submitted, I hope, on Monday. I also refer to, and beg you to take
judicial notice of, an extract from the speech of former Reich
Chancellor Brüning in Kiel on 19 May 1931, which is Number Neurath-36 in
my Document Book 2. Also to an extract from the speech made by former
Reich Foreign Minister Curtius, the successor and friend of Reich
Chancellor Stresemann who had died shortly before, to the League of
Nations Assembly.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, I was telling Herr Von Lüdinghausen
that I have got Volume II. I do not know if the Tribunal have the
English translation.
THE PRESIDENT: No, I do not think we have. Sir David, have the
Prosecution agreed to relevancy, the admissibility of these documents?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, we are not going to make an objection
to such short references as have been given so far. Your Lordship will
appreciate that I have already stated the position of the Prosecution
with regard to the Treaty of Versailles, but as long as it is kept
within reasonable bounds as a matter of introduction, I am not taking
any formal objection.
THE PRESIDENT: Herr Von Lüdinghausen, the Tribunal has ruled out of
evidence a variety of documents which are alleged to show the injustice
of the Treaty of Versailles; as the Prosecution have adopted the
attitude which they have, the Tribunal will regard these as mere
historical documents, but the matter is really irrelevant. The only
question is whether the defendants have attempted to overturn the Treaty
of Versailles by force. We are not concerned with the justice or
injustice.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: No, Mr. President, I did not submit the document
in order to criticize the Versailles Treaty. I merely wanted to
establish the fact that previous governments, too, had pursued with
peaceful means the same aims which my client later pursued as Reich
Foreign Minister, so that under his direction, therefore, there was no
change whatsoever in the nature and aims of German foreign policy with
reference to the Western Powers. That was the reason, and not criticism
as such.
THE PRESIDENT: I know, Dr. Von Lüdinghausen, but all the evidence that
the defendant has been giving in the last few minutes was criticism of
the injustice of the Treaty of Versailles.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: Yes, that was his general introduction, but I was
only trying to prove the continuity of policy.
[_Turning to the defendant._] What were your own views regarding the
continuation of the foreign policy of the Reich with reference to the
question which we have just dealt with?
VON NEURATH: It was my view that the solution of the various political
problems could be achieved only by peaceful means and step by step.
Complete equality for Germany in all fields, in the military field
therefore as well, and also the restoration of sovereignty in the entire
territory of the Reich and the elimination of any discrimination were
prerequisite conditions. But to achieve this was primarily the first
task of German foreign policy.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: Mr. President, in this connection I should once
more like to refer you to the affidavit by Ambassador Prüfer, which is
Number Neurath-4 in my document book, and I should like, with the
permission of the Tribunal, to quote from this, in order to support the
statements just made by the defendant, a part of Paragraph 12:
“Neurath’s policy was one of international understanding and
peace. This policy was not inconsistent with the fact that Herr
Von Neurath also strove for a revision of the severe provisions
of the Versailles Treaty. However, he wanted to bring this about
exclusively by negotiation and in no case by force. All
utterances and directives of his which I as his co-worker ever
heard or saw moved in this direction. The fact that Baron
Neurath considered himself a defender of the peace is perhaps
best illustrated by a statement he made when leaving the Foreign
Office. He declared at that time to a small group of his
colleagues that now war could probably no longer be avoided. He
presumably meant by this that now foreign policy would be
transferred from his hands into those of reckless persons.”
Herr Von Neurath, then you agreed entirely with Hindenburg in absolutely
rejecting any use of force for the purpose of achieving this objective,
the revision of the Treaty of Versailles; and you considered the
attainment of this goal possible and were a determined opponent of any
belligerent developments, which you considered the greatest possible
misfortune, not only for Germany but for the entire world?
VON NEURATH: Yes. Germany and the whole world were still in the midst of
the serious economic crisis which had been caused by the regulations of
the Treaty of Versailles. Any new development of belligerency,
therefore, could lead only to a great disaster.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: On 2 June 1932, a few days after you had entered
your new office as Foreign Minister, the meeting of the so-called
Reparations Conference began in Lausanne, and you and the new Reich
Chancellor, Von Papen, participated. Will you tell us very briefly what
the purpose of that conference was?
VON NEURATH: The reparations imposed by the Treaty of Versailles, which
had never been definitely fixed, were now formally to be settled
completely, that is, the final sum was to be decided on. This purpose
was accomplished.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: At the same time, was there not a meeting of the
Disarmament Conference at Geneva?
VON NEURATH: Yes, at almost the same time these negotiations were also
taking place.
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: Mr. President, in this connection, for the purpose
of general understanding, I should like to point out that the
institution of the Disarmament Conference goes back to a resolution
passed by the League of Nations on 25 September 1928, in which the close
connection between international security, that is to say, peace among
all the European States, and the limitation of armament was emphasized.
In this connection, I should like to refer to the text of the resolution
passed by the League of Nations, which is Number Neurath-33 in my
document book. That is on Page 90 of Document Book 2.
[_Turning to the defendant._] Can you give us a brief account of the
course of these disarmament negotiations?
VON NEURATH: Well, naturally it is very difficult to give a short
account. The Disarmament Conference had been created by the League of
Nations for the purpose of bringing about the disarmament of all
nations, which was provided for in Article 8 as an equivalent for the
German disarmament which had already been carried out by 1927. The
negotiations during this Disarmament Conference were, however, suspended
after a short time, despite the objections of the German
representatives. The preceding negotiations and this adjournment made it
quite clear, even at that time, that those states which had not disarmed
were not prepared to carry through their own disarmament in accordance
with the standards and methods applied to Germany’s previous
disarmament. This fact made it impossible for Germany to accept a
resolution which had been proposed to the Disarmament Conference at this
time, and the German representative therefore received instructions to
declare that Germany would not participate in the work of the
Disarmament Conference as long as Germany’s equal right to equal
participation in the results of the conference was not recognized.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Von Lüdinghausen, shall we adjourn now?
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: Yes, Mr. President.
[_A recess was taken._]
DR. VON LÜDINGHAUSEN: Mr. President, in regard to the question just put
and answered, I should like to refer to several documents and ask you to
take official notice of them. I am submitting, or have submitted in my
Document Book 2, excerpts from the German memorandum of 29 August 1932,
in Document Number Neurath-40; excerpts from an interview of Von Neurath
with the representative of the Wolff Telegraph Bureau, the official news
bureau of the German Reich, in Document Number Neurath-41 of Document