the entire economy as far as the Russian areas are concerned. As far as the war economy is concerned, indeed, my ministry was eliminated entirely from these problems; but we did make efforts to have certain factories and firms active who at their own risk could buy and sell in these areas.
regions. I was chairman of the supervisory commission of the Continental Oil Company, which was active in these regions at the responsibility of the 4-Year Plan. But I personally was only in a supervisory and financial capacity for this company.
Q. Mr. Witness, at the end of this morning's session, you spoke about the so-called Central Planning Board, a body about which we have heard a good deal; and you set forth thoroughly but briefly that you as a minister of economy had no interest in the fact that foreign workers would be transported to Germany, no matter whether for armament or other purposes.
Do I understand you correctly?
Q When was that?
Q Autumn of 1943?
A Yes. And for the first time on the 22nd of November, I attended a session of the Board. At that time, for a fact, I did not only have no interest in having foreign workers brought to Germany but as far as the economics of the thing was concerned I was interested in having the workers remain abroad, for in the occupied countries the production of consumer goods had grown so that this production, that is, French production or Belgian production, could work without being hindered, for the German populace. I was interested in not having the workers carried away, and especially was I against the fact that they be taken by force, for in that way the entire social order would be disturbed. that the German economy had workers, but these questions were not dealt with in the Ministry of Economics but either in the Four-Year Plan where a General Plenipotentiary for Labor had been active, since the beginning -
THE PRESIDENT: Surely we heard all this this morning. It was all given this morning.
DR. SAUTER: In connection with the Central Planning Board, perhaps I might refer to one more document, Mr. President. only -- a letter which you wrote at that time to Field Marshal Milch and a letter which was produced I think by the French Prosecution under No. RF -for the Republique Francaise -- 675. This document was submitted under that number, and it is that letter, Mr. Funk, in which you apologized for the fact that you participated so very infrequently at the meetings of the Central Planning Board. And at that time you sent two experts from your Ministry to the session. One of them was an expert in social welfare -- as deputy of your State Secretary, Dr. Hayler, who will be heard on the witness-stand here later, participated at this meeting and in his place Ohlendorf attended.
I should be interested in knowing, therefore, just what functions this Ohlendorf had, who ostensibly belonged to your Ministry. concerned, on the whole I was interested only in the fact that as far as the export trade was concerned, the necessary raw materials would be allocated to it, and Ohlendorf and two other experts were to be there for that purpose. Ohlendorf was brought into my Ministry with Dr. Hayler. Before that I had known Ohlendorf but vaguely -- met him at one or two meetings. I had had an extraordinarily favorable impression of him, for he ad an extremely clear head, and his thoughts were expressed in a most impressive way; Before that time I didn't even know that Ohlendorf had another position in the main Reich Security Office, for when I met him I know him as a manager for an organization of which Hayler was the director and Ohlendorf was his manager, and I know him and met him as such. Therefore, I had no objections to Ohlendorf being brought into the Ministry and to his taking over that sector which corresponded to his private and professional life, the province of trade and consumption. Reichsicherheitsamt -- main security office -- or whatever the name was, that he was active in the S.D. service; but took no exception to this activity, for I did not know about these activities; I was not convinced that anything was taking place which was not bearable -- or tenable -- to our Ministry. And he was active chiefly in the Group Handel -- Group Trade. As far as I know, he was in the Reichsicherheitsamt only as a sideline. First of all, when I found this, I was surprised in an embarrassed way and when I found out especially about the instructions and missions which he had with the special staff in Russia, whatever the names were -- about this activity of Ohlendorf -I had never heard one word about these activities. He himself never mentioned these things to me and up until the period of time I just mentioned I did not know what were the missions of these special staffs.