The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-17/tgmwc-17-163.11

Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-17/tgmwc-17-163.11
Last-Modified: 2000/07/21

                                                  [Page 195]


Q. At any rate this is the figure, and it is this problem
which has been dealt with by your ministry. It may be that
it includes certain high schools, but at any rate, these are
your Ministry's documents, and I want to know what happened.
This was a minute, as I understand it, from Dennler, Dr.
Dennler, who was the head of group 10 of your office, to
Burgsdorff, who had a superior position, and, if I may
summarize it, this letter of 21st November, 1939, suggests
that the students should be taken forcibly from
Czechoslovakia to the old Reich and put to work in the old
Reich, and then, the next - on 25th November, you will
notice that in paragraph 2 it says - the writer, who is
Burgsdorff, is saying that he is dealing with X119/39, which
is Dennler's memorandum, and Burgsdorff says that he does
not want them to go into the Reich because at that time
there was some unemployment in the Reich, and suggests that
they should be dealt with by compulsory labour on the roads
and canals in Czechoslovakia. Now, these were the two
proposals from your office.

SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, the second one is Document
3857-PS, which will be Exhibit GB 524.


Q. What happened to the unfortunate students?

A. Nothing at all happened to them.

Q. Well, now, did either of these proposals of Dr. Dennler
for forced labour in the Reich and of Burgsdorff for forced
labour in Czechoslovakia, did they come to you?

A. No, either -

Q. Did they come to you for decision?

A. I think they were submitted to me, but I cannot tell you
for certain.

Q. Well, will you agree with me - or perhaps you will be
able to correct my knowledge - that this is the earliest
suggestion - you said it was not put into effect - but that
the earliest suggestion of forced labour came from an
officer of your department? Do you know of any other
department of the Reich that had suggested forced labour as
early as November, 1939?

A. There is no connection, and moreover if you were to look
through suggestions made by all your subordinates, then you,
too, might find some proposal which you afterwards rejected.
Suggestions made by. an adviser do not mean anything at all.

Apart from that, perhaps I can clear up this figure of
18,000. Here it says: "According to the documents at my
disposal, the number of students who will. be affected by
closing the Czech universities for three years will be
18,000." It is, therefore, three times 6,000, is it not,
which is approximately 18,000.

Q. I had already put forward that suggestion, defendant,
about ten minutes ago, but I respectfully agree with you.
That is one matter in which we are not in difference.

Well, now, you understand what I am suggesting. It is that
these proposals had their origin in your office, because
they were quite in keeping with the proposals in the
memoranda which I have just read to the Tribunal, that you
should not only get rid of Czech higher education, but you
should have forced labour. Do you remember that was in the
State Secretary's memorandum? What I am suggesting is that
it was in your department - the idea of forced labour - as
early as 21st November, 1939.

Now, defendant, I have only one other matter, and I hope, as
it is a question of fact, that perhaps you will be able to
agree with me on reflection. You suggested this morning that
the German University in Prague was closed down after the
founding of Czechoslovakia in 1919. That is how it came to
us. On reflection, do you not know that it continued and
that many thousands of students graduated in the German
University of Prague between 1919 and 1939?

                                                  [Page 196]

A. As far as I know, it was a department of the Czech
University, a German part of the Czech University, as far as
I know.

Q. But it continued - it continued as a university?

A. Yes, it continued, but as a Czech university.

Q. Yes, but German students came there and could take their
degrees in German? It was a permitted language? I suggest to
you that there are thousands of people who went there from
Austria and from the old Reich - went there as Germans and
took their degrees in German.

A. Yes, only the old German University, the so-called
Charles University, was closed by the Czechs. But a German
department, or whatever one might call it, still remained.
The Germans studied and took their examinations there.

Q. I think the point is clear. I am not going to argue about
the actual thing, but that there was a German university,
where German students could study, you will agree.

THE PRESIDENT: Do the prosecution wish to cross-examine


Q. Defendant, tell us please, when you were Minister of
Foreign Affairs, did Rosenberg try to intervene in the
foreign affairs of Germany? [N.B. The interpreter
erroneously transmitted Rosenberg's name instead of that of
Ribbentrop - for President's ruling on correction of record
see morning session of 26th June, 1946.]

A. Is that a question?

Q. Yes, that is a question.

A. Yes.

Q. Would you please tell us in what form this intervention
took place?

A. By communicating to the Fuehrer his own ideas on foreign
policy, without giving them to me for consideration.

Q. All right. Yesterday you stated here that in 1936 you had
differences of opinion with Hitler and that on 27th July,
1936, you asked to be relieved of your duties as a minister.
This document was cited here yesterday, but did you not
write to Hitler then - and I will read the last sentence of
your letter to him:

  "Even if I am no longer Minister, I shall be constantly
  at your disposal, if you so desire, with my advice and my
  years of experience in the field of foreign policy."

Did you write these words in your letter to the Fuehrer?

A. Yes. Yes, I did.

Q. And did yon fulfil the promises you made to Hitler?
Whenever it was necessary to cover by diplomatic
manipulations the aggressive actions of Hitler, as for
instance at the time of the annexation of the Sudetenland,
during the invasion of Czechoslovakia and so on? Did you
help Hitler with your experience? Is that right?

A. That is a great mistake. On the contrary, I ... as I have
stated here yesterday and today, I was called in by Hitler
only once, and that was on the last phase of the Austrian
Anschluss. With that my activities came to an end, and in
1938, to be sure, I went to see him of my own accord, to
restrain him from starting the war. That was my activity.

Q. We have already heard this. I would like to ask you
another question concerning the memorandum of Frederici
without repeating what has already been said here concerning
it. You remember this memorandum well, as it was presented
to the Court a short time ago. In the last part of that
memorandum, it is the last paragraph but one, it is stated:

  "If the governing of the Protectorate were in reliable
  hands and guided exclusively by the order of the Fuehrer
  of the 16th of March, 1939, the territory of Bohemia and
  Moravia would become an integral part of Germany."

It was for this purpose that Hitler chose you to be
Protector; is that not so?

A. Not a bit; that was not the reason at all. The reason was
... I have described it in detail yesterday.

                                                  [Page 197]

Q. All right. We shall not repeat the causes, we spoke about
them yesterday. Well, you deny that you were precisely the
man who was supposed to carry through the invasion of

A. To that I can only answer "Yes."

Q. All right. Do you admit that you were, in the
Protectorate, the only representative of the Fuehrer and of
the Government of the Reich, and that you were directly
subordinate to Hitler?

A. Yes, that is right; that is stated in Hitler's decree.

Q. Yes, it is stated there. I will not read this decree,
which would only delay the interrogation. This decree has
already been presented to the Court.

Do you acknowledge that all institutions under the authority
of the State, with the exception of the armed forces, were
subordinate to you?

A. No. I am sorry to have to say that that is a mistake.
That is also stated in the same decree of 1st September,
1939. Apart from that, there, were numerous other
organizations, that is, Reich authorities which were not
under my jurisdiction; quite apart from the police.

Q. Well, as far as the police are concerned, we will speak
about that separately. Do you think it is a mistake that the
decree does not mention it, or do you interpret the decree

I shall read the first paragraph of the decree of the 1st
September, 1939. It is stated there: "All the authorities,
offices and organizations of the Reich in the Protectorate
of Bohemia arid Moravia, with the exception of the armed
forces, are under the jurisdiction of the Reich Protector."
It is also stated in paragraph 2: "The Reich Protector
supervises the entire autonomous administration of the
Protectorate." As you see, it is stated very bluntly and
definitely here that all the institutions of the Reich were
subordinate to you, while you were subordinate to Hitler.

A. I have to tell you again that as to administrative
agencies, yes; but there were a number of other authorities,
Reich authorities and offices which did not come under my
jurisdiction. For instance, the Four-Year Plan.

Q. Now let us pass to the question of the police.

Yesterday, in answer to a question of your counsel, you
stated to the Tribunal that as to this decree of 1st
September, signed by Goering, Frick and Lammers, paragraph
13 was not comprehensible to you. Let us examine other
paragraphs of the same chapter concerning the police.

Paragraph 11 says:

  "The organs of the German Security Police in the
  Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia have the task of
  investigating and combating all hostile acts against the
  Government and population in the territory of the
  Protectorate, inform the Protector for the Reich as well
  as the subordinate organizations, keep them currently
  informed on important events, and advise them as to what
  to do."

Paragraph 14 of the same decree states:

  "The Minister of the Interior of the Reich (the
  Reichsfuehrer SS, and the Chief of the German Police)
  with the agreement of the Protector of Bohemia and
  Moravia issues the legal and administrative directives
  necessary for carrying out this order."

Thus, according to this decree, the police and the SS were
obliged to let you know about all their measures and,
moreover, all their administrative and legal acts and
measures had to be carried out with your knowledge. Do you
acknowledge that?

A. No; that is not right. First of all, there was at one
time an order that they were to inform me. But that was not
carried out and was forbidden by Himmler directly. And the
other, the second regulation to the effect that the
administrative measures - or whatever it is called - could
or should be carried out with my approval, which was never

                                                  [Page 198]

Q. So you deny it?

A. Yes.

Q. I now present to you the testimony of Karl Hermann Frank,
of March 7th, 1946, on this very question; that is, on the
question of the police and to whom they were subordinated.

MAJOR-GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, I present this
testimony as Exhibit USSR 494.

THE PRESIDENT: Is this in the English Book as well, do you

MAJOR-GENERAL RAGINSKY: No, Mr. President. This document
that I am presenting now is an original, signed by Frank.


Q. Karl Hermann Frank, during an interrogation, testified:

   "According to the order on 'The Structure of the German
   Administration in the Protectorate and the German
   Security Police,' all German authorities and offices in
   the Protectorate, including the police force, were
   formally subordinated to the Reich Protector and were
   under obligation to fulfil his orders. Owing to this,
   the Security Police were bound to carry out this basic
   policy set forth by the Reich Protector. Orders as to
   carrying out Government police measures were mainly
   issued by the Central Office of State Security in Berlin
   through the Head of the Security Police.
   If the Reich Protector wanted to carry out some State
   Police measures, he had to have the permission of the
   Central Office of State Security in Berlin; that is, in
   this case the State Police also submitted each order for
   reconfirmation to the Central Office of State Security
   in Berlin. The same was true of directives aimed at
   carrying out State Police measures given by higher SS
   and police leaders and to the head of the Security

I would like to draw your attention to this paragraph that I
am reading now:

  "This system of channels for issuing directives remained
  in force during the whole existence of the Protectorate
  and was used as such by von Neurath in the Protectorate.
  In general the Reich Protector could, on his own
  initiative, issue directives to the State Police through
  the head of the Security Police.
  In regard to the SD - Security Service - which had no
  executive powers, the authority of the Reich Protector
  respecting the issuing of directives to the SD was
  greater and not subject to the approval of the Reich
  Central Office of State Security in every case."

Do you confirm this testimony of Frank?

A. No.

Q. All right.

A. I refer you to a statement by the same Frank, which I
have learned about here, which was made last year, during
which he said something quite different. He said that the
entire police were not under the Reich Protector, but came
under the Chief of the Police in Berlin, namely, Himmler. It
ought to be here somewhere - this statement.

Q. Do not worry about it; I will come back to this

Tell me, please, who was the political adviser in your

A. Political adviser?

Q. Yes, political adviser.

A. In general I had various political advisers.

Q. In order not to waste time, I will show you a short
document, and I ask you to read it.

On 21st July, 1939, the Director of the Security Police
wrote a letter to your Secretary of State and to the SS and
Police Fuehrer, Karl Hermann Frank. The letter had the
following contents:

                                                  [Page 199]

  "In an order of 5th May, 1939, the Reich Protector of
  Bohemia and Moravia appointed the SD Fuehrer and delegate
  of the Security Police as his political adviser. I have
  ascertained that this order has not yet been published or
  carried out. Please provide for carrying out this order."
  Signed: Dr. Best."

Do you remember your order now?

A. I cannot remember that decree at the moment, but I do
remember that this was never carried out, because I did not
have this SD leader as my political adviser.

THE PRESIDENT: This would be a convenient time to break off.

MAJOR-GENERAL RAGINSKY: Mr. President, just one more minute,
please, to finish this question, and then we can break off.


Q. But did you issue such an order on 6th May?

A. I can no longer tell you about that at this date ... but
it is probably true. I do not want to deny it; I do not know
any more.

Q. But you did issue this order?

MAJOR-GENERAL RAGINSKY: All right. I thank you, Mr.
President. It is possible to adjourn now. I shall require
thirty minutes more.

(The Tribunal adjourned until Wednesday 26th June, 1946, at 1000 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.