Chapter VII: Part III: , at Pages 918 and 920. Dr. Frank speaks (2)

My Lord, that article was signed by Streicher, and it is my submission that it shows that he had knowledge of what was going on in the East, of which this Court has had such evidence. That was written November 1943. In April ’43, the Tribunal will remember, the Warsaw ghetto was destroyed. Between April 1942 and April 1944, 1,700,000-odd Jews were killed in Auschwitz and Dachau—I quote now from the transcript—and throughout the whole of that period millions of Jews were to die. It is my submission that that article appearing on the 4th of November and signed by him shows that he knew what was happening, perhaps not the details, but that he knew that the Jews were being exterminated.

I leave _Der Stürmer_ and I would draw the attention of the Tribunal quite shortly to a matter which is perhaps as evil as any other aspect of this man’s activity, and that is the particular attention that he paid to the instruction—if you can call it that—or the perversion of the children and the youth of Germany. He was not content with inciting the German population. He seized the children as early as he could at their schools, and he started to poison their minds at the earliest possible date. Already in some of the extracts to which I have referred, the Tribunal will remember that there are mentions of children and the need for teaching them anti-Semitism. I refer now to Page 54 of the document book, and I would quote four or five lines from the last paragraph, starting in the middle of the last paragraph. It is a report of a speech by Streicher as early as June 1925, when he says:

“I repeat, we demand the transformation of the school into an
ethno-German institution of education. If German children are
taught by German teachers, then we shall have laid the
foundations for the ethno-German school. This ethno-German
school must teach racial doctrine.”

I now go to the last line of the first paragraph on the following page:

“We demand, therefore, the introduction of racial doctrine into
the school.”

That is in a copy of _Der Stürmer_ which has already been put in. It is Exhibit GB-165 (Document M-30).

The following Document, M-43, is an extract from the _Fränkische Tageszeitung_ of the 19th of March 1934, when he addressed the pupils at a girls’ school at Preisslerstrasse after their finishing their vocational course. He was continually holding children’s meetings and attending children’s schools. I quote the third paragraph:

“Then Julius Streicher spoke about his life and told them about
a girl who had at one time been a pupil of his and who had
fallen a victim to a Jew and was finished for the rest of her
life.”

I need not read the rest. It is all in the same tone. That becomes Exhibit GB-177.

Every summer they celebrated in Nuremberg what they called their solstice celebration, some pagan rite where the youth of Nuremberg rallied—organized or at least encouraged by the Defendant Streicher.

On Page 58 of the document book is a report taken from his paper, _Fränkische Tageszeitung_, of his speech to the Hitler Youth on what they called the “Holy Mountain” near Nuremberg, on the 22d of June 1935.

“Boys and girls, look back a little more than 10 years ago. A
great war—the World War—had raged over the peoples of the
earth and had left in the end a heap of ruins. Only one people
remained victorious in that dreadful war, a people of whom
Christ said that its father is the Devil. That people had ruined
the German Nation in body and soul. At that time Adolf Hitler,
an unknown man, arose from among the people and became a voice
which proclaimed a holy war and struggle. He cried to the people
to take courage again and to rise and join in liberating the
German people from the Devil, so that mankind might again be
free from that race which has roamed the globe for centuries and
millennia, marked with the brand of Cain.

“Boys and girls, even if it is said that the Jews were once the
chosen people do not believe it, but believe us when we say that
the Jews are not a chosen people. Because it cannot be that a
chosen people should act among the peoples as the Jews do
today.”

And so on, with similar kind of propaganda. That Document, M-1, will be Exhibit GB-178.

The next Document, M-44, from which I will not read now, becomes Exhibit GB-179. The Tribunal will see that it was a report of Streicher’s address to 2,000 children at Nuremberg at Christmastime 1936. Underlined it says:

“‘_Do you know who the Devil is?_’ he asked his breathlessly
listening audience. ‘The Jew, the Jew,’ resounded from a
thousand children’s voices.”

But he wasn’t content only with writing and talking. He actually issued a book for teachers, a book which he published from his _Der Stürmer_ offices, called _The Jewish Question and School Instruction_.

I have not had the whole of that book translated. It is addressed to school teachers. It is intended for their benefit, and it emphasizes the necessity of anti-Semitic teaching in schools, and it suggests ways in which the subject can be introduced and handled.

On Page 60 of the document book, M-46, the Tribunal will see a few extracts which have been taken from that book. The preface part of it is as follows:

“The National Socialist State has brought fundamental changes
into all spheres of life of the German people.

“It has also presented the German teacher with new duties. The
National Socialist State demands that its teachers instruct
German children on racial questions. As far as the German people
is concerned the racial question is a Jewish question. Those who
want to teach the child about the Jew must themselves have a
thorough knowledge of the subject.”

I will quote from the paragraph opposite “Page 5” in the margin. The whole of the rest of the extracts are really suggestions for teachers as to how to introduce the Jewish subject into their teaching, and at Page 5 of the introduction:

“Racial and Jewish questions are the fundamental problems of the
National Socialist ideology. The solution of these problems will
secure the existence of National Socialism and with this the
existence of our nation for all time. The enormous significance
of the racial question is recognized almost without exception
today by all the German people. In order to come to this
realization, our people had to travel through a long road of
suffering.”

DR. MARX: I should like to point out the following: The prosecutor omitted in his presentation to state that the book he referred to was not written by the Defendant Streicher but by the school inspector Fink. If the prosecutor had read the next sentence, the Tribunal would have known about this fact. My client has called my attention to this point. I noticed it myself also because the next sentence reads as follows:

“Schulrat Fritz Fink desires to help German teachers on the road
to information and knowledge with his book: _The Jewish Question
in the Schools_.”

There can thus be no doubt that this School Inspector Fink is the author of the book. It is, after all, an essential thing to know that Fink and not Streicher was the author of this book.

THE PRESIDENT: Have you finished what you wish to say?

DR. MARX: Yes; that is what I wanted to say.

THE PRESIDENT: I would point out to you that although the book does appear to have been written by Fritz Fink, which is stated in the paragraph at the top, it has a preface by Streicher, so we may presume that Streicher authorized it; and it was published and printed by _Der Stürmer_.

DR. MARX: That is correct. I just wanted to point out to the Tribunal that it did not appear to be understood, that just that particular sentence was not read. One might have thought that an original work of Streicher’s was concerned, in which case the question of whether Streicher agreed with that work would appear of minor importance.

THE PRESIDENT: But you see, Dr. Marx, counsel was reading actually from the preface by Streicher. The last passage that he read, or almost the last, was the preface by Streicher. The last passage I have got marked is the passage on Page 60, which is headed “Preface” and is signed by Julius Streicher, which says in terms that the book was written by School Inspector Fritz Fink.

Let us not take any further time about it.

LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I think I have reached. . .

THE PRESIDENT: Will you read the last words of that preface on Page 60 there: “Those who take to heart . . .”?

LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: If Your Lordship pleases, I read towards the end of the paragraph—the first paragraph of the preface:

“Those who take to heart all that has been written with such
feeling by Fritz Fink, who for many years has been greatly
concerned about the German people, will be grateful to the
creator of this outwardly insignificant publication.”—Then it
is signed—“Julius Streicher, City of the Reich Party rallies,
Nuremberg, in the year 1937.”

I omitted that last part only in the interest of time.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: That book is Exhibit GB-180. I would just read the last two lines, which I was not able to read before Dr. Marx interposed. The last three lines of the paragraph under “Introduction”:

“No one should be allowed to grow up in the midst of our people
without this knowledge of the frightfulness and dangerousness of
the Jew.”

I will not occupy the time of the Tribunal by reading further from that book. The nature of the book I hope is clear. I would only refer to the last three lines on the next page in the document book, taking another extract from it:

“One who has reached this stage of understanding will inevitably
remain an enemy of the Jews all his life and will instill this
hatred into his own children.”

_Der Stürmer_ also published some children’s books, although I make it quite clear that I am not alleging that the defendant himself wrote the books. But they were published from his publishing business; and they are, of course, on the same line as everything else that was published and issued from that business.

The first of them to which I would call attention was entitled in English—or the English translation is—as follows: Don’t Trust the Fox in the Green Meadow Nor the Jew on His Oath. It is a picture book for children. There are pictures, all of them offensive pictures depicting Jews, of which a variety of selections appears in the Tribunal’s book. And opposite each picture there is a little story.

On Page 62 of the document book the Tribunal will see the kind of thing which appears opposite each picture. Opposite the picture in the Tribunal’s document book appears the following:

“Jesus Christ says, ‘The Jew is a murderer through and through.’
And when Christ had to die the Lord didn’t know of any other
people that would torture him to death, so he chose the Jews.
That is why the Jews pride themselves on being the chosen
people.”

The writing opposite the first picture, which depicts a very unpleasant looking Jewish butcher cutting up meat, is as follows:

“The Jewish butcher: He sells half-refuse instead of meat. A
piece of meat lies on the floor, the cat claws another. This
doesn’t worry the Jewish butcher since the meat increases in
weight. Besides, one mustn’t forget, he won’t have to eat it
himself.”

Again in the interest of time, it is not worth quoting the contents of that book any further. The Tribunal can see the type of book it is, the type of teaching it was instilling into the minds of the children. The pictures speak for themselves.

The second picture is a rather beastly picture of a girl being led away by a Jew. On the next page we see the defendant smiling benignly at a children’s party, greeting the little children. The next picture depicts copies of _Der Stürmer_ posted on a wall with children looking at them.

The next picture perhaps requires a little explanation. It is a picture of Jewish children being taken away from an Aryan school, led away by an unpleasant looking father; and all the Aryan children shouting and dancing and enjoying the fun very much.

That book, Document M-32, becomes Exhibit GB-181.

THE PRESIDENT: You won’t be able, will you, to finish in a short time? Perhaps we’d better adjourn now.

LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I have about another 20 minutes.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes; we will adjourn now.

[_A recess was taken._]

LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: My Lord, I had finished describing that one children’s book. There is a similar book called _The Poisonous Fungus_, which has, in fact, been put in evidence already as Exhibit USA-257, but it was not read to the Tribunal; and I would like to read one of the short stories from that book because it shows, perhaps more strikingly, I think, than any other extract to which we have referred, the revolting way in which this man poisoned the minds of his listeners and readers.

It is a book of pictures again with short stories, and Page 69 of the document book shows one of the pictures, a girl sitting in a Jewish doctor’s waiting room.

My Lord, it is not a very pleasant story, but he is not a very pleasant man; and it is only by reading these things that it becomes possible to believe the kind of education that the German children have been receiving during these years, led by this man.

I quote from the story:

“Inge”—that is the girl—“Inge sits in the reception room of
the Jew doctor. She has to wait a long time. She looks through
the journals which are on the table. But she is much too nervous
to read even a few sentences. Again and again she remembers the
talk with her mother. And again and again her mind reflects on
the warnings of her leader of the League of German Girls. A
German must not consult a Jew doctor. And particularly not a
German girl. Many a girl that went to a Jew doctor to be cured
met with disease and disgrace.

“When Inge had entered the waiting room, she experienced an
extraordinary incident. From the doctor’s consulting room she
could hear the sound of crying. She heard the voice of a young
girl, ‘Doctor, doctor, leave me alone.’

“Then she heard the scornful laughter of a man. And then, all of
a sudden it became absolutely silent. Inge had listened
breathlessly.

“‘What can be the meaning of all this?’ she asked herself, and
her heart was pounding. And again she thought of the warning of
her leader in the League of German Girls.

“Inge had already been waiting for an hour. Again she takes the
journals in an endeavor to read. Then the door opens. Inge looks
up. The Jew appears. She screams. In terror she drops the paper.
Horrified she jumps up. Her eyes stare into the face of the
Jewish doctor. And this face is the face of the Devil. In the
middle of this devil’s face is a huge crooked nose. Behind the
spectacles gleam two criminal eyes. Around the thick lips plays
a grin, a grin that means, ‘Now I have you at last, you little
German girl!’

“And then the Jew approaches her. His fat fingers snatch at her.
But now Inge has got hold of herself. Before the Jew can grab
hold of her, she smacks the fat face of the Jew doctor with her
hand. One jump to the door. Breathlessly Inge runs down the
stairs. Breathlessly she escapes from the Jew house.”

Comment is almost unnecessary on a story like that, read by children of the age of those who are going to read the books you have seen.

Another picture which I have included in the book is a picture, of course of the defendant, and the script opposite that picture, which appears on Page 70 of the document book, includes the words—and I quote from the last but one paragraph: “Without a solution of the Jewish question there will be no salvation for mankind.”

The page itself contains an account of how some boys attended one of his speeches:

“That is what he shouted to us. We all understood him. And when,
at the end, he shouted, ‘Sieg-Heil for the Führer,’ we all
acclaimed him with tremendous enthusiasm. Streicher spoke for
two hours that time. To us it seemed to have been but a few
minutes.”

One can begin to see the effect that all this was having from the columns of _Der Stürmer_ itself. In April 1936 there appears only one letter—many others appear in other copies from children of all ages—I quote the third paragraph of this letter, the letter signed by the boys and girls of the National Socialist Youth Hostel at Gross-Möllem:

“Today we saw a play on how the Devil persuades the Jew to shoot
a conscientious National Socialist. In the course of the play
the Jew did it, too. We all heard the shot. We would have all
liked to jump up and arrest the Jew. But then the policeman came
and after a short struggle took the Jew along. You can imagine,
dear _Stürmer_, that we heartily cheered the policeman. In the
whole play not one name was mentioned, but we all knew that this
play represented the murder by the Jew Frankfurter. We were very
sad when we went to bed that night. None felt like talking to
the others. This play made it clear to us how the Jew sets to
work.”

My Lord, that book is already in evidence as I have stated. It is Exhibit GB-170 (Document M-25).

To conclude, I would draw the attention of the Tribunal again only to his authority as a Gauleiter. It appears in the _Organization Book of the NSDAP_ for 1938—which is already in as Exhibit USA-430—in the description of the duties and authority of Gauleiter: The Gauleiter bears over-all responsibility to the Führer for the sector of sovereignty entrusted to him. The rights, duties, and jurisdiction of the Gauleiter result primarily from the mission assigned by the Führer and, apart from that, from detailed direction.

His association with the Führer and with the other defendants—or some of the other defendants—can be seen from the newspapers. On the occasion of his 50th birthday Hitler paid a visit to Nuremberg to congratulate him. That was on the 13th of February 1935. The account of that meeting is published in the _Völkischer Beobachter_ of that date, and I quote as follows:

“Adolf Hitler spoke to his old comrade in arms and the latter’s
followers in words which went straight to their hearts. By way
of introduction he remarked that it was a special pleasure for
him to spend, on this day of honor to Julius Streicher, a short
while in Nuremberg, the town of battle-steeled National
Socialist solidarity, within the circle of the veteran
standard-bearers of the National Socialist idea.

“Just as they all, during the years of misery, had unshakeably
believed in the victory of the Movement, so his friend and
comrade in arms, Streicher, had stood faithfully at his side at
all times. It had been this unshakeable belief that had moved
mountains.

“For Streicher it would surely be an inspiring thought that this
50th anniversary meant to him not only the turn of a half
century, but also of a thousand years of German history. He had
in Streicher a comrade of whom he could say that here in
Nuremberg was a man who would never waver for a single second
and who would unflinchingly stand behind him in every
situation.”

That is Document M-8 and becomes Exhibit GB-182.

The next document (M-22) is a letter from Himmler published in _Der Stürmer_ of April 1937. That edition is already Exhibit USA-258.

“When in future years the history of the reawakening of the
German people is written and the next generation is already
unable to understand that the German people were once friendly
to the Jews, it will be recognized that Julius Streicher and his
weekly paper _Der Stürmer_ contributed a great deal toward the
enlightenment regarding the enemy of mankind.”—Signed—“The
Reichsführer SS, H. Himmler.”

That is Exhibit USA-258. A number of these documents are already in evidence in the bound volumes.

Lastly, we have a letter from Baldur von Schirach, the Reich Youth Leader, published in _Der Stürmer_ of March 1938 (Document M-45, Exhibit USA-260):

“It is the historical merit of _Der Stürmer_ to have enlightened
the broad masses of our people in a popular way as to the Jewish
world danger. _Der Stürmer_ is right in not carrying out its
task in a purely aesthetic manner, for Jewry has shown no regard
for the German people. We have, therefore, no reason for being
considerate toward our worst enemy. What we fail to do today,
the youth of tomorrow will have to suffer for bitterly.”

My Lord, it may be that this defendant is less directly involved in the physical commission of the crimes against Jews, of which this Tribunal have heard, than some of his co-conspirators. The submission of the Prosecution is that his crime is no less the worse for that reason. No government in the world, before the Nazis came to power, could have embarked upon and put into effect a policy of mass extermination in the way in which they did, without having a people who would back them and support them and without having a large number of people, men and women, who were prepared to put their hands to their bloody murder. And not even, perhaps, the German people of previous generations would have lent themselves to the crimes about which this Tribunal has heard, the killing of millions and millions of men and women.

It was to the task of educating the people, of producing murderers, educating and poisoning them with hate, that Streicher set himself; and for 25 years he has continued unrelentingly the education—if you can call it so—or the perversion of the people and of the youth of Germany. And he has gone on and on as he saw the results of his work bearing fruit.

In the early days he was preaching persecution. As persecutions took place he preached extermination and annihilation; and, as we have seen in the ghettos of the East, as millions of Jews were being exterminated and annihilated, he cried out for more and more.

That is the crime that he has committed. It is the submission of the Prosecution that he made these things possible—made these crimes possible—which could never have happened had it not been for him and for those like him. He led the propaganda and the education of the German people in those ways. Without him the Kaltenbrunners, the Himmlers, the General Stroops would have had nobody to carry out their orders. And, as we have seen, he has concentrated upon the youth and the childhood of Germany. In its extent his crime is probably greater and more far-reaching than that of any of the other defendants. The misery that they caused finished with their incarceration. The effects of this man’s crime, of the poison that he has injected into the minds of millions and millions of young boys and girls and young men and women lives on. He leaves behind him a legacy of almost a whole people poisoned with hate, sadism, and murder, and perverted by him. That German people remains a problem and perhaps a menace to the rest of civilization for generations to come.

My Lord, I submit that the Prosecution’s case against this man as set out in the Indictment is proved.

My Lord, Lieutenant Brady Bryson, of the United States Delegation, will present to the Court the case against Schacht.

LIEUTENANT BRADY O. BRYSON (Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States): May it please the Tribunal, a document book has been prepared and filed and the appropriate number of copies has been delivered to the defendants.

We ask the Tribunal’s permission to file within the next few days a trial brief which now is in the process of preparation.

Our proof against the Defendant Schacht is confined to planning and preparation of aggressive war.

THE PRESIDENT: What was it you said about the trial brief?

LT. BRYSON: We ask permission to file a trial brief within the next few days, as our brief is not yet ready.

THE PRESIDENT: I see.

LT. BRYSON: Our proof against the Defendant Schacht is limited to planning and preparation for aggressive war and to membership in a conspiracy for aggressive war.

The extent of Schacht’s criminal responsibility as a matter of law, under the Charter of the Tribunal, will be developed in our brief. Only a few of our 50-odd documents have been previously submitted in evidence. We have taken special pains to avoid repetition and cumulative proof; but for the sake of continuity we would like, in several instances, simply to draw the Tribunal’s attention to evidence previously received, with an appropriate reference to the transcript of the Record.

Before commencing our proof, we wish to state our understanding that the Defendant Schacht’s control over the German economy was on the wane after November 1937, and that by the time of the aggression on Poland his official status had been reduced to that of Minister without Portfolio and personal adviser to Hitler. We know too that he is sometimes credited with opposition to certain of the more radical elements of the Nazi Party; and I further understand that at the time of capture by United States forces he was under German detention in a prison camp, having been arrested by the Gestapo in July 1944.

Be this as it may, our proof will show that at least up until the end of 1937 Schacht was the dominant figure in the rearming of Germany and in the economic planning and preparation for war, that without his work the Nazis would not have been able to wring from their depressed economy the tremendous material requirements of armed aggression, and that Schacht contributed his efforts with full knowledge of the aggressive purposes which he was serving.

The details of this proof will be presented in four parts:

First, we will very briefly show that Schacht accepted the Nazi philosophy prior to 1933 and supported Hitler’s rise to power.

Second, proof of the contribution of Schacht to German rearmament and preparation for war will be submitted. This evidence will also be brief, since the facts in this respect are well-known and have already been touched upon by Mr. Dodd in his presentation of the case on economic preparation for war.

Third, we will show that Schacht assisted the Nazi conspiracy purposely and willingly with knowledge of, and sympathy for, its illegal ends.

And last, we will prove that Schacht’s loss of power in the German Government did not in any sense imply disagreement with the policy of aggressive war.

We turn now to our proof that Schacht helped Hitler to power.

Schacht met Göring for the first time in December 1930, and Hitler early in January 1931 at Göring’s house. His impression of Hitler was favorable. I offer in evidence Exhibit USA-615 (Document 3725-PS), consisting of an excerpt from a pre-trial interrogation of Schacht under date of 20 July 1945, and quote two questions and answers related to this meeting, near the middle of the first page of the interrogation.

THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to give us the Exhibit number? You haven’t given us the other number?

LT. BRYSON: This is an interrogation, Sir, and it will not have two.

THE PRESIDENT: Have you got a number for it?

LT. BRYSON: You will find it in your document book in the back, labeled “Schacht Interrogation of 20 July 1945.” I quote from the middle of the first page:

“Q: ‘What did he’”—that is, Hitler—“‘say?’

“A: ‘Oh, ideas he expressed before, but it was full of will and
spirit.’”

And near the bottom of the page:

“Q: ‘What was your impression at the end of that evening?’

“A: ‘I thought that Hitler was a man with whom one could
co-operate.’”

After this meeting Schacht allied himself with Hitler; and at a crucial political moment in November 1932, he lent the prestige of his name, which was widely known in banking, financial, and business circles throughout the world, to Hitler’s cause. I offer in evidence Exhibit USA-616 (Document 3729-PS) consisting of excerpts from a pre-trial interrogation of Schacht on 17 October 1945. I wish to quote, beginning at the top of Page 36 of this interrogation. This is the interrogation of 17 October 1945, at Page 36. I may say that when I refer to the page numbers, I speak of the page of the document book:

“Q: ‘Yes, and at that time’”—referring to January 1931—“‘you
became a supporter, I take it, of. . .’

“A: ‘In the course. . .’

“Q: ‘Of Hitler’s coming to power?’

“A: ‘Especially in the course of the years 1931 and 1932.’”

And I quote further from the lower half of Page 37 of the same interrogation:

“Q: ‘But what I mean—to make it very brief—did you lend the
prestige of your name to help Hitler come to power?’

“A: ‘I have publicly stated that I expected Hitler to come to
power; for the first time, if I remember, in November ’32.’

“Q: ‘And you know, or perhaps you don’t, that Goebbels in his
diary records with great affection. . .’

“A: ‘Yes.’

“Q: ‘. . . the help that you gave him at the time?’

“A: ‘Yes, I know that.’

“Q: ‘November 1932?’

“A: ‘From the Kaiserhof to the Chancellery and back.’

“Q: ‘That’s right. You have read that?’

“A: ‘Yes.’

“Q: ‘And you don’t deny that Goebbels was right?’

“A: ‘I think his impression was that that was correct at that
time.’”

I now refer the Tribunal to this statement of Goebbels, set forth in 2409(a)-PS. The entire diary of Goebbels is in evidence as Exhibit Number USA-262. The entry I wish to read, which appears in 2409(a)-PS, was made on 21 November 1932:

“In a conversation with Dr. Schacht I assured myself that he
absolutely shares our point of view. He is one of the few who
stand immovable behind the Führer.”

It is believed that Schacht joined the Party only in the sense that he allied himself with the cause. Dr. Franz Reuter, whose biography of Schacht was officially published in Germany in 1937, has stated that Schacht refrained from formal membership in order to be of greater assistance to the Party. I offer in evidence Document Number EC-460, Exhibit Number USA-617, consisting of an excerpt from Reuter’s biography, and I quote the last sentence of the excerpt:

“By not doing so, he was able eventually to help more toward the
final victory than if he had become an enrolled Party member.”

It was Schacht who organized the financial means for the decisive March 1933 election, at a meeting of Hitler with a group of German industrialists in Berlin. Schacht acted as the sponsor or host of this meeting, and a campaign fund of several million marks was collected. Without reading therefrom, I offer in evidence Document Number EC-439, Exhibit Number USA-618, an affidavit of Von Schnitzler under date of 10 November 1945, and refer the Tribunal to the transcript for 23 November, Pages 282-283 (Volume II, Pages 223, 224), where the text of the affidavit already appears in the Record.

Further evidence on this point is also contained in the excerpt from the interrogation of Schacht on 20 July 1945, from which I read a part a moment ago. Schacht lent his support to Hitler not only because he was an opportunist, but also because he shared Hitler’s ideological principles. Apart from the entry in Goebbels’ diary, this may be seen from Schacht’s own letter to Hitler, under date of 29 August 1932, pledging continued support to Hitler after the latter’s poor showing in the July 1932 elections. I offer this letter in evidence as Document Number EC-457, Exhibit Number USA-619, and quote from the middle of the first paragraph and further from the next to the last paragraph:

“But what you could perhaps do with in these days is a kind
word. Your movement is carried internally by so strong a truth
and necessity that victory in one form or another cannot elude
you for long.”

And further down—and keep in mind that neither Hitler nor Schacht was then in the German Government—Schacht says:

“Wherever my work may take me in the near future, even if you
should see me one day behind stone walls, you can always count
on me as your reliable assistant.”

THE PRESIDENT: What do those words mean at the top: “The President of the Reichsbank in Retirement”? Are they on the letter?

LT. BRYSON: Yes, they are, Sir. Dr. Schacht had previously been a president of the Reichsbank. At this time he was in retirement. You will remember, this is prior to Hitler’s accession to power.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, of course.

LT. BRYSON: And then Hitler reinstated Dr. Schacht as President of the Reichsbank after the Nazis had taken over.

THE PRESIDENT: And he put that at the top of his letter, did he?

LT. BRYSON: That I cannot say.

I will also point out that Schacht signed this letter, “With a vigorous Heil.”

We turn now to the second part of our proof, relating to Schacht’s contribution to preparation for war.

The detailed chronology of Schacht’s official career in the Nazi Government, as set forth in Document 3021-PS, has already been submitted in evidence as Exhibit Number USA-11. However, it may be helpful at the outset to remind the Tribunal that Schacht was recalled to the Presidency of the Reichsbank by Hitler on 17 March 1933, which office he continuously held until 20 January 1939; that he was Acting Minister and then Minister of Economics from August 1934 until November 1937; and that he was appointed Plenipotentiary General for War Economy in May 1935. He resigned as Minister of Economics and Plenipotentiary General for War Economy in November 1937, when he accepted appointment as Minister without Portfolio, which post he held until January 1943. His position as virtual economic dictator of Germany in the 4 crucial years from early 1933 to the end of 1936 is practically a matter of common knowledge.

Schacht was the guiding genius behind the Nazi expansion of the German credit system for rearmament purposes. From the outset he recognized that the plan for the German military supremacy required huge quantities of public credit. To that end a series of measures was adopted which subverted all credit institutions in Germany to the over-all aim of supplying funds for the military machine. I will briefly mention some of these measures.

By Cabinet decree of 27 October 1933 the statutory reserve of 40 percent in gold and foreign exchange required against circulating Reichsbank notes was permanently abandoned. By the Credit Act of 1934 the Government assumed jurisdiction of all credit institutions, and control over the entire banking system was centralized in Schacht as Chairman of the Supervisory Board for the Credit System and President of the Reichsbank. This act not only enabled Schacht to control the quantity of credit but also its use. On 29 March 1934 a system of forced corporate lending to the Reich was imposed on German business. And on 19 February 1935 the Treasury was authorized to borrow funds in any amounts approved by the Reich Chancellor, that is, by Hitler.

On these points I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of the _Reichsgesetzblatt_ 1933, Part II, Page 827; _Reichsgesetzblatt_ 1934,