“Strange how the Jews of the Anglo-Jewish Community suddenly
begin to prick up their ears. When the second World War began
the Führer of the German nation warned the Jewish warmongers
against plunging the world into a blood bath again. Since then
the German Führer has warned and prophesied again and again that
the second World War, instigated by world Jewry, must
necessarily lead to the destruction of Jewry. In his last speech
too, the Führer again referred to his prophecies.”
Did you write that?
STREICHER: Yes, this is merely a quotation. It refers to a forecast from
the Führer, of which nobody could possibly tell what it really meant.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well.
If you had not even read that or the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_, did
you ever hear of the declaration of the United Nations which was made on
the 17th of December 1942?
[_The document was submitted to the defendant._]
Do you remember hearing of that? You appear to have been reading _The
Times_; you appear to have been reading some copies of the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_. Maybe you heard of this declaration which
was published in London, Washington, and Moscow at the same time with
the assent and support of all Allied nations and dominions. I will just
read it to you and see if you remember it:
“The attention of the Belgian, Czechoslovak, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Norwegian, Polish, Soviet, United Kingdom, United
States, and Yugoslav Governments and also the French National
Committee has been drawn to numerous reports from Europe that
the German authorities, not content with denying to persons of
Jewish race in all the territories over which their barbarous
rule has been extended the most elementary human rights, are now
carrying into effect Hitler’s often repeated intention to
exterminate the Jewish people in Europe.
“From all the occupied countries Jews are being transported in
conditions of appalling horror and brutality to Eastern Europe.
In Poland, which has been made the principal Nazi
slaughterhouse, the ghettos established by the German invaders
are being systematically emptied of all Jews except a few highly
skilled workers required for war industries. None of those taken
away are ever heard of again. The able-bodied are slowly worked
to death in labor camps. The infirm are left to die of exposure
and starvation, or are deliberately massacred in mass
executions.
“The number of victims of these bloody cruelties is reckoned in
many hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent men, women, and
children.
“The above-mentioned Governments and the French National
Committee condemn, in the strongest possible terms, this bestial
policy of cold-blooded extermination. They declare that such
events can only strengthen the resolve of all freedom-loving
peoples to overthrow the barbarous Hitlerite tyranny. They
reaffirm their solemn resolution to ensure that those
responsible for the crimes shall not escape retribution, and to
press on with the necessary practical measures to this end.”
Did you never hear of this declaration?
STREICHER: I do not know, but if I should have heard of it, then I would
have to say the following:
After the seizure of power the foreign press published so many atrocity
stories, which turned out to be rumors, that I would have had no reason
to believe anything like this; nor is there any mention here that
millions of Jews were killed.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, you see, it isn’t altogether
uncorroborated. You say you had no reason to believe it; but your
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_, which you were subscribing to, was saying
exactly the same thing.
Would you look at Page 26-B of the “B” bundle? That is the declaration
of the United Nations of the 17th of December. Just see what the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ says on the 18th. And there I quote the
second paragraph:
“At that time the Polish Government in London gave the number of
Jews executed as 700,000. The Berlin radio hereupon declared
that these reports were untrue, but admitted that in Poland
‘Jews’ had had to be executed because they carried out acts of
sabotage.”
Then the last paragraph quoted:
“‘Up to the end of September 1942,’ writes the _Daily
Telegraph_, ‘2 million Jews have lost their lives in Germany and
in the countries occupied by the Axis, and it is to be feared
that the number of victims will be doubled by the end of this
year.’”
Did you happen to read that article?
STREICHER: I cannot remember having read it, but I would not have
believed it if I had.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You see, there is another article in that same
paper on the 23rd of December, in the same terms; another on the 30th of
December; and another on the 8th of January. Look at what it says on the
8th of January:
“The Polish Government in London has issued a new declaration
which states that all the information received agrees that a
third of the 3 million odd Jews have lost their lives.”
Did you read that?
STREICHER: I do not know, but I have to repeat, I would not have
believed it.
LT. COL GRIFFITH-JONES: Well now, just let’s see just what you were
writing on the 28th of January. Look at 35-A of your own bundle; 35-A.
Now just see what your Chief Editor, the witness you are going to call,
I understand, Hiemer—see what he has got to say first of all:
“But the ghetto too, which has today been re-established in
nearly all European countries, is only an interim solution, for
mankind once awakened will not merely solve the ghetto question
but the Jewish question in its totality. A time will come when
the present demands, of the Jews will be fulfilled. The ghetto
will have disappeared—and with it Jewry.”
What is he referring to, if he isn’t referring to the mass killing,
murder, of the Jewish race?
STREICHER: That was a statement of his opinion, his conviction. That
conviction must be understood in the same way as something which a
Jewish author wrote in his book in America. Erich Kauffmann wrote that
German men capable of fathering children should be sterilized, and in
that manner the German people should be exterminated. It was at the same
time that Hiemer wrote his article, and I want to say that the very
severe tone in _Der Stürmer_ at that time was due to that book from
America.
The interrogating officers know—and so does my counsel—that I have
repeatedly pointed out that I wanted that book to be produced. It was in
the _Völkischer Beobachter_.
If in America an author called Erich Kauffmann can publicly demand that
all men in Germany capable of fathering children should be sterilized,
for the purpose of exterminating the German people, then I say, eye for
eye and tooth for tooth. This is a theoretical literary matter.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. I am sure we have heard your
explanation. Let’s see what you have to say about your own article on
the same date. I quote from the middle of the next paragraph:
“But now, in the fourth year of this war, world Jewry is
beginning in its retrospective considerations to understand that
the destiny of Jewry is finding its fulfillment at the hands of
German National Socialism.”
What did you mean by that? Perhaps I should have quoted a little
earlier, going back to the beginning:
“When, with the outbreak of the second World War, world Jewry
again began to manifest themselves as warmongers, Adolf Hitler
announced to the world from the platform of the German Reichstag
that the World War conjured up by world Jewry would result in
the self-destruction of Jewry. This prophecy was the first big
warning. It was met with derision from the Jews, as were all the
subsequent warnings.”
And then you go on to say:
“But now, in the fourth year of this war, world Jewry is beginning in
its retrospective considerations to understand that the destiny of Jewry
is finding its fulfillment at the hands of German National Socialism.”
What did you mean by that?
STREICHER: Pardon me?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: What do you mean by saying “World Jewry is
finding its fulfillment at the hands of National Socialism”? How did you
mean that National Socialism was finding the fulfillment of Jewry’s
destiny?
STREICHER: National Socialism could not fulfill the fate, that is to
say, find the solution, since the Führer intervened with the hand of
destiny. That was not a solution.
During an interrogation I pointed out that I who personally wanted a
total solution, was, right from the beginning, against trying to solve
the Jewish problem by means of pogroms. If I said that the destiny of
Jewry was to be fulfilled by National Socialism, then I wanted to say
that through National Socialism the world would gain the knowledge and
the realization that the Jewish problem must be solved internationally.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Let’s just go on.
“That which the Führer of the German people announced to the
world as a prophecy at the beginning of this second World War is
now being fulfilled with unrelenting inevitability. World Jewry,
which wanted to reap big dividends from the blood of the warring
nations, is rushing with gigantic steps toward its extirpation.”
And again you use the word “Ausrottung.”
Does that mean just as it sounds, as though the fulfillment that you
were aiming at was warning the world about Jewry? What do you mean by
it? “Rushing with gigantic steps toward its extirpation”—Ausrottung.
What did you mean by it?
STREICHER: This is a warning. The Führer made a prophecy; nobody could
interpret that prophecy properly. The prophecy was not quoted only in
this article, but in 10 others. Again and again we referred to these
prophecies, the first of which had been made in 1929. Today we know what
the Führer wanted to say; at that time we did not. And I confess quite
openly that with this quotation we wanted to warn world Jewry: “Against
their threat, this threat.”
So as to defend myself I might mention in this connection that the
author, Dr. Emil Ludwig Kohn, who had left Germany and emigrated to
France, had written in the paper _Le Fanal_, in 1934, “Hitler does not
want war, but he is being forced into it. Britain has the last word.”
Thus...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: We are not discussing war now. We are
discussing the extermination, the mass murder of Jews, by the National
Socialists. That is what we are discussing. Let me read on:
“When Adolf Hitler stepped before the German people 20 years ago
to submit to them the National Socialist demands which pointed
the way into the future, he also made the promise which was to
have the gravest repercussions; that of freeing the world from
its Jewish tormentors. How wonderful it is to know that this
great man and leader is following up this promise with practical
action. It will be the greatest deed in the history of mankind.”
Do you say that you are not putting forward propaganda for the policy of
mass extermination which the Nazi Government had set out to do?
STREICHER: We too had freedom of the press like democratic countries.
Every author knew of the forecast, which perhaps later on turned out to
be a fact, and could write about it. That is what I did.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well.
STREICHER: But for my defense, Mr. Prosecutor, I want to be allowed to
say that wars too can be mass murder, with their bombs, _et cetera_. And
if it is proved that someone says that we are forcing Hitler into war,
then I can certainly say that a man who knows that Hitler is being
forced into war is a mass murderer.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: With the permission of the Tribunal I am going
to interrupt you again because we are not discussing whether or not
Hitler was forced into war. We will leave that now.
Just let us go on and see if you are really speaking the truth in saying
that while you are writing these articles you are not perfectly well
aware of what was happening in the Eastern territories.
We got as far as January 1943. I would like you to just look at one or
two more of the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ and see if you remember
reading any of these. Will you look at Page 30-B the 26th of February,
in your “B” bundle?
“Exchange reports from the Polish Government circles in London
that Warsaw, Lvov, Lodz and other cities have been ‘liquidated,’
and that nobody from the ghettos remained alive. The last
investigations have ascertained that only about 650,000 Jews
remain out of 2,800,000.”
Listen to me. Did you read that? Do you remember it?
STREICHER: I do not know. For months, perhaps half a year, we did not
get an issue, but if I had read it, I would not have believed that
either.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Did you believe Hitler? If you will turn over
the page to 31-B, did you believe Hitler? According to the last two
lines quoted in the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ of the 5th of March
1943: “Hitler, in his proclamation of 24 February, again proclaimed the
extermination of the Jews in Europe as his goal.”
Did you believe your own beloved Führer when he was saying the same
things as the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_, the United Nations, and _The
Times_ newspaper in London?
STREICHER: No, I declare that whoever got to know the Führer’s deepest
emotions and his soul, as I have personally, and then later had to learn
from his testament that he, in full possession of his faculties,
consciously gave the order for mass extermination, is confronted with a
riddle. I state here...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: We really don’t want another long speech about
the Führer. Just turn over the page and look at what is being said on
the 26th of March:
“The report of the Polish Government on the measures against the
Jewish population is published in full in the English press. A
passage reads, ‘In the town of Vilna 50,000 Jews were murdered,
in Rovno 14,000; in Lvov half of the total Jewish population.’
“Many details are also given about the use of poison gas, as at
Chelm, of electricity in Belzec, of the deportations from
Warsaw, the surrounding of blocks of houses, and of the attacks
with machine guns.”
Did you read that one?
STREICHER: I do not know. However, that shootings must have occurred, of
course, where Jews committed sabotage, _et cetera_, is self-evident.
During a war that is considered as a matter of course. However, the
figures which are quoted here were just simply not believable.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Yes. I understand you to say that now, but what
I do not understand is what you meant when you said this morning that
the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ made no mention of murders and gave no
figures. You didn’t say that the figures were unbelievable; you told
this Tribunal, on your oath, that the newspaper contained nothing except
the hints of disappearance, with no mention of figures. What did you
mean by that?
STREICHER: I have said the truth under oath, but it is possible that one
might not remember everything. During an interrogation some time back I
stated, based on memory, that an issue must exist which mentions the
disappearance of Jews, and so on. It is in the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_, and I thought I said that it was in 1943 and it is true.
If one article after the other is put before me—well, even if I had
seen it, how can I remember it? But that I, under oath, should have
deliberately told you an untruth, that is, at any rate, not so.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: We will deal with the article you mention in
1943 in one moment; but just before we do that, just see if you believe
your own staff. Turn, will you, to 38-A, M-139. Now, on the 6th of May
it so happens just after those last three extracts from the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ we have looked at, within 2 or 3 months, 1
or 2 months afterwards your newspaper is publishing this article. It is
headed “Children of the Devil.”
“_Der Stürmer_ paid a visit to the ghettos in the East. _Der
Stürmer_ sent its photographic reporter to various ghettos in
the East; a member of _Der Stürmer’s_ staff is well acquainted
with the Jews. Nothing can surprise him easily. But what our
contributor saw in these ghettos was a unique experience for
him. He wrote, ‘What my eyes and my Leica camera saw here
convinced me that the Jews are not human beings but children of
the devil and the spawn of crime.... It is hard to see how it
was possible that this scum of humanity was for centuries looked
upon as God’s chosen people by the non-Jews. ... This satanic
race really has no right to exist.’”
Now, you have heard of what was happening in the ghettos in the East
during 1942 and 1943? Are you really telling this Tribunal that your
photographer went with his camera to those ghettos and found out nothing
about the mass murder of Jews?
STREICHER: Yes, otherwise he would have reported to us about it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Warsaw ghetto, you remember, exterminated,
wiped out in April 1943. Your photographer must have been around just
about that time, if you were writing this on the 6th of May, if he had
just returned. Did you think he could have been there looking at ghettos
for _Der Stürmer_, for Julius Streicher, the Jew-baiter, and have
discovered nothing of what was happening in the ghetto in Warsaw and
elsewhere?
STREICHER: I can only remember that immediately after the end of the
Polish campaign a Viennese reporter went over there, made films and made
reports, in 1942. I would like to ask—is there a name, a signature
there, to show by whom it was written? One thing I know is that the
ghetto was destroyed; I read it in a summary, an illustrated report
which I think originated in the Ministry of Propaganda. But as to the
destruction of the ghetto during an uprising—well, I consider that
legal; from my point of view it was right. But mass murders in the
ghetto in Warsaw are something I never heard of.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now, just let’s look at the article to which
you referred a moment ago. Will you look at 44-A of the document book?
My Lord, this is the same as was included at Page 53 in the original
document book; it was Document Number 1965-PS, Exhibit Number GB-176,
but there is slightly more of the extract quoted at Page 44-A.
[_Turning to the defendant._] Now, I just want you to examine for the
last time whether or not you are speaking the truth in telling the
Tribunal that you did not know what was happening. You quote in that
article from the Swiss newspaper, the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_, of
the 27th August 1943—you will see that date, My Lord, in the middle of
the first paragraph—I start now from that line in the middle:
“The Swiss Jewish newspaper goes on to say, ‘The Jews of Europe,
with the exception of those in England and of insignificant
Jewish communities in the few neutral countries, have
disappeared, so to speak. The Jewish reservoir of the East that
was able to counterbalance the force of assimilation in the West
no longer exists.’”
That is the end of your quotation from the newspaper, and you go on to
say:
“This is not a Jewish lie; it is really true that the Jews have,
‘so to speak,’ disappeared from Europe and that the ‘Jewish
reservoir of the East’ from which the Jewish pestilence spread
for centuries among the European nations has ceased to exist. If
the Swiss newspaper wishes to affirm that the Jews did not
expect this kind of development when they plunged the nations
into the second World War, this is to be believed; but already
at the beginning of the war the Führer of the German Nation
prophesied the events that have taken place. He said that the
second World War would swallow those who had conjured it.”
Now, are you really saying that when that article was written you did
not know how to interpret the word “disappearance,” the disappearance of
the Jews from the East? Are you really telling the Tribunal that?
STREICHER: Yes, the word “disappear” after all does not mean
extermination _en masse_. This deals with a quotation from the
_Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ and is a repeated quotation of what the
Führer had prophesied.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, now, would you look at the article from
which you quote there, which you will find at Page 36-B; and I would
like you to follow it, and we will read the two together. Now, the
particular paragraph which I want to read in the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_ is that quotation which I have just read to you and you
will find the same quotation.
My Lord, it starts at the end of the eighth but last line, “The Jews
were” or rather “The Jews of Europe...” Have you got them in front of
you, Defendant?
STREICHER: I shall listen to you.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It would be better, I think, if you followed
it. I want to help you as much as possible. Page 44-A and 36-B. I will
read slowly first of all from your _Stürmer_ again:
“The Jews of Europe, with the exception of those in England and
of insignificant Jewish communities in the few neutral
countries, have, so to speak, disappeared...”
and you will see that you then go on in the quotation and say:
“...the Jewish reservoir of the East which was able to
counterbalance the force of assimilation in the West no longer
exists.”
Now, would you look at the original article:
“The Jews of Europe”—this is 36-B—“the Jews of Europe, with
the exception of those in England and of insignificant Jewish
communities in the few neutral countries, have, so to speak,
disappeared.”
Now—there you go on, “The Jewish reservoir of the East”—the original
goes on—“three million dead, the same number outlawed; many thousands,
all over the world, mentally and physically broken.”
Are you telling this Tribunal now that on the 27th of August, or when
you read that article of the 27th of August, you didn’t know that Jews
were being murdered in the East and that you had not read of those
things in the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_?
STREICHER: Whether I had read it or not, I would not have believed it,
that 3 million Jews had been killed. That is something I would not have
believed, and that is why I left it out, at any rate. Anyhow, the German
censorship would not have allowed the spreading of something which is
not credible.
THE PRESIDENT: You didn’t read the last part of the line, did you?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: [_Repeating._] “...were mentally and physically
broken. That is the result of the new order.” I am very much obliged to
you.
[_Turning to the defendant._] “That is the result,” you say, “of the
‘new order’ in Europe...”
You say you didn’t believe it. Is that what you say now, that you must
have read it—must you not?
STREICHER: Yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: But you just didn’t believe it; is that right?
STREICHER: No, I did not believe it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Even if you didn’t believe it, when you were
reading this newspaper more or less regularly, when your cameraman had
been to the ghettos in the East, did you think it right to go on, week
after week, in your newspaper crying for the extermination, murder, of
the Jews?
STREICHER: That is not correct. It is not true that murder was demanded
week after week. And I repeat again, the sharpening of our tone was the
answer to the voice from America that called for our mass murder in
Germany—eye for eye, tooth for tooth. If a Jew, Erich Kauffmann,
demands mass murders in Germany, then perhaps I, as an author, can say
that the Jews too should be exterminated. That is a literary matter. But
the mass murders had taken place a long time before without our having
known about them; and I state here that if I had known what had in fact
happened in the East, then I would not have used these quotations at
all.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: But, Defendant, you must have known then, must
you not, after reading that article, after sending your cameraman, after
the United Nations published their declaration, after Hitler’s
prophecies had been made again and again in his proclamations, after you
said his prophecy had been fulfilled? You really say you didn’t know?
STREICHER: The cameraman is at your disposal. He is in Vienna, and I ask
to have him brought here. And I state that this cameraman reported
nothing, and could not have reported anything, about mass murders.
THE PRESIDENT: I think we might adjourn now.
[_A recess was taken._]
DR. MARX: Mr. President, with the permission of the Tribunal, and in the
interest of clarification of the facts, I should like to point out the
following: The Prosecutor, Sir Griffith-Jones, has mentioned a document,
Page 38-A from _Der Stürmer_ of 6 May 1943. That seems to be an error,
because we are dealing here with _Der Stürmer_ of 6 March 1943.
That date is of the greatest importance because if the photographer of
_Der Stürmer_ published a report of 6 March in _Der Stürmer_, then he
must have been at the ghetto in Warsaw before 6 March 1943.
Presumably...
THE PRESIDENT: Why do you say 6 March? The document I have before me has
6 May.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: There has been a mistake, I am afraid, in the
German that Dr. Marx has. I have the original before me, which is 6 May
1943.
DR. MARX: Excuse me. At the present moment I cannot recall when the
destruction of the ghetto of Warsaw took place. That was Document
1061-PS.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I cannot remember for the moment the number of
the document, but the date was, I think from memory, from the 1st to the
23rd of April.
DR. MARX: Then, of course, my remark is without foundation. Please
excuse me.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now we had just dealt with the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_ issue for 27 August, the copy that you quoted from. I just
refer you to one more copy of that newspaper. Would you look at Page
37-B, which is an issue of 10 September 1943:
“Statistics presented by the Convening Committee showed that 5
millions out of the 8.5 million Jews of Europe had died or been
deported ... About 3 million Jews had lost their lives through
forced labor and deportation.”
Did you read that one?
STREICHER: I do not know, and again I would not have believed it. To
this day I do not believe that 5 million were killed. I consider it
technically impossible that that could have happened. I do not believe
it. I have not received proof of that up until now.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It is quite clear that there were plenty of
figures for you, quoted in this _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_ over the
period that we are discussing. Plenty of figures, it now turns out,
doesn’t it?
STREICHER: Pardon?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: We will go on. Now, I just want to put one or
two further articles of your own to you. You remember what I am
suggesting, that you are inciting the German people to murder. We know
now that at least you had read one article in the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_ where murder is mentioned. I just want to see what you go
on to publish in your own paper after that date.
Would you look at Page 47-A. This is an article by yourself on 6 January
1944. This is after you had been living on your estate for some time.
“After the National Socialist uprising in Germany, a development
began in Europe, too, from which one can expect that it will
free this continent for all time of the Jewish disintegrator and
exploiter of nations; and, over and above this, that the German
example will, after a victorious termination of the second World
War, bring about the destruction of the Jewish world tormentor
on the other continents as well.”
What example was the German nation setting to the other nations of the
world? What example do you mean there?
STREICHER: This article corroborates what I have been saying all along.
I spoke of an international solution of the Jewish question. I was
convinced that if Germany had won this war or had been victorious over
Bolshevism, then the world would have agreed that an understanding
should be reached with the other nations for an international solution
of the Jewish question. If I wrote here about destruction, it is not to
be understood as destruction by mass killing; as I have said, that is an
expression; I have to point out that I do not believe that Erich
Kauffmann really wanted to kill the German people by sterilization, but
he wrote it, and we sometimes wrote in the same manner, echoing the
sounds that we heard in the other camp.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You have not yet told us what is this
international solution that you are advocating by talking about
extermination; if it is not murder, what is it? What is the solution?
STREICHER: I have already said that I founded the Anti-Semitic Union,
and through this Anti-Semitic Union we wanted to create movements among
the nations which should, above and beyond governments, act in such a
way that an international possibility would be created, such as has been
represented today here in this Trial—thus, I conceived it, to form an
international congress center which would solve the Jewish question by
the creation of a Jewish state and thereby destroy the power of the Jews
within the nations.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: That is your answer—that you were advocating a
Jewish state? Is that all that this comes to? Is it simply that you were
advocating a Jewish national home? Is that what you have been talking
about in all these extracts that we have read? Is that the solution
which you are advocating?
STREICHER: Well, I do not know what you want with that question. Of
course, that is the solution.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. Let us just go on now. Turn to Page
48-A now, will you? This is 24 January 1944, “Whoever does what a Jew
does is a scoundrel, a criminal, and he who repeats and wishes to copy
him deserves the same fate—annihilation, death.”
Are you still advocating a national Jewish home?
STREICHER: Yes, that has nothing to do with the big political plan. If
you take every statement by a writer, every statement from a daily
newspaper, as an example, and want to prove a political aim by it, then
you miss the point. You have to distinguish between a newspaper article
and a great political aim.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well, let us just turn now to the next
page, 2 March 1944, “Eternal night must come over the born criminal race
of Jews so that eternal day may bless awakening non-Jewish mankind.”
Were they going to have eternal night in their national Jewish state? Is
that what you wanted?
STREICHER: That is an anti-Semitic play of words. Again it has nothing
to do with the great political aim.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It may be an anti-Semitic play of words, but
the only meaning it can have is murder. Is that not true?
STREICHER: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Will you turn to the next page, 25 May 1944;
and I remind you that these are all after you must have read of the
murder in _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_. I quote the second paragraph:
“How can we overcome this danger and restore humanity to health?
Just as the individual human being is able to defend himself
against contagious diseases only if he proclaims war against the
cause of the disease, the germ, so the world can be restored to
health only when the most terrible germ of all times, the Jew,
has been removed. It is of no avail to battle against the
outward symptoms of the world disease without rendering the
morbific agents innocuous. The disease will break out again
sooner or later. The cause and the carrier of the disease, the
germ, will see to that. But if the nations are to be restored to
health and are to remain healthy in the future, then the germ of
the Jewish world plague must be destroyed, root and branch.”
Is that what you mean? Are you saying there when you say “must be
destroyed root and branch”—did you mean to say “ought to be given a
Jewish national state”?
STREICHER: Yes, it is a far cry from such a statement in an article to
the act, or to the will, to commit mass murder.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Turn over to the 10th of August. “When it loses
this struggle, Judaism will be ruined, then the Jew will be
extinguished. Then will Judaism be annihilated down to the last man.”
Are we to read from these words: Provide the Jews with a Jewish national
state?
STREICHER: That is a vision of the future. I would like to call it an
expression of a prophetic vision. But it is not incitement to kill 5
million Jews. That is an opinion, a matter, of belief, of conviction.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It is the prophetic vision of what you wanted,
is it not—of what you have been advocating now for the last 4
years—the beginning of the war? Isn’t that what it is?
STREICHER: Mr. Prosecutor, I cannot tell you today what I may have been
thinking years ago at a certain moment when writing an article. But
still I admit that when I saw lying before me on the table declarations
from the Jewish front, many declarations saying, “the German nation has
to be destroyed; bomb the cities, do not spare women, children, or old
men”—if one has declarations like these in front of one, it is possible
that things will come from one’s pen such as I have often written.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You know, do you not, now, even if you do not
believe the full figures, that millions of Jews have been murdered since
the beginning of the war? Do you know that? You have heard the evidence,
have you not?
STREICHER: I believe it...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I only wanted to know whether you had heard
that evidence. You can answer “yes” or “no,” and I presume it will be
“yes.”
STREICHER: Yes, I have to say, evidence for me is only the testament of
the Führer. There he states that the mass executions took place upon his
orders. That I believe. Now I believe it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Do you think that it would have been possible
to carry out the extermination of 6 million Jews in 1921? Do you think
the German people would have stood for it? Do you think it would have
been possible under any regime in 1921 to have carried out the murder of
6 million men, women, and children of the Jewish race?
STREICHER: Whether that would have been possible with the knowledge of
the people—no, it would not have been possible. The prosecutor himself
has said here that since 1937 the Party had full control over the
people. Now even if the people had known this, according to the opinion
of the Prosecution, they could not have done anything against that
dictatorship because of that control. But the people did not know it.
That is my belief, my conviction, and my knowledge.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Was it possible to exterminate people in that
way only after some 20 years of incitement and propaganda by you and
other Nazis? Is that what made that possible?
STREICHER: I deny that the population was incited. It was enlightened,
and sometimes a harsh word may have been directed against the other side
as an answer. It was enlightenment, not incitement. And if we want to
keep our place before history I have to state again and again that the
German people did not want any killings, whether individually or _en
masse_.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I am not going to let you go into another
history about the German people. I am going to remind you of what you
have said...
STREICHER: Adolf Hitler...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I am going to remind you of what you said
yesterday. I read from the transcript: You speak of a Jewish question at
the time—that is 1923—“I would like to say that the public
distinguished Jews only by their religion; to speak about a Jewish
problem then would have been nonsense.”
Was that because there was no Jewish problem then, and that the Jewish
problem had only been created by you and the Nazi regime?
STREICHER: It was my aim, and I reached that goal in part: If the laws
which in the future should make impossible sexual intercourse between
different races, that is to say if that should become law—then it would
make the public realize that to be a Jew is not a point of religion but
of people and race. I helped to create that basis. But mass killings
were not the result of the enlightenment, or as the Prosecution say,
incitement. Mass killings were the last acts of will of a great man of
history who was probably desperate because he saw that he would not win.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I have no further questions. Perhaps I might be
allowed to just sort out the exhibits and then mention to the Tribunal
their numbers. If the Tribunal would agree, those that I have put in
evidence, which are the other parts of the bundle other than I have
actually quoted from—perhaps I could put them all in as one number and
hand the exhibits in to the clerk, if that would be the convenient
course.
THE PRESIDENT: I think so, yes. If they are in one bundle and you are
going to give one number to a number of documents, it had better be in
one bundle, had it not?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, do you want to re-examine?
DR. MARX: I do not consider it necessary any more.
THE PRESIDENT: Then the defendant can return to the dock. Dr. Marx, will
you continue the defendant’s case?
DR. MARX: I call now, with the permission of the Court, the witness
Fritz Herrwerth.
[_The witness Herrwerth took the stand._]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name?
FRITZ HERRWERTH (Witness): Fritz Herrwerth.
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 in German._]
You may sit down.
DR. MARX: How long have you known the Defendant Streicher?
HERRWERTH: Since the Party Rally in 1934.
DR. MARX: When did you enter his service and in what capacity?
HERRWERTH: I was employed on 15 October 1934, in Nuremberg, not in the
personal service of Herr Streicher himself, but in the municipal motor
pool. However, I worked for the then Gauleiter Streicher.
DR. MARX: When did you leave that service?
HERRWERTH: In August 1943.
DR. MARX: For what reason?
HERRWERTH: It was a personal dispute, and mainly due to my fault.
DR. MARX: Did you have any other tasks to carry out for Herr Streicher?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: And which?
HERRWERTH: Well, whatever came up. I also did agricultural work at the
end.
DR. MARX: Thus you were very often with Streicher?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: And therefore you knew about the most important incidents
during that period?
HERRWERTH: Yes. I do not know, however, what you call important
incidents. There were things that I do not know about, that is, at least
I assume that.
DR. MARX: I will ask you later in detail.
HERRWERTH: Yes, if you please.
DR. MARX: The Defendant Streicher is accused of having caused acts of
violence against the Jews and of having participated in these acts. Do
you know of any such case?
HERRWERTH: Not a single one.
DR. MARX: Will you please wait until the end of my question, and then I
shall say “end of question.” On 9 November 1938, did you drive Streicher
back to Nuremberg from Munich, and when? End of question.
HERRWERTH: It was on 9 November, yes. I do not know the time exactly. At
that time Streicher left Munich a bit earlier, and it may have been
about—I do not know for sure—9 o’clock perhaps.
DR. MARX: Did Streicher know already during that ride back that
something was to be done that night against the Jewish population?
HERRWERTH: No, he knew nothing about that.
DR. MARX: Then, during the night of 9 November, did you witness a
conversation between Streicher and the SA Leader, Von Obernitz?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: Where did that conversation take place?
HERRWERTH: In order to answer that question, I have to explain a little
further. When Herr Streicher went to bed, I was usually with him or the
house superintendent. On that evening Herr Streicher went to bed earlier
than usual. I do not know the reason. And that concluded my work for the
day. I went from Herr Streicher to the Casino of the Gauleitung. That
was in the cellar of the Gauleitung building on Schlageterstrasse. I
played cards there. And then the former SA Obergruppenführer, Von
Obernitz, came and called me, as was customary, by the name of Fritz and
told me he had to speak to Herr Streicher very urgently; and I answered
him that Herr Streicher had already gone to bed. Then he said, “Then I
must rouse him,” and he told me he would assume the responsibility; it
was an important affair. Herr Von Obernitz went to Herr Streicher’s
apartment in my car. Herr Streicher’s bedroom is above my apartment. I
had the keys and of course I could get in at any time.
On the way to the apartment at night I noticed that many SA men were in
the streets. I asked Herr Von Obernitz the reason for that. He told me
that that night something was going to happen; the Jewish homes were to
be destroyed. He did not say anything further to me.
I accompanied Herr Von Obernitz all the way to the bed of Herr
Streicher. Herr Von Obernitz then reported to Streicher about what was
happening that night. I cannot recall the details very well any more,
but I believe that he said that that night the Jewish homes were to be
destroyed. Herr Streicher was, if I may say so, surprised. He had not
known anything about it. He said literally to Herr Von Obernitz, and I
remember that very clearly, “That is wrong. One does not solve the
Jewish question that way. Do what you have been ordered. I shall have no
part in it. If anything should occur so that you need me, then you may
come for me.” I can also mention that thereupon Herr Von Obernitz said
that Hitler had declared that the SA should be allowed to have a fling
as retribution for what had occurred in Paris in connection with Herr
Vorn Rath. Streicher stayed in bed and did not go out during that night.
DR. MARX: Did Herr Von Obernitz mention anything about the fact that the
synagogues were to be set on fire?
HERRWERTH: I believe so, yes. But, as far as I remember, Herr Streicher
refused to do that, too, because the synagogue, as far as I know, was
burned down by the regular fire department, and upon orders from Herr
Von Obernitz.
DR. MARX: How do you know that?
HERRWERTH: I was there.
DR. MARX: Did you watch it?
HERRWERTH: Yes. I was at the synagogue during the night.
DR. MARX: And how could one assume that the regular fire department
started the fire?
HERRWERTH: How that could be assumed I do not know, but I saw it. The
regular fire department started the fire.
DR. MARX: Were you there in time to see how the fire was started or did
you arrive when the building was already on fire?
HERRWERTH: The building was not yet on fire, but the fire department was
there already.
DR. MARX: Is that right?
HERRWERTH: I can say nothing else.
DR. MARX: Did Herr Streicher at that time mention anything about the
fact that he was afraid of a new wave of excitement on the part of the
world press if the synagogue was burned? Did he say that that is why he
refused to do it?
HERRWERTH: I believe so, yes, but I could not say definitely; but, if I
remember correctly, they spoke about that.
DR. MARX: Did Obernitz say from whom he had received the order?
HERRWERTH: He only repeated what Hitler had said—the SA should be
allowed to have a fling.
DR. MARX: Is it correct that you, Witness, told your wife during the
same night about that conversation between Obernitz and Streicher?
HERRWERTH: I believe I did not speak about the conversation; but when I
walked down from the second floor to the ground floor through my
apartment, I told my wife that I would probably be a little late because
that night that action was going to be started; I told her briefly what
was happening but nothing about the conversation.
DR. MARX: Then, later you were at the Pleikershof when Streicher had
been forced to retire there or had retired?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: Do you remember an incident where the future Frau Streicher
spoke about the incidents at Magdeburg which had occurred there the same
night?
HERRWERTH: No, I know nothing of that.
DR. MARX: Did you not tell the then Frau Merkel that she should not talk
about these incidents because Streicher always got very excited about
them?
HERRWERTH: I can recall that Herr Streicher once said that he had been
right in his opinion, for, not long after that night he received
information—I do not know through whom—that, for instance, the glass
for the window panes had to be bought from Holland again. Herr Streicher
said then that that was the first confirmation of the correctness of the
opinion he had expressed at that time.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, just one moment.
Sir David, would it be convenient to you and the counsel for the
Defendant Von Schirach if we discussed the question about the documents
at 0930 tomorrow morning?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, I will find out. Yes, counsel for Von
Schirach says that he thinks it is all right.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, 0930 tomorrow morning.
DR. MARX: What observations did you make during your stay at Pleikershof
about the attitude of Streicher with regard to the Jewish question? What
was that about the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_?
HERRWERTH: Well, what do you want to know about the _Israelitisches
Wochenblatt_? Herr Streicher received it.
DR. MARX: Did he receive it regularly?
HERRWERTH: Yes, I believe I can say that quite certainly. I always saw
large bundles of newspapers of the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_. They
came continuously.
DR. MARX: Herr Streicher said that during the first years of the war he
had great difficulty in getting that paper and the Police did not
release it easily.
HERRWERTH: Yes, that can very well be. For I do not know, after all, of
what year they were. I just saw them and it is difficult for me to tell
now of what date these papers were.
DR. MARX: Yes, you said there were always large bundles of them.
HERRWERTH: Yes, on and off, but there were other newspapers too. Swiss
newspapers were there, the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_, and so on.
There were always so many newspapers lying about and among them I saw
here and there the _Israelitisches Wochenblatt_. I mean to say that it
would not be possible for me to say how many there were.
DR. MARX: All right. Did Streicher speak at times about his knowledge of
happenings in the East or of happenings in concentration camps in the
East?
HERRWERTH: Well. Herr Streicher did not know anything at all about it.
Thus he could not say anything about it. At least that is my conviction.
DR. MARX: Did you, then, ever speak to him about it?
HERRWERTH: Not that I know of; I did not know anything about it myself.
DR. MARX: Did you ever receive knowledge of a letter in which Streicher
was reproached by Reichsführer SS Himmler because he treated the French
prisoners too well? Did you understand me?
HERRWERTH: Yes, I understood, but I have to think about it. I know quite
well that Herr Streicher once mentioned something about the treatment of
prisoners. I know that the Frenchmen were treated very well, but whether
the cause for that was a letter from Himmler I do not know.
DR. MARX: No, no. The cause for the good treatment, you mean?
HERRWERTH: No, the cause for Herr Streicher’s speaking about it. Herr
Streicher spoke about reproaches against the good treatment of the
Frenchmen; but I do not know whether the fact that he spoke about it was
due to a letter from Himmler. But I do not believe that there was a
single Frenchman who could complain in any way about the treatment.
DR. MARX: You were no longer present when the Frenchmen left?
HERRWERTH: No.
DR. MARX: Do you know about an incident when the publisher Fink came
into the garden of Streicher’s home and admitted having lied to the
police in an affair concerning shares?
HERRWERTH: The question must be put in detail, Mr. Attorney, for I do
not know all about it, only part of it. I know that the then Director
Fink stood in tears before Streicher, that he wailed, that he accused
himself, saying that he was a rascal and a traitor. But why, I do not
know. For Herr Streicher then walked farther into the garden with him,
and I only saw that Herr Fink wept, and again heard how he accused
himself.
DR. MARX: Do you know that Streicher at certain intervals brought people
from the SPD and the KPD (Social Democratic Party and Communist Party)
from the Dachau Concentration Camp?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: How many do you suppose there were?
HERRWERTH: I do not know. It was every year around Christmas time. I
estimate that there were about 100 to 150 men every year. They came from
Dachau. Herr Streicher had dinner prepared for them in a separate room,
in the Hotel Deutscher Hof, and I believe that used to be the family
reunion—that is to say, the prisoners rejoined the members of their
family. Streicher also saw to it that released prisoners found work, and
he intervened personally for them.
DR. MARX: Did he also get work for one or another of these released
persons?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: What do you know about that?
HERRWERTH: I remember that three men, I believe, came into the Mars
motorcycle factory. Herr Streicher at that time told the plenipotentiary
of the German Labor Front to find positions for these people, as far as
I remember.
DR. MARX: What was the attitude of Streicher when he found out that
members of the Party had acquired cars and villas of Jewish property at
very low prices?
HERRWERTH: I can still remember when Herr Streicher returned from
Berlin. I do not know how much Herr Streicher knew at that time about
these purchases; but at any rate, when Herr Streicher returned from
Berlin where Herr Göring had expressed his views about these low-priced
purchases of buildings, Herr Streicher, just arrived at the Nuremberg
railroad station, said—and I heard it myself—that these purchases had
to be nullified at once.
Besides, I know only about one case where a Party member had to do with
the purchase of a house. I do not know whether there were more of them.
DR. MARX: Do you know whether Streicher was under surveillance by the
Gestapo while on his farm and that there was a prohibition against
visiting him there?
HERRWERTH: In answering the first question, I cannot say for sure that
Criminal Police agents were there. I cannot affirm categorically that
Herr Streicher was once under observation, but it could be safely
assumed. I know of a woman who even stated that she had been
photographed in the forest when she came from the railroad station to
the farm. And what was the second question?
DR. MARX: Whether people were prohibited from visiting him.
HERRWERTH: Yes. I met various members of the Party within the city and
whomever I asked said to me, “Impossible to get out there, impossible to
get out there.” And if I asked who had issued the prohibition, then no
one would talk about it; but as one heard it here and there, this
prohibition was said to have been issued by the Deputy of the Führer,
Herr Hess.
DR. MARX: Do you know anything about the fact that Streicher, when he
found out that acts of violence against Jews or other political
adversaries were intended, stopped them immediately?
HERRWERTH: Yes. At least, on the basis of his statements. He always said
that that was wrong.
DR. MARX: Do you know of any case where he took measures against
somebody who had been a party to such acts of violence? If you do not
know it, say you do not know.
HERRWERTH: Very well, at this moment I cannot recall any case.
DR. MARX: Do you know anything about that affair concerning the Mars
Works shares? What do you know about it?
HERRWERTH: Yes. I know about that case through statements made by
Streicher at that time. I was not a witness to these events myself, but
Herr Streicher once related to me what had happened. Shall I describe it
briefly?
DR. MARX: Yes, but very condensed, please.
HERRWERTH: Streicher was in a Turkish bath at the time when the Director
Fink and his adjutant, König, came and offered to sell the shares to
Herr Streicher. Herr Streicher said, “What kind of shares are they?” The
answer was, “They are shares of the Mars Works.” He said, “How many?”
The answer was “100,000 marks’ worth.” Then Streicher said, “What do the
shares cost?” He was told “5,000 marks.” Herr Streicher asked, “Why are
these shares so cheap?” Finally Herr Fink said, I believe, “Because they
are Jewish shares.”
Whoever knows Herr Streicher as I do, knows that Herr Streicher has
never taken anything from a Jew. He protested very emphatically against
the fact that such an offer had been made to him at all.
That seemed to settle the matter for the time being, and then suddenly
the then Gauleiter Herr Streicher had the thought that with that money
he could possibly construct the third Gau building. He mentioned that to
the gentlemen as they left, and they decided to buy the shares. Herr
Streicher forbade them to use Party money. Then both did not know what
to do. Herr Streicher said he would advance these 5,000 marks.
That settled the case, but I had another experience later. It was about
one and a half years after that trial that Streicher had had in Munich,
when he was dismissed. At that time the wife of NSKK Obergruppenführer
Zühlen came to me and asked whether I already knew that the criminal
police was again in Nuremberg concerning the Streicher case. I said “no”
to Frau Zühlen and added, “If they want to find out something why do
they not come out to the farm to Herr Streicher himself? He will give
them all the necessary information.”
After about 2 to 3 weeks, I met the Director of _Der Stürmer_, Fischer,
successor to Herr Fink. He told me—but I would like to mention first
that the shares, together with the 5,000 marks, were confiscated from
Herr Streicher. The then Director Fischer told me that on that same day
he had received a phone call from the trustee association, and that the
trustee association had reported to Director Fischer that they had
transferred to the account of _Der Stürmer_ the 5,000 marks which
Streicher at that time had advanced for the purchase of the shares.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, do you not think he is going into rather too
much detail about this?
DR. MARX: Yes.
HERRWERTH: Yes, I will make it shorter.
The man from the trustee association said that the 5,000 marks were
released because the innocence of Streicher had been proved in this
matter.
DR. MARX: You witnessed the Supreme Party Court session at that time?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: What did Herr Fink say at that time? Did he not accuse himself
again of having made false statements?
HERRWERTH: I was not present when Herr Fink was questioned.
DR. MARX: Very well. Then I would like to ask you, were you present when
the incident in Munich occurred at the Künstlerhaus Inn—with the man
who accosted Streicher?
HERRWERTH: Yes.
DR. MARX: Can you give us a description of how that incident occurred?
HERRWERTH: Well, Herr Streicher left the inn after dinner. I cannot
remember the exact words any more, but I am going to try to describe it
as well as possible. Herr Streicher left the inn, and as he went out
that man approached Herr Streicher in a—may I say—improper manner.
Streicher continued on his way and was silent at first. He asked the
people around him, myself also, whether we knew that man. Nobody knew
him.
Then Herr Streicher sent his son, Lothar, back into the room again to
speak to the man and to ask him what the reason was for such behavior.
Lothar Streicher came out and said that the man had behaved in just the
same manner again.
DR. MARX: Will you please be more brief? You should only tell us how
that incident occurred and what caused you and also Herr Streicher to
use violence against the man.
HERRWERTH: You mean his behavior?
DR. MARX: Yes. What happened then?
HERRWERTH: Herr Streicher asked the landlord for a room, and in that
room Streicher spoke to the man personally. There again the man made
offensive remarks, and then it came to blows, first with Lothar
Streicher. Now, as it happened, he was a strong man, and of course all
of us helped to get him down.
DR. MARX: All right.