One Hundred and Eleventh Day, Thursday, 18 April 1946,
Morning Session 1
Afternoon Session 33
One Hundred and Twelfth Day, Tuesday, 23 April 1946,
Morning Session 64
Afternoon Session 97
One Hundred and Thirteenth Day, Wednesday, 24 April 1946,
Morning Session 136
Afternoon Session 167
One Hundred and Fourteenth Day, Thursday, 25 April 1946,
Morning Session 196
Afternoon Session 226
One Hundred and Fifteenth Day, Friday, 26 April 1946,
Morning Session 263
Afternoon Session 292
One Hundred and Sixteenth Day, Monday, 29 April 1946,
Morning Session 317
Afternoon Session 350
One Hundred and Seventeenth Day, Tuesday, 30 April 1946,
Morning Session 393
Afternoon Session 429
One Hundred and Eighteenth Day, Wednesday, 1 May 1946,
Morning Session 460
Afternoon Session 494
One Hundred and Nineteenth Day, Thursday, 2 May 1946,
Morning Session 527
Afternoon Session 555
ONE HUNDRED AND ELEVENTH DAY
Thursday, 18 April 1946
_Morning Session_
THE PRESIDENT (Lord Justice Sir Geoffrey Lawrence): Dr. Seidl.
DR. ALFRED SEIDL (Counsel for Defendant Hans Frank): Mr. President,
Members of the Tribunal, on 9 April of this year, deviating from the
rule made by the Tribunal, I made the application that I should first be
allowed to present the documents, then call the witnesses, and then at
the end examine the defendant as a witness. I do not know whether the
Tribunal is already in possession of the document books. I have
ascertained that Volume I of the document book was translated by 8
April, Volume II and III on 11 April, and Volume IV and V a few days
later. At any rate, I have not yet received any document books myself,
for the reason that the office concerned has not yet received permission
to bind the books.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I thought I asked about this, not yesterday, but
the day before yesterday—yes; and you said you were perfectly ready to
go on.
DR. SEIDL: I had been told that the books had been translated, and I
naturally assumed that these books would also be bound. Yesterday I
discovered that this is not the case. At any rate, the fault is not
mine.
THE PRESIDENT: I was not suggesting that there was any fault on your
part.
MR. THOMAS J. DODD (Executive Trial Counsel for the United States): In
the first place, we did not have much to go over with Dr. Seidl. The
agreement was reached with him the night before last about 6 o’clock or
a little afterwards. Thereafter the materials were put into the process
of preparation, and there are 500 pages. They have just not been
completed, and it is not so that the people did not receive authority to
go ahead. They have not been able to complete their work and there will
be some delay.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, you can go on with your witnesses. You have
the defendant himself to call and several other witnesses.
DR. SEIDL: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And the documents will no doubt be ready by then. We are
rising this evening at half past four, and by the time that the Tribunal
reassembles, by Tuesday morning, no doubt all the documents will be
ready. As to your application, the Tribunal has considered the
application and sees no reason to depart from its ordinary rule that the
defendant should be called first; that is to say, if you intend to call
the defendant.
DR. SEIDL: Oh yes, I intend to examine the defendant; but in the
interests of accelerating the proceedings, I suggested that the other
witnesses should be heard first so that the examination of the defendant
might be as short as possible. It is possible that he can then answer a
number of questions merely by saying “yes” or “no.” Another reason why I
consider this procedure to be the most expedient is because a proper
examination of the defendant is only possible if I have the document
books at hand at the same time. That necessity does not apply to the
other witnesses. I should, therefore, beg the Tribunal to give me
permission so that I can first examine the witnesses who are already in
the witnesses’ room.
THE PRESIDENT: The documents are all, or nearly all, I imagine, in
German and can be put to the defendant in the course of his examination;
and the Tribunal think, as they have already said, that calling the
defendant first is in the interests of expedition; and they, therefore,
feel they must adhere to their rule.
DR. SEIDL: Very well. In that case, with the permission of the Tribunal,
I call the Defendant Dr. Hans Frank to the witness stand.
[_The Defendant Frank took the stand._]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you give your full name?
HANS FRANK (Defendant): Hans Frank.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat this oath after me:
I, swear by God—the Almighty and Omniscient—that I will speak the pure
truth—and will withhold and add nothing.
[_The witness repeated the oath._]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you sit down, please.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, when and where were you born?
FRANK: I was born on 23 May 1900 at Karlsruhe, in Baden.
DR. SEIDL: Will you please give the Tribunal a brief outline of your
education?
FRANK: In 1919 I finished my studies at the Gymnasium, and in 1926 I
passed the final state law examination, which completed my legal
training.
DR. SEIDL: And what profession did you follow after that?
FRANK: I had several legal posts. I worked as a lawyer; as a member of
the teaching staff of a technical college; and then I worked principally
as legal adviser to Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist German
Workers Party.
DR. SEIDL: Since when have you been a member of the NSDAP?
FRANK: I joined the German Labor Party, which was the forerunner of the
National Socialist German Workers Party, in 1919, but did not join the
newly formed National Socialist Workers Party at the time. In 1923 I
joined the Movement in Munich as a member of the SA; and eventually, so
to speak, I joined the NSDAP for the first time in 1927.
DR. SEIDL: Were you ever a member of the SS?
FRANK: I have never been a member of the SS.
DR. SEIDL: That means you have never had a rank of an SS
Obergruppenführer or General of the SS?
FRANK: I never had the rank of an SS Obergruppenführer or SS General.
DR. SEIDL: Not even honorary?
FRANK: No, not even honorary.
DR. SEIDL: You were a member of the SA. What was the last position you
held in that?
FRANK: I was Obergruppenführer in the SA at the end, and this was an
honorary position.
DR. SEIDL: What posts did you hold in the NSDAP during the various
periods, and what functions did you exercise?
FRANK: In 1929 I became the head of the legal department of the Supreme
Party Directorate of the NSDAP. In that capacity I was appointed
Reichsleiter of the NSDAP by Adolf Hitler in 1931. I held this position
until I was recalled in 1942. These are the principal offices I have
held in the Party.
DR. SEIDL: Until the seizure of power you concerned yourself mainly with
legal questions within the Party, did you not?
FRANK: I dealt with legal questions in the interest of Adolf Hitler and
the NSDAP and its members during the difficult years of struggle for the
victory of the Movement.
DR. SEIDL: What were your basic ideas regarding the concept of a state
controlled by a legal system?
FRANK: That idea, as far as I was concerned, was contained in Point 19
of the Party program, which speaks of German common law to be created.
In the interest of accelerating the proceedings, I do not wish to
present my ideas in detail. My first endeavor was to save the core of
the German system of justice: the independent judiciary.
My idea was that even in a highly developed Führer State, even under a
dictatorship, the danger to the community and to the legal rights of the
individual is at least lessened if judges who do not depend on the State
Leadership can still administer justice in the community. That means, to
my mind, that the question of a state ruled by law is to all intents and
purposes identical with the question of the existence of the independent
administration of law. Most of my struggles and discussions with Hitler,
Himmler, and Bormann during these years were more and more focused on
this particular subject. Only after the independent judiciary in the
National Socialist Reich had been definitely done away with did I give
up my work and my efforts as hopeless.
DR. SEIDL: You were also a member of the Reichstag?
FRANK: In 1930 I became a member of the Reichstag.
DR. SEIDL: What posts did you hold after 1933?
FRANK: First, I was Bavarian State Minister of Justice, and after the
ministries of justice in the various states were dissolved I became
Reich Minister without portfolio. In 1933 I became the President of the
Academy of German Law, which I had founded. I was the Reich Leader of
the National Socialist Jurists Association, which was later on given the
name of “Rechtswahrerbund.” In 1933 and 1934 I was Reich Commissioner
for Justice, and in 1939 I became Governor General of the Government
General in Kraków.
DR. SEIDL: What were the aims of the Academy of German Law of which you
were the founder?
FRANK: These aims are written down in the Reich Law regarding the
Academy of German Law. The main task, the central task, of that Academy
was to carry out Point 19 of the Party program to bring German Common
Law into line with our national culture.
DR. SEIDL: Did the Academy of German Law have definite functions, or
could it act only in an advisory capacity?
FRANK: The Academy of German Law was the meeting place of the most
prominent legal minds in Germany in the theoretical and practical
fields. Right from the beginning I attached no importance to the
question whether the members were members of the Party or not. Ninety
percent of the members of the Academy of German Law were not members of
the Party. Their task was to prepare laws, and they worked somewhat on
the lines of an advisory committee in a well-organized parliament. It
was also my idea that the advisory committees of the Academy should
replace the legal committees of the German Reichstag, which was
gradually fading into the background in the Reich.
In the main the Academy helped to frame only laws of an economic or
social nature, since owing to the development of the totalitarian regime
it became more and more impossible to co-operate in other spheres.
DR. SEIDL: If I understand you correctly, then the governmental
administration of law was solely in the hands of the Reich Minister of
Justice, and that was not you.
FRANK: No, I was not Reich Minister of Justice. The Reich Minister of
Justice, Dr. Gürtner, was, however, not competent for the entire field
of legislation but merely for those laws which came within the scope of
his ministry. Legislation in the Reich, in accordance with the Enabling
Act, was in the hands of the Führer and Reich Chancellor and the Reich
Government as a body. Consequently my name appears in the
_Reichsgesetzblatt_ at the bottom of one law only, and that is the law
regarding the Reintroduction of Compulsory Military Service. However, I
am proud that my name stands at the end of that law.
DR. SEIDL: You have stated earlier that during 1933 and 1934 you were
Bavarian Minister of Justice.
FRANK: Yes.
DR. SEIDL: In that capacity did you have an opportunity of voicing your
opinion on the question of concentration camps, and what were the
circumstances?
FRANK: I learned that the Dachau concentration camp was being
established in connection with a report which came to me from the Senior
Public Prosecutor’s Office in Munich on the occasion of the killing of
the Munich attorney, Dr. Strauss. This Public Prosecutor’s Office
complained to me, after I had given them orders to investigate the
killing, that the SS had refused them admission to the Dachau
concentration camp. Thereupon I had Reich Governor, General Von Epp,
call a meeting where I produced the files regarding this killing and
pointed out the illegality of such an action on the part of the SS and
stated that so far representatives from the German Public Prosecutor’s
Office had always been able to investigate any death which evoked a
suspicion that a crime had been committed and that I had not become
aware so far of any departure from this principle in the Reich. After
that I continued protesting against this method to Dr. Gürtner, the
Reich Minister of Justice and at the same time Attorney General. I
pointed out that this meant the beginning of a development which
threatened the legal system in an alarming manner.
At Heinrich Himmler’s request Adolf Hitler intervened personally in this
matter, and he used his power to quash any legal proceedings. The
proceedings were ordered to be quashed. I handed in my resignation as
Minister of Justice, but it was not accepted.
DR. SEIDL: When did you become Governor General of the occupied Polish
territories, and where were you when you were informed of this
appointment?
FRANK: On 24 August 1939, as an officer in the reserve, I had to join my
regiment in Potsdam. I was busy training my company; and on 17
September, or it may have been 16, I was making my final preparations
before going to the front when a telephone call came from the Führer’s
special train ordering me to go to the Führer at once.
The following day I traveled to Upper Silesia where the Führer’s special
train was stationed at that time; and in a very short conversation,
which lasted less than ten minutes, he gave me the mission, as he put
it, to take over the functions of Civil Governor for the occupied Polish
territories.
At that time the whole of the conquered Polish territories was under the
administrative supreme command of a military commander, General Von
Rundstedt. Toward the end of September I was attached to General Von
Rundstedt’s staff as Chief of Administration, and my task was to do the
administrative work in the Military Government. In a short time,
however, it was found that this method did not work; and when the Polish
territories were divided into the part which was incorporated into the
German Reich and the part which then became the Government General, I
was appointed Governor General as from 26 October.
DR. SEIDL: You have mentioned the various positions which you held over
a number of years. I now ask you: Did you, in any of the positions you
held in the Party or the State, play any vital part in the political
events of the last 20 years?
FRANK: In my own sphere I did everything that could possibly be expected
of a man who believes in the greatness of his people and who is filled
with fanaticism for the greatness of his country, in order to bring
about the victory of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist movement.
I never participated in far-reaching political decisions, since I never
belonged to the circle of the closest associates of Adolf Hitler,
neither was I consulted by Adolf Hitler on general political questions,
nor did I ever take part in conferences about such problems. Proof of
this is that throughout the period from 1933 to 1945 I was received only
six times by Adolf Hitler personally, to report to him about my sphere
of activities.
DR. SEIDL: What share did you have in the legislation of the Reich?
FRANK: I have already told you that, and there is no need to give a
further answer.
DR. SEIDL: Did you, as a Reich Minister or in any other State or Party
post want this war, or did you desire a war in violation of treaties
entered into?
FRANK: War is not a thing one wants. War is terrible. We have lived
through it; we did not want the war. We wanted a great Germany and the
restoration of the freedom and welfare, the health and happiness of our
people. It was my dream, and probably the dream of every one of us, to
bring about a revision of the Versailles Treaty by peaceful means, which
was provided for in that very treaty. But as in the world of treaties,
between nations also, it is only the one who is strong who is listened
to; Germany had to become strong first before we could negotiate. This
is how I saw the development as a whole: the strengthening of the Reich,
reinstatement of its sovereignty in all spheres, and by these means to
free ourselves of the intolerable shackles which had been imposed upon
our people. I was happy, therefore, when Adolf Hitler, in a most
wonderful rise to power, unparalleled in the history of mankind,
succeeded by the end of 1938 in achieving most of these aims; and I was
equally unhappy when in 1939, to my dismay, I realized more and more
that Adolf Hitler appeared to be departing from that course and to be
following other methods.
THE PRESIDENT: This seems to have been covered by what the Defendant
Göring told us, by what the Defendant Ribbentrop told us.
DR. SEIDL: The witness has already completed his statement on this
point.
Witness, what was your share in the events of Poland after 1939?
FRANK: I bear the responsibility; and when, on 30 April 1945, Adolf
Hitler ended his life, I resolved to reveal that responsibility of mine
to the world as clearly as possible.
I did not destroy the 43 volumes of my diary, which report on all these
events and the share I had in them; but of my own accord I handed them
voluntarily to the officers of the American Army who arrested me.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, do you feel guilty of having committed crimes in
violation of international conventions or crimes against humanity?
THE PRESIDENT: That is a question that the Tribunal has got to decide.
DR. SEIDL: Then I shall drop the question.
Witness, what do you have to say regarding the accusations which have
been brought against you in the Indictment?
FRANK: To these accusations I can only say that I ask the Tribunal to
decide upon the degree of my guilt at the end of my case.
I myself, speaking from the very depths of my feelings and having lived
through the 5 months of this trial, want to say that now after I have
gained a full insight into all the horrible atrocities which have been
committed, I am possessed by a deep sense of guilt.
DR. SEIDL: What were your aims when you took over the post of Governor
General?
FRANK: I was not informed about anything. I heard about special action
commandos of the SS here during this trial. In connection with and
immediately following my appointment, special powers were given to
Himmler, and my competence in many essential matters was taken away from
me. A number of Reich offices governed directly in matters of economy,
social policy, currency policy, food policy, and therefore, all I could
do was to lay upon myself the task of seeing to it that amid the
conflagration of this war, some sort of an order should be built up
which would enable men to live. The work I did out there, therefore,
cannot be judged in the light of the moment, but must be judged in its
entirety, and we shall have to come to that later. My aim was to
safeguard justice, without doing harm to our war effort.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, did the police, and particularly the Security Police
and SD, come under your jurisdiction in the Government General?
FRANK: The Higher SS and Police Leaders were in principle subordinate to
the Reichsführer SS Himmler. The SS did not come under my command, and
any orders or instructions which I might have given would not have been
obeyed. Witness Bühler will cover this question in detail.
The general arrangement was that the Higher SS and Police Leader was
formally attached to my office, but in fact, and by reason of his
activities, he was purely an agent of the Reichsführer SS Himmler. This
state of affairs, even as early as November 1939, was the cause of my
first offer to resign which I made to Adolf Hitler. It was a state of
affairs which made things extremely difficult as time went by. In spite
of all my attempts to gain control of these matters, the drift
continued. An administration without a police executive is powerless and
there were many proofs of this. The police officers, so far as
discipline, organization, pay, and orders were concerned, came
exclusively under the German Reich police system and were in no way
connected with the administration of the Government General. The
officials of the SS and Police therefore did not consider that they were
attached to the Government General in matters concerning their duty,
neither was the police area called “Police Area, Government General.”
Moreover the Higher SS and Police Leader did not call himself “SS and
Police Leader in the Government General” but “Higher SS and Police
Leader East.” However, I do not propose to go into details at this
point.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, did the concentration camps in the Government
General come under you, and did you have anything to do with their
administration?
FRANK: Concentration camps were entirely a matter for the police and had
nothing to do with the administration. Members of the civil
administration were officially prohibited from entering the camps.
DR. SEIDL: Have you yourself ever been in a concentration camp?
FRANK: In 1935 I participated in a visit to the Dachau concentration
camp, which had been organized for the Gauleiters. That was the only
time that I have entered a concentration camp.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, in 1942, by a decree of the Führer, a State
Secretariat for Security in the Government General was created. The date
is 7 May 1942. What was the reason for creating that State Secretariat?
FRANK: The establishment of this State Secretariat was one of the many
attempts to solve the problem of the police in the Government General. I
was very happy about it at the time, because I thought now we had found
the way to solve the problem. I am certain it would have worked if
Himmler and Krüger had adhered to the principle of this decree, which
was co-operation and not working against each other. But before long it
transpired that this renewed attempt, too, was merely camouflage; and
the old conditions continued.
DR. SEIDL: On 3 June 1942, on the basis of this Führer decree, another
decree was issued regarding the transfer of official business to the
State Secretary for Security. Is that true?
FRANK: I assume so, if you have the document. I cannot remember the
details of course.
DR. SEIDL: In that case I shall ask the witness Bilfinger about this
point.
FRANK: But I should like to add something to that. Wherever the SS is
discussed here, the SS and the police are considered as forming one
body. It would not be right of me if I did not correct that wrong
conception. I have known during the course of these years so many
honest, clean, and upright soldiers among the SS, and especially among
the Waffen-SS and the police, that when judging here the problem of the
SS in regard to the criminal nature of their activities, one can draw
the same clear distinction as in the case of any of the other social
groups. The SS, as such, behaved no more criminally than any other
social groups would behave when taking part in political events. The
dreadful thing was that the responsible chief, and a number of other SS
men who unfortunately had been given considerable powers, were able to
abuse the loyal attitude which is so typical of the German soldier.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, another question. In the decree concerning the
creation of the State Secretariat for Security, it is ordered that the
State Secretary—which in this case was the Higher SS and Police
Leader—before making basic decisions, had to ask you for your approval.
Was that done?
FRANK: No, I was never called upon to give my approval and that was the
reason why before long this, my last, attempt proved to be a failure.
DR. SEIDL: Did the Higher SS and Police Leader and the SS
Obergruppenführer Krüger, in particular, obey orders which you had given
them?
FRANK: Please, would you repeat the question? It did not come through
too well. And please, Dr. Seidl, do not speak quite so loudly.
DR. SEIDL: Did the Higher SS and Police Leader Krüger, who at the same
time was the State Secretary for Security, obey orders which you gave
him in your capacity as Governor General?
FRANK: Not even a single order. On the strength of this new decree I
repeatedly gave orders. These orders were supposedly communicated to
Heinrich Himmler; and as his agreement was necessary, these orders were
never carried out. Some special cases can be confirmed by the State
Secretary Bühler when he is here as a witness.
DR. SEIDL: Did the Reichsführer SS and Chief of the German Police,
before he carried out security police measures in the Government
General, ever obtain your approval?
FRANK: Not in a single case.
DR. SEIDL: The Prosecution has submitted a document, L-37, as Exhibit
Number USA-506. It is a letter from the Commander of the Security Police
and SD of the District Radom, addressed to the branch office at
Tomassov. This document contains the following:
“On 28 June 1944 the Higher SS and Police Leader East issued the
following order:
“The security situation in the Government General has
deteriorated so much during the recent months that the most
radical means and the most severe measures must now be employed
against these alien assassins and saboteurs. The Reichsführer SS
in agreement with the Governor General, has given order that in
every case of assassination or attempted assassination of
Germans, not only the perpetrators shall be shot when caught,
but that in addition, all their male relatives shall also be
executed, and their female relatives above the age of sixteen
put into a concentration camp.”
FRANK: As I have said that I was never called upon by the Reichsführer
SS Himmler to give my approval to such orders, your question has already
been answered. In this case, I was not called upon either.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, were you at least informed of such orders from the
Reichsführer SS Himmler or from the Higher SS and Police Leader East
before they were carried out?
FRANK: The reason why this was not done was always the same. I was told
that as Poles were living not only in the Government General but also in
those territories which had been incorporated into the Reich, the fight
against the Polish resistance movement had to be carried on by unified
control from a central office, and this central office was Heinrich
Himmler.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, what jurisdiction did you have in the general
administration?
FRANK: I think it would accelerate the proceedings if the Witness Bühler
could testify to these details. If the Tribunal so desires I will of
course answer this question now. In the main I was concerned with the
setting up of the usual administrative departments, such as food,
culture, finance, science, _et cetera_.
DR. SEIDL: Were there representatives of the Polish and Ukrainian
population in the Government General?
FRANK: Yes. The representation of the Polish and Ukrainian population
was on a regional basis, and I united the heads of the bodies of
representatives from the various districts in the so-called subsidiary
committees. There was a Polish and an Ukrainian subsidiary committee.
Count Ronikier was the head of the Polish committee for a number of
years, and at the head of the Ukrainian committee was Professor
Kubiowicz. I made it obligatory for all my offices to contact these
subsidiary committees on all questions of a general nature, and this
they did. I myself was in constant contact with both of them. Complaints
were brought to me there and we had free discussions. My complaints and
memoranda to the Führer were mostly based on the reports from these
subsidiary committees.
A second form in which the population participated in the administration
of the Government General was by means of the lowest administrative
units, which throughout the Government General were in the hands of the
native population. Every ten to twenty villages had as their head a
so-called _Wojt_. This Polish word _Wojt_ is the same as the German word
“Vogt”—V-o-g-t. He was, so to speak, the lowest administrative unit.
A third form of participation by the population in the administration
was the employment of about 280,000 Poles and Ukrainians as government
officials or civil servants in the public services of the Government
General, including the postal and railway services.
DR. SEIDL: In what numerical proportion did the German civil servants
stand to the Polish and Ukrainian civil servants?
FRANK: The proportion varied. The number of German civil servants was
very small. There were times when, in the whole of the Government
General, the area of which is 150,000 square kilometers—that means half
the size of Italy—there were not more than 40,000 German civil
servants. That means to one German civil servant there were on the
average at least six non-German civil servants and employees.
DR. SEIDL: Which territories did you rule as Governor General?
FRANK: Poland, which had been jointly conquered by Germany and the
Soviet Union, was divided first of all between the Soviet Union and the
German Reich. Of the 380,000 square kilometers, which is the approximate
size of the Polish State, approximately 200,000 square kilometers went
to the Soviet Union and approximately 170,000 to 180,000 square
kilometers to the German Reich. Please do not ask me for exact figures;
that was roughly the proportion.
That part of Poland which was taken over into Soviet Russian territory
was immediately treated as an integral part of the Soviet Union. The
border signs in the east of the Government General were the usual Reich
border signs of the Soviet Union, as from 1939. That part which came to
Germany was divided thus: 90,000 square kilometers were left to the
Government General and the remainder was incorporated into the German
Reich.
THE PRESIDENT: I don’t think there is any charge against the defendant
on the ground that the civil administration was bad. The charge is that
crimes were committed, and the details of the administration between the
Government General and the department in the Reich are not really in
question.
DR. SEIDL: The only reason, Mr. President, why I put that question was
to demonstrate the difficulties with which the administration had to
cope right from the beginning in this territory, for an area which
originally represented one economic unit was now split into three
different parts.
[_Turning to the defendant._] I am coming now to the next question. Did
you ever have hostages shot?
FRANK: My diary contains the facts. I myself have never had hostages
shot.
DR. SEIDL: Did you ever participate in the annihilation of Jews?
FRANK: I say “yes”; and the reason why I say “yes” is because, having
lived through the 5 months of this trial, and particularly after having
heard the testimony of the witness Hoess, my conscience does not allow
me to throw the responsibility solely on these minor people. I myself
have never installed an extermination camp for Jews, or promoted the
existence of such camps; but if Adolf Hitler personally has laid that
dreadful responsibility on his people, then it is mine too, for we have
fought against Jewry for years; and we have indulged in the most
horrible utterances—my own diary bears witness against me. Therefore,
it is no more than my duty to answer your question in this connection
with “yes.” A thousand years will pass and still this guilt of Germany
will not have been erased.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, what was your policy for the recruiting of laborers
for the Reich when you were Governor General?
FRANK: I beg your pardon?
DR. SEIDL: What policy did you pursue for the recruiting of labor for
the Reich in your capacity as Governor General?
FRANK: The policy is laid down in my decrees. No doubt they will be held
against me by the Prosecution, and I consider it will save time if I
answer that question later, with the permission of the Tribunal.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, did Hitler give you any instructions as to how you
should carry out your administration as Governor General?
FRANK: During the first 10 minutes of the audience in his special train
Adolf Hitler instructed me to see to it that this territory, which had
been utterly devastated—all the bridges had been blown up; the railways
no longer functioned, and the population was in a complete turmoil—was
put into order somehow; and that I should see to it that this territory
should become a factor which would contribute to the improvement of the
terribly difficult economic and war situation of the German Reich.
DR. SEIDL: Did Adolf Hitler support you in your work as Governor
General?
FRANK: All my complaints, everything I reported to him, were
unfortunately dropped into the wastepaper basket by him. I did not send
in my resignation 14 times for nothing. It was not for nothing that I
tried to join my brave troops as an officer. In his heart he was always
opposed to lawyers, and that was one of the most serious shortcomings of
this outstandingly great man. He did not want to admit formal
responsibility, and that, unfortunately, applied to his policy too, as I
have found out now. Every lawyer to him was a disturbing element working
against his power. All I can say, therefore, is that, by supporting
Himmler’s and Bormann’s aims to the utmost, he permanently jeopardized
any attempt to find a form of government worthy of the German name.
DR. SEIDL: Which departments of the Reich gave instructions to you
regarding the administration of the Government General?
FRANK: In order to expedite the proceedings I should like to suggest
that the witness Bühler give the whole list.
DR. SEIDL: Did you ever loot art treasures?
FRANK: An accusation which is one that touches my private life, and
affects me most deeply, is that I am supposed to have enriched myself
with the art treasures of the country entrusted to me. I did not collect
pictures and I did not find time during the war to appropriate art
treasures. I took care to see that all the art treasures of the country
entrusted to me were officially registered, and had that official
register incorporated in a document which was widely distributed; and,
above all, I saw to it that those art treasures remained in the country
right to the very end. In spite of that, art treasures were removed from
the Government General. A part was taken away before my administration
was established. Experience shows that one cannot talk of responsibility
for an administration until some time after it has been functioning,
namely, when the administration has been built up from the bottom. So
that from the outbreak of the war, 1 September 1939, until this point,
which was about at the end of 1939, I am sure that art treasures were
stolen to an immeasurable extent either as war booty or under some other
pretext. During the registration of the art treasures, Adolf Hitler gave
the order that the Veit Stoss altar should be removed from St. Mary’s
Church in Kraków, and taken to the Reich. In September 1939 Mayor Liebel
came from Nuremberg to Kraków for that purpose with a group of SS men
and removed this altar. A third instance was the removal of the Dürer
etchings in Lvov by a special deputy before my administration was
established there. In 1944, shortly before the collapse, art treasures
were removed to the Reich for storage. In the Castle of Seichau, in
Silesia, there was a collection of art treasures which had been brought
there by Professor Kneisl for this purpose. One last group of art
treasures was handed over to the Americans by me personally.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, did you introduce ghettos, that is, Jewish quarters
in the Government General?
FRANK: I issued an instruction regarding the setting up of Jewish
quarters. I do not remember the date. As to the reasons and the
necessity for that, I shall have to answer the Prosecutor’s questions.
DR. SEIDL: Did you introduce badges to mark the Jews?
FRANK: Yes.
DR. SEIDL: Did you yourself introduce forced labor in the Government
General?
FRANK: Forced labor and compulsory labor service were introduced by me
in one of the first decrees; but it is quite clear from all the decrees
and their wording that I had in mind only a labor service within the
country for repairing the damage caused by the war, and for carrying out
work necessary for the country itself, as was of course done by the
labor service in the Reich.
DR. SEIDL: Did you, as was stated by the Prosecution, plunder libraries
in the Government General?
FRANK: I can answer that question plainly with “no.” The largest and
most valuable library which we found, the Jagellon University Library in
Kraków, which thank God was not destroyed, was transferred to a new
library building on my own personal orders; and the entire collection,
including the most ancient documents, was looked after with great care.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, did you as Governor General close down the
universities in the Government General?
FRANK: The universities in the Government General were closed because of
the war when we arrived. The reopening of the universities was
prohibited by order of Adolf Hitler. I supplied the needs of the Polish
and Ukrainian population by introducing university courses of
instruction for Polish and Ukrainian students—which were actually on a
university level—in such a way that the Reich Authorities could not
criticize it. The fact that there was an urgent need for native
university-trained men, particularly doctors, technicians, lawyers,
teachers, _et cetera_, was the best guarantee that the Poles and
Ukrainians would be allowed to continue university teaching to the
extent which war conditions would allow.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn for 10 minutes.
[_A recess was taken._]
DR. SEIDL: Witness, we were last speaking of the universities. Did you
yourself, as Governor General, close the secondary schools?
FRANK: My suggestion to reopen the Gymnasiums and secondary schools was
rejected by Adolf Hitler. We helped to solve the problem by permitting
secondary school education in a large number of private schools.
DR. SEIDL: Now, a basic question. The Prosecution accuse you of having
plundered the country ruled by you as Governor General. What do you have
to say to that?
FRANK: Well, evidently by that accusation is meant everything that
happened in the economic sphere in that country as a result of the
arrangements between the German Reich and the Government General. First,
I would like to emphasize that the Government General had to start with
a balance sheet which revealed a frightful economic situation. The
country had approximately twelve million inhabitants. The area of the
Government General was the least fertile part of the former Poland.
Moreover, the boundary between the Soviet Union, as well as the boundary
between the German Reich, had been drawn in such a way that the most
essential elements, indispensable for economy, were left outside. The
frontiers between the Soviet Union and the German Reich were immediately
closed; and so, right from the start, we had to make something out of
nothing.
Galicia, the most important area in the Republic of Poland from the
viewpoint of food supplies, was given to the Soviet Union. The province
of Posen belonged to the German Reich. The coal and industrial areas of
Upper Silesia were within the German Reich. The frontier with Germany
was drawn in such a way that the iron works in Czestochowa remained with
the Government General, whereas the iron-ore basins which were 10
kilometers from Czestochowa were incorporated into the German Reich.
The town of Lodz, the textile center of Poland, came within the German
Reich. The city of Warsaw with a population of several millions became a
frontier town because the German border came as close as 15 kilometers
to Warsaw, and the result was that the entire agricultural hinterland
was no longer at the disposal of that city. A great many facts could be
mentioned, but that would probably take us too far. The first thing we
had to do was to set things going again somehow. During the first weeks
the population of Warsaw could only be fed with the aid of German
equipment for mass feeding. The German Reich at that time sent 600,000
tons of grain, as a loan of course, and that created a heavy debt for
me.
I started the financial economy with 20 million zlotys which had been
advanced to me by the Reich. We started with a completely impoverished
economy due to the devastation caused by the war, and by the first of
January 1944 the savings bank accounts of the native population had
reached the amount of 11,500 million zlotys, and we had succeeded by
then in improving the feeding of the population to a certain extent.
Furthermore, at that time the factories and industrial centers had been
reconstructed, to which reconstruction the Reich authorities had made
outstanding contributions; Reich Marshal Göring and Minister Speer
especially deserve great credit for the help given in reviving the
industry of the country. More than two million fully paid workers were
employed; the harvest had increased to 1.6 million tons in a year; the
yearly budget had increased from 20 million zlotys in the year 1939 to
1,700 million zlotys. All this is only a sketch which I submit here to
describe the general development.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, in your capacity as Governor General did you
persecute churches and religion in the areas which you had under your
administration?
FRANK: I was in constant personal contact with the Archbishop, now
Cardinal, Sapieha in Kraków. He told me of all his sufferings and
worries, and they were not few. I myself had to rescue the Bishop of
Lublin from the hands of Herr Globocznik in order to save his life.
DR. SEIDL: You mean the SS Gruppenführer Globocznik?
FRANK: Yes, that is the one I mean.
But I may summarize the situation by quoting the letter which Archbishop
Sapieha sent to me in 1942, in which, to use his own words, he thanked
me for my tireless efforts to protect the life of the church. We
reconstructed seminaries for priests; and we investigated every case of
arrest of a priest, as far as that was humanly possible. The tragic
incident when two assistants of the Archbishop Sapieha were shot, which
has been mentioned here by the Prosecution, stirred my own emotions very
deeply. I cannot say any more. The churches were open; the seminaries
were educating priests; the priests were in no way prevented from
carrying out their functions. The monastery at Czestochowa was under my
personal protection. The Kraków monastery of the Camaldulians, which is
a religious order, was also under my personal protection. There were
large posters around the monastery indicating that these monasteries
were protected by me personally.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, when did you hear for the first time about the
concentration camp at Maidanek?
FRANK: I heard the name Maidanek for the first time in 1944 from foreign
reports. But for years there had been contradictory rumors about the
camp near Lublin, or in the Lublin District, if I may express myself in
such a general way. Governor Zörner once told me, I believe already in
1941, that the SS intended to build a large concentration camp near
Lublin and had applied for large quantities of building materials, _et
cetera_. At that time I instructed State Secretary Bühler to investigate
the matter immediately, and I was told, and I also received a report in
writing from Reichsführer SS Himmler, that he had to build a large camp
required by the Waffen-SS to manufacture clothes, footwear, and
underwear in large SS-owned workshops. This camp went under the name of
“SS Works,” or something similar.
Now, I have to say I was in a position to get information, whereas the
witnesses who have testified so far have said under oath that in the
circles around the Führer nothing was known about all these things. We
out there were more independent, and I heard quite a lot through enemy
broadcasts and enemy and neutral papers. In answer to my repeated
questions as to what happened to the Jews who were deported, I was
always told they were to be sent to the East, to be assembled, and put
to work there. But, the stench seemed to penetrate the walls, and
therefore I persisted in my investigations as to what was going on. Once
a report came to me that there was something going on near Belcec. I
went to Belcec the next day. Globocznik showed me an enormous ditch
which he was having made as a protective wall and on which many
thousands of workers, apparently Jews, were engaged. I spoke to some of
them, asked them where they came from, how long they had been there, and
he told me, that is, Globocznik, “They are working here now, and when
they are through—they come from the Reich, or somewhere from
France—they will be sent further east.” I did not make any further
inquiries in that same area.
The rumor, however, that the Jews were being killed in the manner which
is now known to the entire world would not be silenced. When I expressed
the wish to visit the SS workshop near Lublin, in order to get some idea
of the value of the work that was being done, I was told that special
permission from Heinrich Himmler was required.
I asked Heinrich Himmler for this special permission. He said that he
would urge me not to go to the camp. Again some time passed. On 7
February 1944 I succeeded in being received by Adolf Hitler
personally—I might add that throughout the war he received me three
times only. In the presence of Bormann I put the question to him: “My
Führer, rumors about the extermination of the Jews will not be silenced.
They are heard everywhere. No one is allowed in anywhere. Once I paid a
surprise visit to Auschwitz in order to see the camp, but I was told
that there was an epidemic in the camp and my car was diverted before I
got there. Tell me, My Führer, is there anything in it?” The Führer
said, “You can very well imagine that there are executions going on—of
insurgents. Apart from that I do not know anything. Why don’t you speak
to Heinrich Himmler about it?” And I said, “Well, Himmler made a speech
to us in Kraków and declared in front of all the people whom I had
officially called to the meeting that these rumors about the systematic
extermination of the Jews were false; the Jews were merely being brought
to the East.” Thereupon the Führer said, “Then you must believe that.”
When in 1944 I got the first details from the foreign press about the
things which were going on, my first question was to the SS
Obergruppenführer Koppe, who had replaced Krüger. “Now we know,” I said,
“you cannot deny that.” And he said that nothing was known to him about
these things, and that apparently it was a matter directly between
Heinrich Himmler and the camp authorities. “But,” I said, “already in
1941 I heard of such plans, and I spoke about them.” Then he said that
was my business and he could not worry about it.
The Maidanek Camp must have been run solely by the SS, in the way I have
mentioned, and apparently, in the same manner as stated by the witness
Hoess.
That is the only explanation that I can give.
DR. SEIDL: Therefore you did not know of the conditions in Treblinka,
Auschwitz, and other camps? Did Treblinka belong to Maidanek, or is that
a separate camp?
FRANK: I do not know; it seems to be a separate camp. Auschwitz was not
in the area of the Government General. I was never in Maidanek, nor in
Treblinka, nor in Auschwitz.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, the Prosecution has presented under Number USA-275
the report of the SS Brigadeführer Stroop on the destruction of the
Warsaw Ghetto. Before that action was initiated, did you know anything
about it and did you ever come across this report?
FRANK: I was surprised when the American Chief Prosecutor said in his
opening speech, while submitting a document here with pictures about the
destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto, that that report had been made to me.
But that has been clarified in the meantime. The report was never made
for me, and was never sent to me in that form. And, thank Heaven, during
the last few days it has been made clear by several witnesses and
affidavits that this destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto was carried out
upon direct orders of Himmler, and over the head of all competent
authorities of the Government General. When in our meetings anybody
spoke about this Ghetto, it was always said that there had been a revolt
in the Warsaw Ghetto which we had had to quell with artillery; reports
that were made on it never seemed to me to be authentic.
DR. SEIDL: What measures did you take to see that the population in the
Government General was fed?
FRANK: An abundance of measures were taken to get agriculture going
again, to import machinery, to teach farmers improved farming methods,
to build up co-operative associations, to distribute seeds in the usual
way.
DR. SEIDL: The Witness Bühler will speak about that later.
FRANK: Moreover the Reich helped a great deal in that respect. The Reich
sent seeds to the value of many millions of marks, agricultural experts,
breeding cattle, machines, _et cetera_.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, you have told us what you did for the welfare of the
population of the Government General. The Prosecution, however, has
charged you with a number of statements which they found in your own
diary, and which seem to contradict that. How can you explain that
contradiction?
FRANK: One has to take the diary as a whole. You can not go through 43
volumes and pick out single sentences and separate them from their
context. I would like to say here that I do not want to argue or quibble
about individual phrases. It was a wild and stormy period filled with
terrible passions, and when a whole country is on fire and a life and
death struggle is going on, such words may easily be used.
DR. SEIDL: Witness...
FRANK: Some of the words are terrible. I myself must admit that I was
shocked at many of the words which I had used.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, under Number USA-297 the Prosecution has submitted a
document which deals with a conference which you apparently had in 1939
or 1940 with an office of the Chief of the Administration Ober-Ost. I
shall have the document handed to you and ask you to tell me whether the
report of that man, as it is contained in the document, agrees with what
you have said. It is on Page 1, at the bottom, the second paragraph.
FRANK: That is a shortened summary of a speech, which perhaps in an
address...
THE PRESIDENT: What is the PS number?
DR. SEIDL: Dr. Frank, what is the number?
FRANK: 297, I believe.
DR. SEIDL: No, on the cover, please.
FRANK: On the cover it says 344. I will return the document to you.
Would you kindly ask me about individual phrases. It is impossible for
me to read all of its contents.
DR. SEIDL: The number is 297, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it is USA-297. It is EC-344, (16) and (17), is that
right?
DR. SEIDL: Yes.
[_Turning to the defendant._] It says here that during the first
conversation which the chief of the central department had with the
Reich Minister Dr. Frank on 3 October 1939 in Posen, the latter
explained the task which had been given him by the Führer and the
economic-political principles on which he intended to base his
administration of Poland. This could only be done by ruthless
exploitation of the country. Therefore, it would be necessary to recruit
manpower to be used in the Reich, and so on.