GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I would like to go to another particular part. Would it be convenient to have a short recess now? I have a few more questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well; the Tribunal will recess.
(A recess was taken) for Economy but you were not a full-fledged Plenipotentiary; Schacht occupied this position and you had only a secondary position in that respect.
Do you remember your article which was entitled "The Economic and Finance Mobilization?" Do you remember what you wrote in it?
Q We are not going to lose any time on that question. I remind you of it.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: I should like to submit to the Tribunal as evidence, USSR Exhibit 452, an article by Funk, which was published in the central monthly of the NSDAP and of the workers front, which was called "Der Schulungsbrief for 1939." BY GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q You wrote then: "As the General Plenipotentiary for Economics, appointed by the Fuehrer, I think that it is my duty that during the war it should be secured, from the economic point of view, the fullpower of the people in Germany." Did you find this place?
Q Furthermore, you wrote: "The use of economy for great political aims of the Fuehrer demands not only a strong leadership of all the economic institutions but also from the political point of view, such as industry, agriculture, forestry, wood industry, foreign trade transport, using of manpower, the domination of wages and salaries, finance credits, and everything should be mobilized to such an extent that the entire economic potential should be put at the disposal of the Reich. In order to fulfil this task, I, as General Plenipotentiary for Economy, have at my disposal the corresponding authorities of the Reich." Do you agree that this is exactly how you wrote in 1939?
Q Is the question not quite clear to you?
THE PRESIDENT: He said yes.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I certainly wrote that. BY GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q You know about the so-called "green Map" which was issued in July 1941.
It was read into the record here. These are directives for economics or, rather, directives for the plundering of the occupied territories in the East. How did you personally participate in the planning of these directives?
A I don't know that. I don't know it any mere whether or not I participated at all.
Q You don't remember it? How is it possible that such documents were planned without your participation, who was the President of the Reichsbank and General Plenipotentiary for Economy? Economy. I was never Plenipotentiary for the armament industry. The authorities of the Plenipotentiary for Economy shortly after the beginning of the war, were turned over to the Plenipotentiary for the Four Year Plan. That has been repeatedly confirmed and emphasized and what I personally at that time had to say concerning economy and did concerning economy in the Occupied Eastern Territories, was very very little. I don't remember it any more in detail but the administration of economy in the Occupied Territories was with the Leadership Staff East of the Plenipotentiary of the Four Year Plan and that office, of course, cooperated, with the Ministry Rosenberg for the Occupied Eastern Territories. Personally, I only remember that in the course of time, the Ministry of Economy sent individual business men, tradesme from Hamburg and Cologne and charged them to establish their activities, their individual economic activities in the Occupied Eastern Territories. developments you dealt with. That is what you called "development." Do you remember your utterances in Prague at the meeting of the South European Organization or should I remind you of it?
A No, no. During the interrogations, before this trial, my attention was called by General Alexander to the speech and I told him at that time already that there was a wrong newspaper report which I had rectified after a short time, a s hort time after it appeared.
Q Just a minute, defendant Funk. You Just foresaw what I am going to ask you but you don't know yet how my question is going to be formulated and you can reply to it later.
You just stated to the Tribunal that at none of the meetings of Hitler, never were discussed political or economic attacks on the Soviet Union and whenever such things were discussed at those meetings, you never participated at those meetings and all the plans of Hitler regarding the dismemberment of the Soviet Union you knew nothing about, and however, you yourself in your speech said that the East is going to be the future colony of Germany, colonial territory of Germany. You said that. Did you state it exactly so, that the East is going to be the future colonial territory of Germany?
A No; that I explained already in my interrogations. I disputed that and immediately after this was presented to me, I said that I was speaking of the old German colonial territories and General Alexander can confirm that. He questioned me about this.
Q I have no intention of calling General Alexander as a witness. I am only asking you whether you said exactly as it is written here in this booklet.
Q You just told me that I didn't have to remind you what had been written and this is exactly what had been written regarding your speech in Prague. I should like to remind you verbatim what you have said: "Large unknown territories in the great vast territories of the Soviet Union will become the much promising territories for raw materials in Europe", and at that time what was the question, what tactics were in question here at that time? I am asking you to answer.
A. I have said that I did not speak about colonial territories, but of the historic areas of communization of Germany.
Q. Yes, but this is not the question of old territories, but rather the new territories which you wanted to acquire. Well, let's leave that question.
A. The area had been conquered already. We did hot have to conquer that. That had been conquered by German troops.
Q. Yes. I am well aware of how they were seized and how you left them. This company was organized for the exploitation of the oil riches of the Eastern Occupied Territories, especially at Groznay and Baku. Please tell me whether it is correct. Answer yes or no.
A. It was not only for the occupied territories, but this company dealt with oil industries all over Europe. It grew from the shares in the Rumanian oil, and whenever German troops occupied territories where there were oil deposits, then that company, which was a foundation of the Four-Year Plan, was charged by the various economic offices, later by the armament industry, with going ahead and producing oil in these territories, with reconstructing destroyed oil wells. It was a company which had a tremendous reconstruction program. I personally was the president of the board and I only had to do wit the financing of that company.
Q. I have heard that already, but you didn't reply directly to my question. I asked you if the Groznay and Baku sources were the objects of the exploitation on your part. Were the oil sources of the Caucasus included as the basic capital of your plans?
A. No.
Q. No?
A. No.
Q. All right.
A. We didn't conquer the Caucasus and therefore the company could not be active in the Caucasus.
Q. Yes. However, at that time Rosenberg had already made a report regarding the seizure of the Caucasus and the exploitation of the raw materials there.
Tell me, do you remember that here, before the Tribunal, there was read into the record a transcript of a meeting at Goering's office on the 6th of August 1942, regarding the Eastern Occupied Territories? Do you remember about this meeting?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you participate in this meeting?
A. That I don't know. Did they speak about the oil territories in the Caucasus in that meeting? That I don't know.
Q. I told you nothing about it. I just asked you whether you participated in that meeting, whether you were present at that meeting or not.
A. That I don't know any more. It may very well be.
Q. You don't remember it?
A. No.
Q. In that case, I should like to submit to you a document which has already been submitted to the Tribunal, and was read into the record. It is Document USSR-170. effective measures for the economic plunder of the territories of the USSR, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and other countries. At this meeting, Defendant Goering addressed himself to you.
Do you remember that you were present at that meeting? No?
A. Yes, indeed. I remember that. But what Goering told me then refers to the fact that a long time after the Russian territories had been occupied. we sent businessmen there who were supposed to take merchandise into these territories that was of interest to the population. For instance it says here; "Businessmen were to be sent there, although we had to send them to Venice to buy that merchandise there and be able to re-sell it in the occupied Russian territories."
Q. Yes.
A. At least, that is what can be read here.
Q. I didn't ask you about that. I only want to know whether you were present at that meeting. Could you reply to the question directly.
A. Of course. Since Goering talked to me, I must have been there. It was on the 7th of August 1942.
Q. You replied here to certain questions of Mr. Dodd regarding the replenishment of the gold reserve of the Reichsbank.
It was stated that the gold reserves of the Reichsbank were replenished only from the gold reserves of the Belgian Bank. Did you not know that there was stolen from the National Czechoslovakian Bank 23,000 kilos of gold which were taken to the Reichsbank? explicitly here yesterday that the gold deposits had been increased by the taking over of the gold of the Czech National Bank and the Belgian Bank. I stated that clearly yesterday. I spoke of the Czech National Bank, and we worked together with them. Czechoslovak Bank.
A Yes, I mentioned it yesterday. I said so yesterday.
THE PRESIDENT: He said that just now. He said that he had spoken about the Czechoslovakian gold deposits.
GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, yesterday he didn't mention Czechoslovakia. That is why I put this question to him, but if he confirms it today, I am not going to interrogate him further regarding this question. BY GENERAL RAGINSKY:
Q I come now to the next question, regarding Yugoslavia. On the 14th of April 1941, that is to say before the full occupation of Yugoslavia, the Chief Commander of the German Land Army issued an order regarding the occupied territories of Yugoslavia. This document has already been submitted to the Tribunal as Exhibit USSR-140. Point 9 of this document speaks about the compulsory weight of the Yugoslav currency; one mark equals 20 dinars. There was also compulsory introduction of Reichskreditkassenschein. way, at a very cheap price, to export from Yugoslavia various valuables and merchandise, and such operations were carried out in all the Eastern Occupied Territories.
I am asking you: Do you agree that such operations were one of the means of economic plundering of the Eastern Occupied Territories?
A That depends on the relation of the exchange rate. In some cases, in particular in the case of France, I protested against the underevaluation of the currency of the occupied territories.
Q Excuse me just a second. You have already spoken about France and I don't want to take up the time of the Tribunal unnecessarily. dinar and the mark was at that time. In general, as much as I had anything to do with it -- I did not make the directive; that came from the Finance Minister of the Armed Forces -- I always saw to it that the rate should not be too far different from the rate which existed, on the basis of purchasing power. I could not tell now precisely what the exchange rate was at that time. troops, because otherwise we would have had to give out special requisition bills and that would have been much worse than introducing an official means of currency, as is being done right now here in Germany, because working with requisition bills is much more disagreeable and harmful for the population and the entire country than working with a recognized means of currency. We invented the Reiehskreditkassenschein ourselves. the entire guilt lies with the Minister of Finance. Tell me, are you aware of the testimony which was given by your assistant Landfried, and was submitted by your defense counsel? Do you remember what Landfried said? He said something quite different. He said that on the determination of the exchange rate, you had to do especially with the currency of the occupied territories in the East.
Do you agree with Landfried?
that can be confirmed by every document -- and I always intervened that the new rates should be as close as possible to the old rates established on the basis of purchasing power, that is to say, no under-evaluation. according to your directives and by you. advise.
Q Your advice?
A I had to approve it. Maybe it was the Reichsbank Directorate that formally gave the approval, but anyway I was asked.
Q I am satisfied with the reply to my question. I should like to go on now to the next question. regarding the Serbian National Bank, which has already been submitted to the Tribunal as USSR-Exhibit 135. This order, requested the National Bank of Yugoslavia and the entire property of that bank to be divided between Germany and its satellites. Instead of the National Yugoslavian Bank there was created the fictional so-called Serbian Bank, the leaders of which were appointed by the General Plenipotentiary in Serbia. in Serbia?
Q He was a collaborator of yours?
A No, he never worked at the Ministry of Finance; no, never, Neuhausen never was in the Ministry of Economics.
Q Was he a collaborator of Goering? which the Yugoslavian Government was plundered to such an extent could not have been introduced without you and without your bankers and being planned by yourselves? was carried out and by which the Serbian National Bank was founded, but it is a matter of record, of course, that the Reichsbank participated in such transaction.
Q I would like to put to you another two questions: German Aggressor being used up to the limit of all Economic Powers of the occupied territories and by means of various economic measures; such as devaluation of currency, a forceful continued economic plunder of the occupied territories, do you agree that this was the policy of Germany in the occupied territories of the East? U.S.S.R., No. U-119; it is two documents which contains the notes of the Reich Commissar for the determination of the prices of the 22nd of April, 1943. At this meeting participated experts for the prices in all the occupied territories. I should like to read into the record a few excerpts from this document:
On page 2 it says: them a million and a half were war prisoners, and four million were just citizens, one million two hundred thousand from the East and one million from the former Polish territory and two hundred thousand from Czechoslovakia, sixty-five thousand Croatians and sixty thousand Serbs and so forth.
be made at the cost of the country who is submitting the materials, that is to say, from the cost of clearing. main interest did not lie in the welfare of the population but in using to the utmost the economic powers of the country.
On page 16 there is also an excerpt there. In the occupied territories of the Eastern territories the prices should be much lower than the German prices which has already given great privilege to the Bank of the Reich.
On page 7 it states about the clearing in Germany to the sum of 39-9/10 million marks, and the clearing cost is minus two million. In the Ukraine minus eight and a half million, in Serbia minus 219 million, Croatia minus 85 million, Slovakia minus 301 million, and finally on page 22of the document it states: level as possible. Already now we have drawn various privileges for the covering of Reich debts, and the salaries and wages are only one-third of what they are in Germany. perpetrated on such a gigantic scale could not have been perpetrated without your active participation as Minister of Economics and President of the Reichsbank and General Plenipotentiary for Economics? Plenipotentiary for Economy. But may I state my position to this document? First, there is the figure of the number of the workers which have been brought from occupied territories into Germany. I have emphasized myself, and it has been approved and confirmed by other statements I was principally against it. I was principally opposed to it, that from occupied territories foreign manpower should be brought in to such a large extent that the economic order in these territories would be impaired. I am not even speaking about forced recruitment of labor.
I was always opposed to that, and an expert who name I do not know, has said that the price policy had no importance because the main interest was not interest for the population but the exploitation of local economy. I have to contradict that because that is not my point of view. I do not know who that man was who said that, but it is a matter of course that a territory could not produce well if one does not keep the economy on a good footing there and establish prices at such a level that the people there can exist and social order be maintained. So I have to oppose this point of view also. yesterday in detail that the clearing arrangement was in common usage for Germany, and that at any time I have always recognized and confirmed that these clearing debts are true debts and everything also shall be repeated in the currency in which they were made; also, besides I have to emphasize as a matter of principle again and again that this economy in the occupied territories I was not consulted; I had no power to give a directive there and I only participated in so far as I had the regular channels to the various offices, and that, of course, there was a connection between these offices, but any responsibility for the occupied territories I cannot assume, but for the Reichsbank I have stated, I assume full responsibility.
Q I know you are courageous and you don't want to say you are guilty, but do you remember your testimony which you gave on the 22nd of October, 1945, through interrogation?
A I don't know what you mean by that?
Q You don't remember at this time you were asked on the question of mobilization of foreign workers: Did you know about that? And you stated you never said anything against it, is that true? You said "No"? Why as it you did not say anything personally against it?
A That is not correct. I have protested against it, the recruitment of workers and against the fact so many workers were taken out of occupied territory, that the local economy would no longer be able to produce. That is not correct.
Q I have the last question to put to you now: Do you remember an article which was published in the newspaper "Das Reich", dated the 18th of August, 1940, in connection with your birthday? This article is entitled, "Walter Funk, Pioneer of the Socialist Economic Forces". I should like to read a few excerpts from this article: questions and Plenipotentiary of the Fuehrer for Economics, who worked both for the Party and for the economy of Germany was the one who held the pass for German industry. If in the putsch of 1933 in the official life of Germany the contradictions between the politics and the economy and the industrialists and the politicians had gradually became less and less, it became a part of all the works of the entire Reich. It should really be attributed to the great efforts of Funk who in all his work beginning with 1929 helped and worked as much as he could in that direction.
And in the last 'paragraph of this article: a National Socialist, in every question and in every ideal of the Fuehrer, and what the ideals of the Fuehrer are we all know. As a matter of fact, the whole world knows that they are. personality?
GENERAL RAGINSKY: I have no further questions to put to the witness.
(Dr. Dix came to the lectern.)
THE PRESIDENT: What is it you wish to say, Dr. Dix?
DR. DIX: I have only one question to the witness, which was caused by the cross-examination of Mr. Dodd. I could not put this question any sooner, because it was only given by a question by Mr. Dodd.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go on. BY DR. DIX:
Q Mr. Witness, Mr. Dodd has put to you a record of an interrogation, according to which Schacht after leaving the Reichsbank still had a room there, and you have heard the testimony by Schacht here.
He has testified beyond doubt that he did not have any more room at the Reichsbank, that moreover the Reichsregierung put a room in his apartment at his disposal by contributing to the costs and that the Reichsregierung paid a secretary which he took from the Reichsbank but who was now paid by the Reich Government. That was the testimony of Schacht. By your answer given to Mr. Dodd it has not become quite clear whether you have any doubt of the correctness of that statement by Schacht.
A I do not know the conditions of the apartment of Dr. Schacht. I was told at the time that he was still frequently coming into the Reichsbank and that a room was reserved for him. If that information should not have been correct, then it is not my fault. I do not doubt that what Dr. Schacht said is correct. He must know the conditions in his apartment better than I do.
(There was no further questions from Dr. Dix.)
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, do you wish to re-examine?
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in this final questioning of the Defendant, Dr. Funk we have harder work than usually, and that because today the translation caused serious difficulties. I myself have heard what has been spoken here and I have to admit frankly I have only been able to understand part of it. As far as the Defendant is concerned, it may have been the same, and therefore I should like to reserve the right, Mr. President, after I receive the transcript -- stenographic record -- to make one or two corrections, if any cause for that should be seen in the transcript.
We are contronted with a difficulty also, Mr. President, because the Defendant, Dr. Funk, in the cross-examination not only was submitted a large number of extensive documents. We are used to those surprises. But also the Defendant Funk had to give answers on questions concerning documents which he had not issued, which had nothing to do with his activities -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the Tribunal saw no sign at all of the Defendant Funk not being able to understand thoroughly every question put to him. And I think that therefore there is no reason for any protest on your behalf and you should go on to put any question you wish to put in reexamination -- let's say, questions that arise out of the cross-examination.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in our earphones, at least -- on this side -we could not understand quite a number of questions. Whether that was particularly the case with those ear-phones or with the entire machinery I don't know.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if the Defendant Funk did not understand any questions put to him, he could have said so. He did not say so. He answered all the questions from a logical point of view, perfectly accurately. You can ask him if you like, if he did not understand any of the questions put to him. BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Now, Mr. Funk, the Prosecution among other things has put to you that you participated in the exploitation, the plunder of France. In this connection is it correct that the merchandise, the consumers' goods, which had come from France, were in many cases manufactured from raw materials which had come from Germany?
A. Certainly. Of course, we continuously shipped coal, coke, iron and other raw materials to France, so that they could produces especially we shipped those raw materials which the French economy did not have in the country. There was a very close exchange and a very close productive community between the German and French economy in the way of organization.
Q. Dr. Funk, excerpts from an article have been read before, which appeared on the occasion of your birthday. Do you know the author of that article?
A. Yes, Franz Jaezigo.
Q. Did he receive any material from you for that article?
A. No.
Q. Didn't he ask for it?
A. No. I didn't know anything about that article beforehand. I did not order a birthday article for myself.
Q. So you didn't know anything about that article and therefore, if I understand you correctly, there is no guarantee that that which is said in this article is really true.
A. No. But I find that the tendency of the article is very good.
Q. Witness, the American Prosecutor confronted you yesterday with the matter of your negotiations with Rosenberg in the spring of 1941, and the fact that at that time a few months before the march into Russia you had these negotiations with Rosenberg. He apparently wanted to conclude that you had confirmed or admitted or wanted to admit that you had known about the intention of Hitler to wage an aggressive war against Russia. You did not have a chance to say anything on this yesterday. Therefore I should like to give you another opportunity now to state that very clearly and to explain what your belief was at that time concerning the intentions of Hitler in the spring of 1941, when you negotiated with Rosenberg and what you knew about eventual causes for war before that time.
not understand it to mean that I had known anything about an agressive war against Russia, because it had been explained before that I was quite surprised by the task assigned to Rosenberg. But the prosecutor spoke explicitly about preparations for war with Russia.
I was informed by Dr. Lammers that the Fuehrer was expecting a war from Russia because Russia was deploying large numbers of troops along the entire border, because Russia had entered Bessarabia, Bukovina, and Transylvania, and because the negotiations with Molotov brought proof that Russia maintained an agressive policy in the Balkans and the Eastern Baltic, by which Germany felt herself threatened. Therefore, there were preparations on the part of Germany for an eventual conflict with Russia. mentioned, I also said explicitly that the measures concerning currency which were discussed there were approved by me, because we created thereby stable currency conditions in the occupied Eastern territory. I was therefore opposed to the idea, for instance, that the German Reischmark should be introduced there, which the population could not have accepted because they could not even read it.
Q Mr. Witness, the Soviet Russian prosecutor has pointed out again and again that you were not only Reichsbank president and Reichsminister for Economy, but also General Plenipotentiary for Economy. You have corrected that already and pointed out that from the very beginning when you were appointed, your authority as General Plenipotentiary for Economy was practically taken over by Goering, and that, I believe, in December of 1939, your authority as General plenipotentiary for Economy also was formally turned over to Goering.
MR. DODD: I take objection not only to the form this examination is taking, but to its substance. Counsel is in effect testifying himself, and he is testifying about matters that the witness testified to on direct examination, and it seems clear to us that this cannot be helpful at all to the Tribunal as a matter of redirect examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Sauter, do you feel it is really proper for you to got the witness to go over again the evidence which he has already given? The only object of redirect examination is to elucidate any questions which have not been properly answered in cross examination. The witness has already dealt with the topics with which you are now dealing, in the same sense which you are now putting into it.
DR. SAUTER: I have repeated the statements only because I want to put a question to the witness now concerning a document which has been submitted only yesterday, which had not been submitted until then, and on which I could not take any position, therefore, and because this Soviet Russian prosecutor has repeated the assertion here that the defendant rise during the war has been General Plenipotentiary for Economy, although that is not correct.
THE PRESIDENT: I have heard myself the witness say over and over again that he was not the General Plenipotentiary for Economy during the war. He has repeatedly said that.
DR. SAUTER: Of course, sir. But it has been repeated from this side.
Mr. President, yesterday a document was submitted which bears the number E. C. 488., a letter dated the 28th of January, 1939. On the front page it is marked in large letters "Secret".
THE PRESIDENT: What is the question about it?
DR. SAUTER: Here in the original is the heading, which is in capital letters, and it roads, "The General Plenipotentiary for War Economy". That is the heading of the stationery. Then the word "War" is lined out; so that at the end you can only read, "The General Plenipotentiary for Economy". General Plenipotentiary for War Economy must have been changed to a new title, "General Plenipotentiary for Economy".
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I see. The copy that we have before us does not have the word "War" in it at all.
DR. SAUTER: I beg your pardon?
THE PRESIDENT: I said the copy which we have before us hasn't got the word "War" in it at all.
DR. SAUTER: On my photostat it can be seen.
THE PRESIDENT: I see it. But what is the question you want to put?
DR. SAUTER: At the time when this letter was written, the General Plenipotentiary was the defendant Funk. I should like to ask to be permitted to put the question to him, how can it be explained that the title of his office--that is, Plenipotentiary for War Economy--was changed. The question would be how it could be explained that the title of his office, "General plenipotentiary for war Economy" had been changed to the new title, "General Plenipotentiary for Economy".
THE WITNESS: The reason is-
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q One moment, Dr. Funk, please.