The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-12/tgmwc-12-115.08

Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-12/tgmwc-12-115.08
Last-Modified: 2000/01/27

Q. Witness, why were you dismissed from the teaching
profession? Did you ever commit any punishable or immoral

A. Actually I have answered this question already. Everybody
knows that I could not have been active publicly in this
profession if I had committed a crime. I was dismissed from
my profession because the majority of the parties in the
Bavarian Parliament in the autumn of 1923, after the Hitler
putsch, demanded my dismissal. That, gentlemen, was my

Q. You know that two charges are made against you. First,
you are accused that you were a party to the conspiracy
which aimed at launching a war, or wars, of aggression
generally, at breaking treaties and by so doing, or even at
an earlier stage, committing Crimes Against Humanity.

Secondly, you are accused of Crimes Against Humanity as
such. I should like to ask various questions on the first
point now. Did you ever have discussions with Adolf Hitler
or other leading men of the State or the party at which the
question of a war of aggression was discussed?

A. I can answer that with "no" right away, but I should like
to be permitted to make a short statement.

In 1921, as I have already said, I went to Munich, and
before the public on the platform I handed over my movement
to the Fuehrer. I also wrote him a letter in this connection
later. No other conference took place with Adolf Hitler or
any other person. I returned to Nuremberg and went on making
speeches. When the Party programme was proclaimed I was not
present. That proclamation, too, was made in public; the
conspiracy was so public that political opponents could make
attempts at terrorisation.

To sum up; at none of the secret meetings was any oath taken
or anything agreed upon which the public could not have
known. The programme stood, it had been submitted to the
police; on the basis of the law governing organisations the
party, like other parties, was entered in the register of
organisations. So that at that time there was no conspiracy.

Q. Witness, one of the most important points of the Party
programme was the demand for freedom from the conditions of
the Versailles treaty. What were your ideas as to the
possibility of some day getting rid of the Versailles

A. I think I can state that very shortly. I believe the
Tribunal has known this for some time. Of course you will
sometimes find one traitor in a people like the one who was
sitting here today; and you will also find unlimited members
of decent people. And after the last war, these decent
people themselves took up the slogan: "Get rid of

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: If your Honour please, I think I must
object to this sort of procedure. This witness has no right
to call another witness a traitor. He has not been asked any
question to which that is a response, and I ask that the
Tribunal admonish him in no uncertain terms and that he
confine himself to answering the questions here and that we
may have an orderly proceeding.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you will observe that injunction.

THE WITNESS: I ask the Tribunal to excuse me. It was a slip
of the tongue.

THE PRESIDENT: The observation that you made apparently I
did not catch myself, but it was made with reference to a
witness who has just given

                                                  [Page 303]

evidence here and you had no right at all to call him a
traitor or to make any comment upon his evidence.


Q. Herr Streicher, you will please refrain from making such
remarks. Adolf Hitler always spoke on the anniversary days
of the Party about a "sworn fellowship." What do you say
about that?

A. "Sworn fellowship" - that meant that he, Hitler, was of
the conviction that his old supporters were one with him in
the convictions, in their hearts and in their political
loyalty - a "sworn fellowship" sharing the same views and
united in their hearts.

Q. Would not that mean that a conspiracy existed?

A. Then he would have said we were a "fellowship of

Q. Was there any kind of close relationship between you and
the other defendants which could be termed a conspiracy, and
were you better acquainted or did you have especially close
relations with any one of these defendants?

A. In as much as they are old members of the Party we were
one community of people with the same convictions. We met at
Gauleiter meetings or when one of them spoke in the same
town of the Gau, he was seen by the others. But I only had
the honour of getting to know the Reich Ministers and the
gentlemen from the army here.
A political group therefore - an active group - certainly
did not exist.

Q. In the early days of the Party what solution was foreseen
for the Jewish problem?

A. Well, in the early days of the Party, the solution of the
Jewish problem was never mentioned, just as the question of
solving the problem of the Versailles treaty was never
mentioned. You must remember the state of chaos that existed
at that time in Germany. An Adolf Hitler who said to his
members: "I shall start to promote a war" -
would have been dubbed a fool. We had no arms in Germany.
Our army of one hundred thousand men had only a few big guns
left. The possibility of making or of prophesying war was
absolutely excluded, and to speak of a Jewish question at a
time when Jews were distinguishable only by their religion
or to speak of the solution of this problem, would have been
absurd. Before 1933 therefore, the solution of the Jewish
problem was not a topic of discussion. I never heard Adolf
Hitler mention it; and there is no one here of whom I could
say I ever heard him say one word about it.

Q. It is assumed that you had particularly close relations
with Adolf Hitler and that you had considerable influence on
his decisions. I should like to ask you to describe your
relations with Adolf Hitler and to clarify them.

A. Anyone who had occasion to make Adolf Hitler's
acquaintance knows that I am correct in saying that those
who imagined they could pave a way to his personal
friendship were entirely mistaken. Adolf Hitler was a little
eccentric in every respect and I believe I can say that
friendship between him and other men did not exist.
Certainly not a friendship that might have been described as
"intimate friendship." It was not easy to approach Adolf
Hitler; and anyone who wanted to approach him could only do
so by performing some manly deed.

I know what you mean by your question, and I may say that
before 1923 Adolf Hitler did not trust me. Although I had
handed over my movement to him unreservedly he sent Goering
- who later became Marshal of the Reich - some time later to
Nuremberg. Goering was then a young S.A. Fuehrer - I think
he was an S.A. Fuehrer - and he came to investigate matters
and to

                                                  [Page 304]

determine whether I or those who denounced me were in the
right. I do not mean this as an accusation, but merely as a
statement of fact. Soon after that he sent a second and then
a third person - in short, he did not trust me before 1923.

Then came Munich and the putsch. After midnight, when most
of them had left him, I appeared before him and told him
that the public must be told now when the next great day
would come. He looked at me intently and said: "Will you do
it? " I said: "I will do it."

Maybe the prosecution has the document before it. Then -
after midnight - he wrote on a piece of paper:-

  "Streicher will be responsible for the entire

That was to be for the following day, 11 November; and on 11
November I
took charge of the propaganda.

One hour before the march to the Feldherrnhalle I returned
and everything was in readiness. Our banner - which was to
become a banner of blood - flew in front. I joined the
second group and we marched into the city towards the
Feldherrnhalle. When I saw rifle after rifle ranged before
the Feldherrnhalle and knew that now there would be
shooting, I marched up ten paces in front of the banner and
straight up to the rifles. Then came the massacre and we
were arrested. I have almost finished.

At Landsberg - and this is the important part - Hitler
declared to me and to the men who were in prison with him,
that he would never forget. Thus, because I took part in the
march to the Feldherrnhalle and marched at the head of the
procession, Adolf Hitler may have felt himself drawn to me
more than
to the others. That was the friendship born of the deed.

Q. Have you finished?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you consulted by Adolf Hitler on important matters?

A. I saw Adolf Hitler only at Gauleiter conferences; when he
came to Nuremberg for meetings we had meals together, along
with five, ten or more people. I only recall being alone
with him once in the Brown House at Munich, after the
completion of the Brown House, and our conversation was not
a political one. All the conversations which I had with
Adolf Hitler, whether in Nuremberg, Munich or elsewhere,
took place in the presence of Party circle members.

Q. Now I come to 1933. On 1 April, 1933, a day of Boycott
was decreed throughout the entire German Reich against the
Jewish population. What can you tell us about that and what
part did you play in it?

A. A few days before 1 April, I was summoned to the Brown
House in Munich. Adolf Hitler explained to me something that
I already knew, namely, that a tremendous propaganda
campaign against the new Germany was being carried on by the
foreign Press. Although he himself had only just become
Chancellor, although Hindenburg was still at the head of the
Reich, although Parliament existed, a tremendous campaign of
hate against Germany had begun in the foreign Press.

The Fuehrer told me that even the Reich flag, the emblem of
sovereignty, was being subjected to insults abroad and that
we would have to tell world Jewry: "Thus far and no
farther." We would have to show them that we would not
tolerate it any longer.

                                                  [Page 305]

Then he told me that an Anti-Boycott Day was to be fixed for
1 April and that I was to organise it. Perhaps it would not
be irrelevant to point out the following facts: Adolf Hitler
thought that it might be a good thing to use my name in
connection with this Anti-Boycott Day. That was not done in
the end. So I undertook the organisation of the Anti-Boycott
and issued a directive, which I believe is in the hands of
the Tribunal. There is no need for me to say much about it.
I gave instructions that no attempts should be made on the
lives of Jews, that one or more guards should be posted in
front of all Jewish premises - that is to say in front of
every Jewish store - and that these guards should be
responsible for seeing that no damage was done to property.
In short, I organised the proceedings in a way which was
perhaps not expected of me, and perhaps not expected by many
members of the Party. I frankly admit that.

One thing is certain; except for minor incidents, Anti-
Boycott Day passed off perfectly. I believe that there is
not even a Jew who can contradict this. Anti-Boycott Day was
a disciplined proceeding and was not "anti" in the sense of
an attack on something. It had a purely defensive

Q. Was a committee formed at the time consisting of
prominent - i.e., leading members of the Party, and did that
committee ever appear?

A. As to the committee - it was like the Secret Cabinet
Council in Berlin, which never met. In fact, I believe that
the members of the committee did not even see or get to know
each other.

Q. The committee members?

A. The boycott committee. Goebbels put it into the
newspapers. That was a Press affair. I spoke to Goebbels on
the telephone once. He asked how things were going in
Munich, where I was. I said that everything was going
perfectly. Thus, no conference ever took place, it was only
done for effect, to make it appear a much bigger thing, than
it was.

Q. Witness, you made a mistake a few minutes ago, speaking
of the Munich affair in 1923. You meant 9 November - or
didn't you - 9 November, 1923. And what did you say?

A. I do not remember.

Q. It should be 9 November, 1923?

A. 9 November, 1923.

Q. Yes. The so-called Racial Law was promulgated at the
Reich Party Day in Nuremberg in 1935. Were you consulted
about the planning and preparation of the draft of that law,
and did you have any part in it, especially in its

A. Yes, I believe I had a part in it in so far as for years
I have written that any further mixture of German blood with
Jewish blood must be avoided. I have written such articles
again and again, and in my articles I have repeatedly
emphasised that the fact the Jews should serve as an example
to every race, for they created a racial law for themselves
- the law of Moses, which says: "if you come into a foreign
land you shall not take unto yourself foreign women." And
that, gentlemen, is of tremendous importance in judging the
Nuremberg laws. These laws of the Jews were taken as a model
for them. When, after centuries, the Jewish lawgiver Ezra
discovered that in spite of this many Jews had married non-
Jewish women, these marriages were annulled. That was the
beginning of Jewry which, because it introduced these racial
laws, has survived throughout the centuries, while all other
races and civilisations have perished.

Q. Herr Streicher, this is rather too much of a digression.
I asked you whether you took part in planning and working
out the draft of the law, or

                                                  [Page 306]

whether you yourself were not taken by surprise when these
laws were

A. I was quite honest in saying that I believe I contributed
indirectly to the making of these laws.

Q. But you were not consulted on the law itself?

A. No. I will make a statement, as follows:-

At the Reich Party Day in Nuremberg in 1935, we were
summoned to the hall without knowing what was going to
happen - at least I myself had no knowledge of it - and the
racial laws were proclaimed. It was only then that I heard
of these laws and I think that, with the exception of Herr
Hess, this is true of most of the gentlemen in the dock who
attended that Reich Party Day. The first we heard of these
decrees was at the Reich Party Day. I did not collaborate
directly. I may say frankly, that I regarded it as a slight
when I was not consulted in the making of these laws.

Q. It was thought that your assistance was not necessary?

A. Yes.

Q. Were you of the opinion that the 1935 legislation
represented the final solution of the Jewish question by the

A. With reservations, yes. I was convinced that if the Party
programme was carried out, the Jewish question would be
solved. The Jews became German citizens in 1848. Their
rights as citizens were taken from them by these laws.
Sexual intercourse was prohibited. For me, this represented
the solution of the Jewish problem in Germany. But I
believed that another international solution would still be
found and that some day discussions would take place between
the various States with regard to the demands made by
Zionism and that these demands would lead to a Jewish State.

Q. What can you tell us about the demonstrations against the
Jewish population during the night of 9 to 10 November,
1938, and what part did you play in them?

THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Marx, if you are going into that, it is
now 5 o'clock and I think we had better adjourn now until
Monday morning.

(Thereupon the Tribunal adjourned until Monday, 29 April,
1946, at 10.00 hours.

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.