“After midnight the excitement of the public had reached its
peak and a large crowd marched to the synagogues in Nuremberg
and Fürth and burned those two Jewish buildings where the murder
of Germans had been preached.”
This is now what you say—it is on Page 44 of the document book, My
Lord:
“From the cradle on, the Jew is not taught as we are: ‘Thou
shalt love thy neighbor as thyself’ or ‘If you are smitten on
the left cheek offer then your right one.’ No. He is told ‘With
the non-Jew you can do whatever you like.’ He is even taught
that the slaughtering of a non-Jew is an act pleasing to God.
For 20 years we have been writing about this in _Der Stürmer_.
For 20 years we have been preaching it throughout the world, and
we have made millions recognize the truth.”
Does that sound as though you had disapproved of the demonstrations that
had taken place the night before?
STREICHER: First of all I must state that the report, part of which you
read, appeared in a daily paper. Thus I am not to be held responsible
for this. If someone wrote that part of the populace rose up against the
gang of murderers then that is in keeping with the order from the
Ministry of Propaganda in Berlin; outwardly that action was described as
a spontaneous demonstration of the populace...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: That does not answer my question. Does that
passage that I have read sound as though you had disapproved of the
demonstrations that had taken place the night before? Does it or does it
not?
STREICHER: I was against that demonstration.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Just let me read on:
“But we know that we have in our midst people who take pity on
the Jews, people who are not worthy of living in this town, who
are not worthy of belonging to this people, of whom you are a
proud part.”
Why should it have been necessary for people to have had pity on the
Jews, if you were not—you and the Nazi Party—persecuting them?
STREICHER: I have already pointed out today that I was forced, after
this demonstration had taken place, to make a public comment and say
that one should not have so much pity. I wanted to prove thereby that
this was not a spontaneous action by the people; in other words, the
matter does not speak against me; it speaks for me. The people, as I
myself, were opposed to the demonstration and I found that I had cause
to—should I say—get public opinion to the point where one might
possibly not regard that action as something too severe.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: But, why, if you were opposed to it and if the
people were opposed to it, should it have been your duty to try and
convert them so that they should be in favor of that kind of thing? Why
were you opposed to it and why should you try to turn them against the
Jew?
STREICHER: I do not understand what you mean.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I understand you to say that you were opposed
to these demonstrations and that the people also were opposed to the
demonstrations; that, therefore, it was your duty to try to stir them up
and make them in favor of the demonstrations after they had happened.
Why should it have been your duty to do that?
STREICHER: Today one can perhaps say that this or that was my duty, but
one must consider what those times were—the confusion that
existed—that to make a quick decision, as one might have to in this
courtroom, was quite impossible. What happened has happened. I was
against it and the public too. What was written about it otherwise was
done so for tactical reasons.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. Were you in favor of the
Aryanization of Jewish houses and businesses? Were you in favor of that
or did you disapprove of that issue?
STREICHER: I have answered that question today in great detail, in
connection with a statement of Party comrade Holz. I have stated and I
repeat that my deputy came to me...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Just stop for a moment, I don’t want a speech.
I asked you a question which you could answer “yes” or “no.” Did you
approve or disapprove of the system of Aryanization of Jewish businesses
and houses?
STREICHER: One cannot answer that quickly with “yes” or “no.” I have
made it clear today, and you must allow me to explain it so that there
is not any misunderstanding. My Party comrade...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I am not going to allow you to repeat it. I
will go on if you are not prepared to answer that question. The Tribunal
have heard it and I pass on.
STREICHER: I certainly want to answer it. After my Party comrades...
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant...
STREICHER: After the Party comrades came...
THE PRESIDENT: You have refused to answer the question properly, a
question to which you can give either an affirmative or a negative
answer. Did you approve or did you not approve? You can give an answer
to that and then you can give any explanation afterwards.
STREICHER: I personally was not for Aryanization. When Holz repeated
that, giving as a reason that the houses had been pretty badly damaged,
_et cetera_, that we might get material for a Gau (district) building, I
said “All right, if you can do it, go ahead.” I already stated today
that this was carelessness on my part.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: There were in fact a very great number of
Jewish businesses and houses Aryanized in Nuremberg and Franconia, were
there not?
STREICHER: Yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Would you just look at a new exhibit, Document
Number D-835, which becomes Exhibit GB-330. That is a list—it is an
original document—it is a list of Jewish property in Nuremberg and
Fürth which was Aryanized. Have you seen that list or anything like it
before?
STREICHER: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, you can take it from me, that that list
contains the addresses of some 800 properties in Nuremberg and Fürth
which have been taken from the Jews and handed over to Aryans. Would you
agree that that would be at least 800 houses in your city here that were
Aryanized?
STREICHER: I do not know about it in detail; but I must establish
something: I do not know—is that the official document? I have already
stated today that my Party comrade Holz started Aryanizing. That was
rescinded by Berlin. Then came the Aryanization carried out by the
State. I could not have had any influence here, either, so that this was
none of my business. This Aryanization, the expropriation of Jewish
property, was ordered by Berlin.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now, you mentioned this morning that you were a
subscriber to a weekly newspaper called the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_; is that correct?
STREICHER: Yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: When did you start subscribing to that
newspaper?
STREICHER: What did you say?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: At what date did you start subscribing to that
newspaper?
STREICHER: I do not know.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, I have no doubt you can tell the Tribunal
approximately. Have you always, since 1933, been a subscriber of that
newspaper?
STREICHER: Well, I do not think I could have read every issue, since I
traveled a great deal.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You were, as I think it is stated in this
application of your wife to give evidence, a regular reader of it, were
you not?
STREICHER: My friends, the editors, and I used to share in the reading
of this paper.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: May I take it that between yourself and your
editors—I don’t say every copy was read—but it was regularly read from
1933 onwards; is that fair?
STREICHER: You cannot say “read regularly.”
LT. COL, GRIFFITH-JONES: A large number of the copies that you
subscribed for, which came weekly to you, were they read by yourself or
by your editors?
STREICHER: Certainly.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now, I want to turn to something else for a
moment. I want to make myself perfectly clear to you.
DR. MARX: Mr. President, I should like to draw the attention of the
Tribunal to the fact that the document which has just been presented,
“Confiscated Property and Real Estate,” has the heading “Aryanization
Department for Real Estate, Nuremberg.” That cannot mean anything except
that this document comes from the official department which was later
set up for the confiscation of such real estate. But by no means can
this be a document to prove that we are concerned here with the real
estate Aryanized by Holz, subsequent to 9 November.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I accept that that may be so.
DR. MARX: I should like to ask, therefore, that the appropriate
correction be made.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: If I was mistaken in saying that those
properties had been Aryanized, I would be right then, would I not, in
saying that that list of properties was prepared by the Aryanization
Department in Nuremberg for the purpose of Aryanizing them in the
future? Would that be a fair statement to make?
STREICHER: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I won’t pursue that matter any further.
I want to make myself quite clear to you in what I am suggesting. I am
suggesting that from 1939 onwards you set out to incite the German
people to murder and to accept the fact of the murder of the Jewish
race. Do you understand that?
STREICHER: That is not true.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: No doubt you will say it isn’t true. I just
wanted you to be quite clear on what my suggestion is going to be.
I want you to look now at a bundle, which will be given to you, of
extracts from _Der Stürmer_. You can see the originals which are in
Court if you desire to do so, but it will save time if we use the
document books there.
Now, will you look at Page 3-A. For convenience, the pages in this
bundle are all marked “A” to distinguish them from the numbers in the
original document book.
THE PRESIDENT: Are they all in evidence?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: None of them are in evidence at the moment.
Perhaps the most convenient way would be for me to put the actual
documents in evidence together at the end, unless the Tribunal or the
defendant desire to see any copies of them. I will give them numbers as
I go along.
Will you look at Page 3-A of that bundle, Document Number D-809, which
becomes Exhibit Number GB-331:
“The Jewish problem is not yet solved, nor will it be solved
when one day the last Jew will have left Germany. Only when
world Jewry has been annihilated, will it have been solved.”
Is that what you were working for when you say you were working for the
international solution to this problem, an annihilation of world Jewry?
STREICHER: If that is how you understand “annihilation.” That was
written by my chief editor at the time. He says that the Jewish problem
will not yet be solved when the last Jew will have left Germany. And
when he suddenly says that only when world Jewry has been annihilated
will it be solved, then he certainly may have meant that the power of
world Jewry should be annihilated. But my Party comrade Holz did not
think of mass killing or the possibility of mass killing.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: The German word used there is “vernichtet,” is
it not? Look at your copy. “Vernichtet” that means “to annihilate.”
STREICHER: Today, when you look back, you could interpret it like that,
but not at that time.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well, we won’t waste time because we have
quite a number to look through. Will you look on to the next page. That
was in January you were writing that. In April 1939, Document D-810,
Exhibit GB-332, I refer only to the last two lines. This is an article
again by your editor: “Then perhaps their graves will proclaim that this
murderous and criminal people has, after all, met its deserved fate.”
What do you mean by “graves” there? Do you mean excluding them from the
business of the world?
STREICHER: This is the first time that I have seen this article. That is
the statement of opinion of a man who was probably looking ahead and
making a play on words; but as far as I knew him, and as far as we
discussed the Jewish problem, there was no question of mass
extermination; we did not even think of it. Maybe it was his wish—I do
not know—but anyway, that is the way it happened to be written.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. Just turn over, will you now, to May
1939, Document Number D-811, Exhibit Number GB-333. I quote the last six
lines: “There must be a punitive expedition against the Jews in Russia.”
This, of course, was before the Russian invasion.
“There must be a punitive expedition against the Jews in Russia,
a punitive expedition which will provide the same fate for them
that every murderer and criminal must expect, death sentence and
execution. The Jews in Russia must be killed. They must be
utterly exterminated. Then the world will see that the end of
the Jews is also the end of Bolshevism.”
STREICHER: Who wrote that article?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It is published in your _Stürmer_. We can find
out, if necessary. It is not written by you, but it is published in your
_Der Stürmer_; and you have told the Tribunal that you accept
responsibility for everything that was written in that newspaper.
STREICHER: All right, I assume responsibility; but I want to state that,
here too, this is the private opinion of a man who in May 1939 could not
have thought that _ex nihilo_—for we had no soldiers—a “March to
Russia” could be started. This is a theoretic and very strongly-worded
expression of opinion of that anti-Semitic person.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: All I ask you about that is: Is that not
advocating the murder of Jews, that article; if it is not, what is it
advocating?
STREICHER: The whole article would have to be read so that I could tell
what motives existed for writing something like that. I therefore ask
you to make public the whole article. Then one can form a proper
judgment.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, we’ll go on. We won’t waste time unless
you really want to see the whole article.
My Lord, if I perhaps might be allowed to put these documents in
evidence. As Your Lordship will see, this bundle is a bundle of extracts
from _Der Stürmer_.
DR. MARX: Mr. President, with the permission of the Tribunal, I would
like to make the following statements: A number of extracts from _Der
Stürmer_ have been mentioned here which have been put before me for the
first time. Some of them are articles which have not been written by the
defendant personally. Some are signed by Hiemer, and some by Holz, who
was particularly radical in his manner of writing, and passages are
being quoted which are perhaps taken out of context.
I must ask, therefore, that I be afforded the opportunity of going over
these extracts together with the Defendant Streicher. Otherwise, he
might come to the conclusion that his defense is being made too
difficult for him and that it is being made impossible for him to
prepare himself appropriately.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, you will have an opportunity of checking up on
these various extracts, and then you will be able to introduce, if
necessary, any passages which explain the extracts. That is a matter
which has been explained to defendants’ counsel over and over again.
Colonel Griffith-Jones, are there not certain of these extracts which
are written or signed by the defendant?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, with Your Lordship’s permission I will
refer to some of them, but so that I should not have to refer to all of
them, I was going to suggest that perhaps I might put them in and, if it
is necessary, let the Tribunal know afterwards the numbers of them to
save time.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I put the whole bundle in evidence and will not
refer to all of them.
THE PRESIDENT: Then you can give us the exhibit numbers later.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: If that is suitable to the convenience of the
Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well now, the Tribunal will see by looking at
this bundle, from the first page—which I think is 3-A—to Page 25-A,
that there are various extracts which have been written either by
yourself or by members of your staff between January 1939 and January
1941.
Do I understand you to say now, to have said in your evidence, that you
never knew that Jews were being exterminated in thousands and millions
in the Eastern territories? Did you never know that?
STREICHER: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: As I understood your evidence about the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ this morning you said this, as I have
written it down:
“Sometimes that journal contained hints that everything was not
in order. Later in 1943 an article appeared stating that masses
of Jews were disappearing but the article did not quote any
figures and did not mention anything about murders.”
Are you really saying that those copies of the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_, which you and your editors were reading, contained nothing
except for a hint of disappearance with no mention of figures or murder?
Is that what you are telling this Tribunal?
STREICHER: Yes, I stick to that, certainly.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now, I want you, if you will, to take this
bundle and keep it in front of you. It is a bundle of extracts from the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ from July 1941 until the end of the war.
The Tribunal will be able to see what a fanatic for the truth really
tells.
[_The document was submitted to the defendant._]
My Lord, this bundle, for convenience again, is marked “B.”
[_Turning to the defendant._] Will you look at the first page? That is
an article on the 11th of July 1941. “Some 40,000 Jews died in Poland
during the last years. The hospitals are overfull.”
Now, you need not turn over for the moment, Defendant. We will turn the
pages soon enough.
Did you happen to read that sentence in the issue of the 11th of July
1941?
STREICHER: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Will you look at Page 3, 3-B? In November 1941:
“Very bad news comes from the Ukraine. Thousands of Jewish dead are
being mourned, among whom are many of the Galician Jews who were
expelled from Hungary.”
Did you read that?
STREICHER: That might be possible. It says “thousands,” thousands are
being mourned. That is no proof that millions were killed. There are no
details as to how they came to their end.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: If that is the explanation you want us to
accept we will leave it.
Just go on again to the next page, will you? The 12th of December 1941,
a month later:
“According to news which has arrived from several sources,
thousands of Jews—one even speaks of many thousands—are said
to have been executed in Odessa”—and so on.—“Similar reports
reach us from Kiev and other Russian cities.”
Did you read that?
STREICHER: I do not know; and if I had read it then it would not change
a thing. That is no proof.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: But you have told the Tribunal, you know, that
there was nothing except hints of disappearance. Doesn’t it show that
you were not telling the truth when you read these extracts?
STREICHER: In that case may I say the following? When the war started we
no longer received the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_. During the later
years one could only get the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ through the
Police. We got that paper, toward the end, into Germany by smuggling. On
one occasion we asked the Police to provide us with foreign newspapers
and this weekly, and we were told that it was not possible. But we
nevertheless got it. What I mean to say by this is that I did not read
every one of those issues. The issues which I did read were confiscated
on my farm. Whatever is underlined has been read by me or it was read by
my editor in chief. I cannot, therefore, guarantee that I read every
article.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: No, I appreciate that and that is why we have
quite a number of them. You see, we have an extract for practically
every week or month over the course of 3 years.
I would just like you to turn to Page 30-A of the “A” bundle. I just
want you to see what you were writing after having heard, or after
having read, or anyway after those copies of the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_ had been published. This is a leading article by yourself.
“If the danger of the reproduction of that curse of God in the
Jewish blood is finally to come to an end, then there is only
one way open—the extermination of that people whose father is
the devil.”
And is the word that you use for extermination there “Ausrottung,”
rooting out, extirpation?
STREICHER: First of all, I would like to ask whether this issue is known
to my defense counsel, and if the translation is correct?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It does not matter. He has copies of all this
and he will be able to protect your interests. We are now just testing
the truth of the evidence that you have given.
Can you tell me, is that “extermination”? Does that mean murder of Jews?
What else can it mean?
STREICHER: It depends on the whole context. In that case I want you to
read the whole article.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, if there is anything in the rest of the
article which can be helpful to you, your counsel will have an
opportunity to see the article and be able to put it before the
Tribunal. I can assure you that the remainder of your articles, as a
general rule, do not assist your case.
STREICHER: When that article appeared, mass killing had already taken
place a long time ago.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. Well now, we will not go through
this at any length.
If you will look at your “B” bundle, your bundle of extracts from the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_...
THE PRESIDENT: I think you should draw his attention to the date on Page
30-A.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I am very much obliged to Your Lordship.
[_Turning to the defendant._] The 25th of December 1941.
If you will glance at “B” bundle you will see a number of extracts going
from Page A to Page 21. Now, I would like you to glance at Page 24 of
that “B” bundle.
STREICHER: Page 24?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Yes, Page 24. This is an article which appeared
in the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ on the 27th of November 1942. I just
wondered whether you read this:
“At the Zionist Congress of Switzerland the representative of
the ‘Jewish Agency’ in Geneva... gave a report on European
Jewry.... The number of victims goes into millions. If the
present conditions continue and the German program is carried
out, it is to be reckoned that, instead of 6 or 7 million Jews
in Europe only 2 million will still be left.”
Then there are the three last lines of the extract:
“The Jews who were there had mostly been deported to the
notorious unknown destination further to the East. At the end of
this winter the number of victims will be 4 million.”
Is that what you call a hint of disappearance of Jews from the East?
STREICHER: I cannot recollect that I have ever read that but I do want
to say that if I had read it I would not have believed it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well now, let us just turn to the “A” bundle
again and look at the article that you wrote on the 17th of December
1942. It is Page 34-A. This is an article which is initialed “STR” so I
presume it was written by you.
“The London newspaper, _The Times_, of the 16th of September 1942
published a...”
STREICHER: I have not got it yet.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Page 34-A.
STREICHER: Just a minute.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Find it for him. It is headed: “Eye for Eye,
Tooth for Tooth.”
“The London newspaper, _The Times_, of 16 September 1942
published a resolution which had been unanimously passed by the
Board of Deputies of British Jews. This resolution expresses the
grief and horror of the Anglo-Jewish Community at the
unspeakable atrocities committed by Germany and her allies and
vassals against the Jews of Europe which had only one aim, to
exterminate the whole Jewish population of Europe in cold
blood.”
Now, you must have read of that in _The Times_ because you say so.
STREICHER: Yes.