Afternoon Session
[The Defendant Von Schirach resumed the stand.]
DR. SAUTER: Witness, before the adjournment we spoke about the question of the military or premilitary education of the youth. And now I come to a similar chapter; that is the question of whether you, as Youth Leader, in your articles, speeches, and orders did in any way attempt to influence young people psychologically towards an aggressive war in order to make them war-minded by such means.
VON SCHIRACH: No, never in my speeches to German youth, or in anything which I laid down for youth in the way of orders and directives, did I prepare German youth for war; nor have I ever, even in the smallest circle of my collaborators, expressed myself in such terms. All my speeches are contained in the collection Das Archiv, at least their essential contents. A considerable part of my speeches is collected also in a book Revolution der Erziehung (The Revolution in Education), which has been submitted to the Tribunal.
All this evidence shows that I never spoke to the youth of the country in that sense; it would have been in direct contradiction to all my aims of co-operation with the youth of other nations.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, perhaps I may draw your attention in this connection to the document which is in the Schirach document book under Number Schirach-125, I repeat 125—and also 126, where Schirach expresses his opinion about the question of preserving peace and rejecting war. I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of these documents as evidence.
Witness, you have just spoken of co-operation between your Reich Youth Leadership Office and the German Hitler Youth with the youth of other nations. Could you give us a more detailed statement on that, in particular which youth associations of other nations you co-operated with, which you attempted to approach, and in which way and to what degree?
VON SCHIRACH: Starting in 1933, and in an increasing degree year by year, I made efforts to bring about exchange camps with youth organizations in other countries. Here in Germany these groups of English youth, French youth, Belgian youth, and the youth of many other countries, particularly, of course, from Italy, often came as our guests. I remember that in one year alone, I think in 1936, there were approximately 200,000 foreign youths who stayed overnight in our youth hostels.
Perhaps it is important in this connection to say that the youth hostel system, which I took over in 1933, was developed by me and finally formed a part of an international youth hostel system, the president of which was sometimes a German, sometimes an Englishman. An international youth hostel agreement made it possible that youngsters of our nations could stay overnight in youth hostels of the guest nations.
I myself took great pains to bring about an understanding with the youth of France. I must say that this was a pet idea of mine. I think that my former assistants will remember just how intensely I worked towards the realization of that idea. I had my leaders’ periodical appear in the French language; I do not know whether more than once, but certainly at least once, so that the understanding between the French and the German youth could be strengthened thereby.
I went to Paris and I invited the children of one thousand veterans of the first World War to come to Germany. I very often had young French guests as visitors in Germany. But over and above this understanding with France, which eventually also led to difficulties between the Führer and myself, I co-operated with many, many other organizations.
Perhaps I may add that German-French co-operation, as far as youth was concerned, was supported particularly by Ambassador Poncet in Berlin, Premier Chautemps, and other French personalities who wrote in my leadership periodical on that particular subject. I exchanged views with youth leaders all over the world, and I myself undertook long journeys to visit youth organizations in other countries and establish contact with them. The war terminated that work. I do not want to omit mentioning here that for one whole year I put the entire youth program under the slogan “Understanding,” and that in all my speeches before the youth I tried to direct and educate it toward a better understanding of other nations.
DR. SAUTER: Is it true that, for instance, even during the last years before the war, I think even in the winter of 1937-1938 and again 1938-1939, you received large delegations of English youth in skiing camps of the Hitler Youth and that vice versa also during those years considerable delegations of Hitler Youth leaders and Hitler Youth members were sent to England so that the people could get to know and understand each other?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, that is correct. There were innumerable encampments of foreign youth in Germany and very many camps of German youth abroad, and I myself often visited such camps or received delegations from them.
I would like to add that as late as 1942 I made an attempt to co-operate with the youth of France. At that time the difficulty lay in Mussolini’s attitude. I went to Rome and, through Count Ciano’s intervention, had a long conversation with Mussolini and succeeded in having him withdraw his objections to having our youth invite all French groups to come to Germany.
Unfortunately, when I reported this result to our Foreign Minister, Hitler turned it down. At any rate, that is what Herr Von Ribbentrop said.
DR. SAUTER: From an article in the paper Das Archiv of 1938 I gather, for instance, that during that year you invited among others, 1,000 children of French war veterans to come into the Hitler Youth camps in Germany and into the German-French youth skiing camps. Is that correct?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, I have already told you that.
DR. SAUTER: Another article shows me that, for instance, I believe in 1939, you had a special memorial erected, I think in the Black Forest, when some members of an English youth delegation were accidentally killed there during games.
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, the defendant had mentioned earlier that near Berlin he erected a special house for these purposes under the name “The Foreign House of the Hitler Youth.” May I present to the Tribunal in the original, pictures of this “Foreign House,” as Document Number Schirach-120; and may I ask the Tribunal to look at these pictures, because in them...
THE PRESIDENT: We are quite prepared to take it from you without looking at the house. The particular style of architecture will not affect us.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, but if you will not look at the pictures, then you will not know how the house was furnished; and you will not see that in the house, for instance, there was not a single swastika, not a single picture of Hitler, or any such things. That, again shows considerations for the views of the foreign guests.
In this connection, Mr. President, may I also ask you to take judicial notice of a number of documents, all of which refer to the efforts of the Defendant Von Schirach to bring about an understanding between German youth and the youth of other nations. These are the documents in Schirach’s document book which have the Numbers Schirach-99 up to and including Schirach-107, then Documents Schirach-108 through 113, and also Documents Schirach-114 up to and including 116, and then Documents Schirach-117, 119, and 120. All these documents refer to the same subject.
Witness, when you invited such delegations from foreign youth organizations to Germany, was anything concerning German institutions and organizations, particularly with reference to the Hitler Youth, ever kept secret from these delegations, or how was that?
VON SCHIRACH: No, as a matter of principle, foreign youth leaders who wished to get to know our institutions were shown everything without any reservations whatever. There was, in fact, no institution of German youth in the past which was not shown to our foreign guests. Also the so-called premilitary education was demonstrated to them in every detail.
DR. SAUTER: And then in 1939 the second World War broke out. During the last months before that happened, did you seriously expect a war; or with what did you occupy yourself at the time?
VON SCHIRACH: I was firmly convinced that Hitler would not allow a war to break out. It was my opinion that he was in no way deceived about the fact that the Western Powers were firmly resolved to be serious. Until the day when war broke out, I firmly believed that the war could be avoided.
DR. SAUTER: Did you discuss with military leaders or political personalities at that time the danger of war and the prospects of maintaining the peace?
VON SCHIRACH: No; in fact, I want to say something here and now about my discussions with military personalities.
I have already stated that over a period of 12 years—that is from 1933 to 1944 or 1945; that is, 13 years—I had perhaps one or possibly two half-hour conversations with Field Marshal Keitel. I remember that one of them dealt entirely with a personal matter.
During the same period I had, I think, only one single discussion with Admiral Raeder, and Admiral Dönitz I met for the first time here in Nuremberg.
I never had any official discussions with Generaloberst Jodl at all, and I talked to the late Field Marshal Von Blomberg, if I remember rightly, possibly twice for half an hour. I had no official discussions at all with the former Supreme Commander of the Army, Von Fritsch. I was his guest on one occasion only, when he was running skiing competitions for the army, and he kindly invited me because he knew that I was interested in skiing.
With his successor, Von Brauchitsch, I had a general chat on questions of education when I talked before the youth of Königsberg in 1933. Later, I believe, I visited him once on official business; and we discussed a question which was of no particular importance for the education of youth. It was some technical matter.
These are the discussions which I have had with military personalities. In fact, altogether I must say that I did not have time for conferences. I led an organization comprising 8 million people; and my duties in that organization were such that I did not possibly have the time to participate in conferences and discussions in Berlin regarding the situation, even if I had been admitted to them, which was not the case.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, from 1932 you were a Reichsleiter. That means that you belonged to the highest level of leaders in the Party. Were you not, in that capacity as Reichsleiter, informed by Hitler, his deputy, or other political personalities about the political situation?
VON SCHIRACH: I think that Hitler invited the Reichs- and Gauleiter, on an average, twice a year to a conference, during which he retrospectively discussed political events. Never at any time did Hitler discuss before these men operations of the future, whether of a political or military nature.
DR. SAUTER: Then, if I understand your answer correctly, you were always surprised by these foreign developments.
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Does the same apply to the question of the Austrian Anschluss?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes. I heard of the Anschluss of Austria, which of course I hailed enthusiastically, through the radio, if I remember rightly, during a trip by car from my Academy at Brunswick to Berlin. I continued my journey to Berlin, boarded a train at once, and arrived the following morning in Vienna. There I greeted the young people: youth leaders, some of whom had been in prisons or in a concentration camp at Wöllersdorf for a long time, and also many women youth leaders, who had also experienced great hardships.
DR. SAUTER: And what about the march into Czechoslovakia?
VON SCHIRACH: Like every other German citizen, I heard of that through the radio, and did not learn any more than any other citizen learned from the radio.
DR. SAUTER: Were you, in any capacity, a participant in the negotiations regarding the Munich Pact with Chamberlain and Daladier in 1938?
VON SCHIRACH: No.
DR. SAUTER: And what was your opinion?
VON SCHIRACH: I regarded that agreement as the basis for peace, and it was my firm conviction that Hitler would keep that agreement.
DR. SAUTER: Did you know anything about the negotiations with Poland in 1939?
VON SCHIRACH: No, I heard about the negotiations which led to the war, only here in this courtroom. I was merely acquainted with that version of the negotiations which was officially announced through the radio or by the Ministry of Propaganda; and I know no more, therefore, than what every other German citizen knows. The version which Hitler announced before the Reichstag was considered by me to be absolutely true; and I never doubted it, or at least I did not doubt it until about 1943, and all I have heard about it here is new to me.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, the Prosecution, among other things, have made the accusation against you that in your book, Die Hitler-jugend—Idee und Gestalt (Hitler Youth—Idea and Form)—which, Mr. President, is Number 1458-PS—you used the expression “Lebensraum” (living space) and “Ostraum” (eastern space) and that by doing so you welcomed or considered as a necessity German conquests in the East, that is, at the expense of Soviet Russia and Poland.
What do you have to say about that?
VON SCHIRACH: In this book of mine, Die Hitler-jugend—Idee und Gestalt, the word “Lebensraum” (living space) is not used at all to my knowledge. Only the word “Ostraum” (eastern space) is used, and I think it is in connection with a press service in the East. In a footnote, in connection with a description of the tasks of the Colonial Advisory Board in the Reich Youth Leadership, there is a statement to the effect that, as a result of the activities of this Colonial Advisory Board the necessity of drawing the attention of youth to the exploitation of the eastern territory—and by that is meant the thinly populated eastern area of Germany—should not be overlooked.
That was at a time when we in the youth organizations were particularly concerned with the problem of the “flight from the land,” that is to say, the migration of the second or third sons of farmers to the cities. I formed a special movement of youth to combat that trend, the Rural Service, which had the task of stopping this flow of youth from the country to the towns and also of bringing home to youth in towns the challenge of the country.
Of course I never thought of a conquest of Russian territory because ever since I occupied myself with history it was always my point of view politically that the policy regarding mutual security with Russia, which broke off with Bismarck’s dismissal, should be resumed. I considered the attack against the Soviet Union as the suicide of the German nation.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, did you, as the Youth Leader of the German Reich, have the right to report to Hitler directly?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, that is true; but this right to make reports was more or less only on paper. To picture that precisely, before the seizure of power I frequently reported to Hitler in person. In 1932 he quite often announced his intention to dine with me in the evening, but it is clear that in the presence of my wife and other guests political questions were not discussed, particularly not the questions which fell into my special sphere. Only now and then, perhaps, could I touch upon a subject which interested me in connection with education.
In 1933, as far as I can remember, I reported twice to him personally, once regarding the financing of the youth movement, and the second time in connection with the Party Rally of 1933. During the following years my reports averaged one or two a year whereby I was treated in the same way as most people who reported to Hitler. Of the 15 odd points on which I wanted to report to him, I managed to deal with 3 or 4, and the others had to be dropped because he interrupted me and very explicitly elaborated on the things which interested him most.
I then tried to help myself by taking along models of youth buildings, views of the big stadiums and of youth hostels, which I had set up in a hall in the Reich Chancellery, and when he looked at them I used the opportunity to put two or three questions to him.
I must state here—I think I owe it to German youth—that Hitler took very little interest in educational questions. As far as education was concerned, I received next to no suggestions from him. The only time when he did make a real suggestion as far as athletic training was concerned was in 1935, I believe, when he told me that I should see to it that boxing should become more widespread among youth. I did so, but he never attended a youth boxing match. My friend Von Tschammer-Osten, the Reich Sports Leader, and I tried very often to persuade him to go to other sporting events, particularly to skiing contests and ice hockey championships in Garmisch, but apart from the Olympic Games, it was impossible to get him to attend.
DR. SAUTER: You have told us a little earlier about this so-called military or premilitary education, stating that, as far as one could talk about such education at all, it played only a minor part in the training of the Hitler Youth.
May I ask you to tell us, though not at length but only in condensed phrases, what, in your mind, were the chief aims of your youth education program. Be very brief.
VON SCHIRACH: Tent encampments.
DR. SAUTER: Tent encampments?
VON SCHIRACH: Trips, construction of youth hostels and youth homes.
DR. SAUTER: What do you mean by “trips”?
VON SCHIRACH: Youth hikes, individually and in groups; also the construction of more and more youth hostels. In one year alone, more than 1,000 homes and youth hostels were built by me in Germany. Then there was additional professional training, and then what I called the “Labor Olympics,” namely, the annual Reich trade contests, voluntary competition between all youth of both sexes who wanted to participate. In fact millions participated. Then our great Reich sports contests, championships in every type of sport, our cultural work, and the development of our singing groups, our acting groups, youth concert choirs, and the development of our youth libraries, and then something which I mentioned in connection with combating the migration from the country, the Rural Service with its rural help groups, those youths, who for idealistic reasons were working in the country, even town boys—to show the farmer boys that the country was really more beautiful than the city, that even a city boy will give up his life in the city temporarily to devote himself to the land and to tilling the soil. Then, as a great communal accomplishment of youth, I must mention the dental improvement and the regular medical examinations.
These, in a few summary words, were the main tasks which our youth organizations had, but they are by no means all.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, these ideas, these thoughts, and these aims of the Defendant Von Schirach are contained in a number of documents which are found in the Schirach document book, and which are extracts from his works, speeches, and orders. I am referring to Schirach document book, Numbers Schirach-32 through 39, 44 through 50, 66 through 74(a), 76 through 79, and, finally, 80 through 83.
All these documents deal with the tasks which the Defendant Schirach has just described to you, and I am asking the Tribunal to take judicial notice of the details in these documents.
[Turning to the defendant.] There is only one point of that Hitler Youth program, if I may call it that, with which I would like to deal, because it has been particularly stressed against you in the Indictment. That is your collaboration with the Lawyers’ League, that is to say, your occupation with law. In that connection I would like to know why you, the Reich Youth Leader, were interested in legal problems at all. What were you striving for, and what did you achieve? Please, will you tell us that briefly, because it has been emphasized in the Indictment.
VON SCHIRACH: May I remind you that the youth of the state was regarded by me as being a Youth State. In that Youth State all professions and all tasks were represented. My collaboration with the Lawyers’ League was due to the necessity of training legal advisers for our working youth whom they could offer the necessary legal protection. I was anxious that those Hitler Youth leaders who were studying law should return to the organization to deal with just such tasks within the organization.
From this type of training a large organization developed within the ranks of youth which was equivalent to the organization of doctors within the youth organization; our medical organization comprised approximately 1,000 doctors, men and women. These legal men assisted the staff, in the districts and other units of our youth organization, putting into practice those demands which I had first enunciated early in our fighting days, before the seizure of power, and which I had championed in the State later on, namely, the demand for free time and paid vacations for the young worker.
This legal work of our youth led to the founding of seminars for Youth Law and Working Youth Law, et cetera, attached to the universities at Kiel and Bonn. In particular it had the result that those demands which I voiced in a speech in 1936, before the Committee for Juvenile Law of the Academy for German Law, could be carried through.
DR. SAUTER: Just one moment.
[Turning to the Tribunal.] This is the speech of which excerpts are reproduced, in Schirach document book, Number Schirach-63. It is copied from Das Archiv of October 1936.
Herr Von Schirach, perhaps you can tell us very briefly which social demands you, as Reich Youth Leader, made regarding youth. You said earlier, “free time.” What did you mean by that?
VON SCHIRACH: In the first place, a shortening of working hours for young people, the abolition of night work for young people, a fundamental prohibition of child labor, extended weekends, and 3 weeks’ paid vacation every year.
In 1937 at Liegnitz I noticed that at that time 50 percent of the young workers had no holidays at all and that only 1 percent had 15 to 18 days per annum. In 1938, on the other hand, I had put through the Youth Protection Law which prohibited child labor, raised the age of protection for juveniles from 16 to 18 years, prohibited night work, and realized my demand regarding the extended weekend, at the same time stipulating at least 15 days’ vacation annually for youngsters. That was all I could achieve. It was only part of what I wanted to achieve.
DR. SAUTER: These are the demands which are contained in the following documents in the document book: Schirach-40 to 41 and 60 to 64. I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of these.
Witness, I now come to another problem, and that is your position within the Party. Some time ago we were shown a chart here giving a clear picture of the organization of the Party. Was that plan correct, or what was your position within the Party?
VON SCHIRACH: My position in the Party was not correctly depicted in that chart, at least not as far as the channels of command are concerned. According to the chart which was exhibited here, the channel of command would have been from the Reich Leader for Youth Education to the Chief of the Party Chancellery, and from there to Hitler and from Hitler to the Reich Youth Leadership Office of the Party. That, of course, is an erroneous picture.
I was not in the Party Directorate to give my orders via the Gauleiter to the district leaders but as the representative and head of the youth movement, so that if you want to describe my position and the position of my organization in the framework of the NSDAP correctly, you would actually have to draw a pyramid, the apex of which, that is to say my position in the Party Directorate, would be above the Reichsleiter. I was the only person in the youth movement who was connected with the Party.
DR. SAUTER: And the other leaders and subleaders of the youth movement?
VON SCHIRACH: Some of them may have been Party members, but not all. At any rate, they were not members of the Gauleitung or Kreisleitung. The entire staff of the youth movement, the entire youth organization, stood alongside the Party as a unit.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, as the Youth Leader of the German Reich, were you a civil servant?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: And from 1 December 1936, I believe, you were the chief of a high Reich office?
VON SCHIRACH: I was a civil servant only from 1 December 1936.
DR. SAUTER: With the title?
VON SCHIRACH: Youth Leader of the German Reich.
DR. SAUTER: As the chief of a high Reich office, were you actually independent of the Minister of the Interior and the Minister for Education?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, that was, after all, the purpose of creating an independent Reich office.
DR. SAUTER: Did you thereby become a member of the Reich Cabinet, as has been claimed?
VON SCHIRACH: I am sure I did not. I heard here for the first time that I was supposed to have been a member of the Cabinet. I never participated in a Cabinet meeting. I never received a decree or anything of the sort which would have made me a member of the Cabinet. I never received invitations to attend Cabinet meetings. I never considered myself a member of the Cabinet, and I believe that the Ministers did not consider me a member either.
DR. SAUTER: Were you in any way informed of the resolutions passed by the Reich Cabinet, for instance, by having the minutes of the meetings sent to you?
VON SCHIRACH: No. Resolutions passed by the Reich Cabinet, insofar as any were passed after 1 December 1936, only came to my attention in the same way as they reached any other higher official or employee of the Reich who read the Reichsgesetzblatt or the Reichsministerialblatt. Records and minutes: were never sent to me.
DR. SAUTER: When you became a high Reich authority, did you receive the staff which you needed through a ministry, or how did you obtain that staff for yourself?
VON SCHIRACH: A few youth leaders who had worked on my staff for a number of years were made civil servants through me. I did not receive a single official from any ministry to deal with matters relating to the youth organization. The entire high Reich office, if I remember correctly, consisted of no more than five officials. It was the smallest of the high Reich offices, something I was particularly proud of. We carried out a very large task with a minimum of personnel.
DR. SAUTER: And now, Witness, I want to come to a subject which is going to be rather extensive and that is the affidavit by Gregor Ziemer, which you have already mentioned. It is a very lengthy affidavit which has been presented by the Prosecution under Document Number 2441-PS.
Witness, what do you have to say in detail with regard to that affidavit? Do you know it? Do you know this man Gregor Ziemer?
VON SCHIRACH: No.
DR. SAUTER: Have you found out who he is and from where he gathered his alleged knowledge?
VON SCHIRACH: I gather from the affidavit that Herr Ziemer before the war was headmaster of the American school in Berlin and that he has written a book which apparently deals with youth and school education in Germany. This affidavit is an extract from that book.
The affidavit as such, if you regard it in its entirety, has, I believe, more importance as propaganda than as an impartial judgment.
I want to start by quoting something from the very first page, which is the page containing Ziemer’s affidavit, and in the last paragraph it says that street fights took place outside the American school between the Jewish children going to this school and the local youngsters. I need not deal with the difficulties which the school itself had, because that was not part of my department. But these street fights took place outside the school, and I think I ought to say something about them. I never heard anything about these clashes, but I should have heard about them under all circumstances, because during most of 1938 I was in Berlin. I should have heard of them first through the youth organization itself, because the senior youth leaders would have been obliged to report to me if such incidents had taken place.
Furthermore, I would have had to hear about it through the Foreign Office, because if youngsters from the American colony had been molested, protests would certainly have gone through the Embassy to the Foreign Office, and these protests would without fail have been passed on to me at once or reported to me by telephone.
I can only imagine that the whole affair is a very gross exaggeration. The American Ambassador Wilson even had breakfast with me—I think in the spring of 1939, and I do not think I am wrong about the date—in Gatow.
DR. SAUTER: In the Foreign House?
VON SCHIRACH: In the Foreign House.
And we discussed a number of subjects privately. I believe that on that occasion or afterwards he would most certainly have mentioned such incidents if they had in reality occurred in the way Herr Ziemer describes them.
DR. SAUTER: I believe I can go over to Page 2, where...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, how much of this document has been read by the Prosecution? As far as I know, very little.
DR. SAUTER: I beg your pardon?
THE PRESIDENT: How much of this affidavit has been read and put in evidence by the Prosecution?
DR. SAUTER: I cannot tell you that offhand, Mr. President. But judging by practice, I must assume that if a document is submitted to the Tribunal, judicial notice of the entire document is taken by the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not so. We have stated over and over again that we take only judicial notice on documents which have been read to the Tribunal, unless they are documents of which full translations have been given. This document was, I suppose, presented in the course of the Prosecution’s case, and probably one sentence out of it was read at the time. I do not know how much was read; but you and the defendant ought to know.
MR. DODD: There was only one paragraph read, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: One paragraph?
MR. DODD: One full paragraph and perhaps one short one on Page 21.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have it here.
MR. DODD: I think the Prosecution covered the part having to do with the speech at Heidelberg.
THE PRESIDENT: And that is the only part of it that has been read, and that is, therefore, the only part of it that is in evidence.
VON SCHIRACH: Perhaps for the sake of credibility—and I shall not deal in detail with the accusations contained in that affidavit—I might be allowed to say, with one sole exception, all the annual slogans of the Hitler Youth are reproduced falsely in this affidavit and that Gregor Ziemer nevertheless swears to the correctness of his statement.
THE PRESIDENT: Wouldn’t it be the best, if you want to reply to his affidavit, that you should direct the defendant’s attention to the part which has been read? Then he can make an answer to that.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in Ziemer’s affidavit, which the defendant has told me he regards as a clearly inflammatory piece of writing, the annual slogans are mentioned which are supposed to have been issued by the defendant, that is, the slogans for the work for the following year.
THE PRESIDENT: One passage of this document has been put in. If you want to put in the rest, you are entitled to do so. But I should have thought that it would have been the best way for you to answer the passage which has been put in. The rest of the affidavit is not in evidence.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in that case my client would get the worst end of the bargain, because in other passages which have not been used by the Prosecution...
THE PRESIDENT: I said you could use the other passages if you want to.
DR. SAUTER: Certainly, but I want to prove that Herr Ziemer’s statements are not correct; that is why I have just been discussing the question of annual slogans with the defendant. This is only one example.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the defendant is apparently saying that the affidavit is unreliable because of the slogans which are referred to in it. Is that not sufficient for your purpose?
DR. SAUTER: Yes; but I intend to prove that Herr Ziemer’s statements are untrue. The defendant maintains that the statements contained in that affidavit are not true. But I am trying to prove to you that, in fact, Herr Ziemer has deliberately stated and sworn to untruths.
THE PRESIDENT: Surely, Dr. Sauter, there being one passage in this affidavit which is in evidence, you can deal very shortly with the question of the credit of the person who made the affidavit.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, this Herr Ziemer, in his affidavit, has made statements regarding the annual slogans...
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: ...which you issued for the Hitler Youth. How these annual slogans were worded can be easily seen by the Tribunal from the affidavit. I now ask you to tell us how the annual slogans of the Hitler Youth were worded during your time; that is, 1933 to 1940.
VON SCHIRACH: Herr Ziemer mentions the slogan on Page 15 of the English document. Herr Ziemer says that in 1933 the motto for German Youth had been “One Reich, One Nation, One Führer.” He probably means “One People, One Reich, One Führer.” Actually, the year 1933 was the year of “Unity.”
DR. SAUTER: What do you mean by “Unity”?
VON SCHIRACH: The year in which German youth joined ranks in one organization.
DR. SAUTER: I want to skip a few years now and come to the year 1938. What was your slogan for the Hitler Youth in 1938?
VON SCHIRACH: 1938 was the year of “Understanding.”
DR. SAUTER: The year of “Understanding”?
VON SCHIRACH: Herr Ziemer says the slogan was “Every Youth a Flyer.”
DR. SAUTER: And then in 1939 what was your slogan?
VON SCHIRACH: That was the year of “Duty Towards Health.”
DR. SAUTER: The year of “Duty Towards Health”?
VON SCHIRACH: According to Herr Ziemer, it was “Hitler Youth on the March.”
DR. SAUTER: And finally 1940, your last year?
VON SCHIRACH: It was the year of “Instruction.” But he called it “We March Against England.”
But I want to add that the first slogan, “One People, One Reich, One Führer,” which Ziemer says was the official slogan of the year 1933 for German youth, arose first in 1938 when Hitler went into Austria. Before that, that slogan did not exist at all. It was never the annual slogan of German youth.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, we must comply with the wish of the Tribunal and not go into the affidavit of Ziemer any further, with the exception of the one point which has been used by the Prosecution in the Indictment against you in connection with the accusation of anti-Semitism. I skip Herr Ziemer’s further statements and come to this speech at Heidelberg. Will you tell me first of all, what Ziemer said, and then make your own comments on that.
VON SCHIRACH: Ziemer said that during a meeting of students in Heidelberg—I think either at the end of 1938 or the beginning of 1939—I had made a speech against the Jews in connection with a rally of the National Socialist Student Union. He says that on that occasion I praised the students for the destruction of the Heidelberg Synagogue, and that following that I had the students file past me and gave them decorations and certificates of promotion.
First of all, I have already referred to my activity in the student movement. Upon the request of the Deputy of the Führer, Rudolf Hess, I handed the leadership of the student movement over to him in 1934. He then appointed a Reich student leader; and after that I did not speak at any student meetings.
As far as I can remember, I visited Heidelberg during the summer of 1937; and there I spoke to the youth group. This was 1 or 1½ years before Ziemer’s date. And on one occasion I attended a festival play at Heidelberg.
DR. SAUTER: All of this is irrelevant.
VON SCHIRACH: I have no recollection of any meeting of this sort with students, and I have no recollection of ever having publicly stated my views about the Jewish pogrom of 1938. I will state at another point what I said in my capacity as Youth Leader regarding this.
Ziemer says—I am translating from the English text—he says that “the day will come when the students of Heidelberg will take up their place side by side with the legions of other students to win the world over to the National Socialist ideology.”
I have never spoken like that before youth, in public, or even in a small circle. These are not my words; I did not say that. I had no authority whatsoever to confer decorations or certificates, et cetera, upon students. Medals of distinction for students did not exist. All decorations were conferred by the head of the State.
I personally had the right to confer the golden youth decoration, and I think it was conferred by me about 230 times in all, almost entirely upon people who earned distinction in the field of education, but not upon unknown students.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, the important point in your testimony is to tell us whether it is correct that the speech made at the end of 1938 before the students at Heidelberg, in which the speaker referred to the wreckage of the synagogues, was not made by you, because at that time you had not had anything to do with the student movement for years. Is that correct?
VON SCHIRACH: I had nothing to do with the student movement, and I do not remember having spoken before such a meeting. I consider it quite out of the question that such a meeting of students took place at all. I did not make those statements.
DR. SAUTER: Have you got the affidavit before you?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes. I cannot find that particular passage at the moment.
DR. SAUTER: It says something which I have translated into German, namely, it mentions the “small, fat student leader.” Have you got that passage? Does it not say so?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, it says so.
DR. SAUTER: Well then, surely “small, fat student leader” cannot be applied to you.
May I, Mr. President, in this connection, draw your attention to an affidavit which appears in Schirach’s document book under Number Schirach-3, and which I herewith submit to the Tribunal. It is an affidavit of a certain Hoepken, who, beginning with 1 May 1938, was the female secretary of the Defendant Von Schirach and who, in this affidavit under the Figure 16—which is Page 22 of the document book—mentioning exact details—states under oath that during the time with which we are here concerned the defendant was not at Heidelberg at all.
I do not suppose it is necessary for me to read that part of the affidavit. I am asking the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it.
THE PRESIDENT: I think this would be a good time to break off.
[A recess was taken.]
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you have spoken in another connection about the fact that you did not consider officers suitable as youth leaders. I would be interested to know how many members of the leadership corps of the Hitler Youth in 1939 at the outbreak of the war were reserve officers in the Armed Forces.
VON SCHIRACH: I would judge that the leadership corps of the HJ had about 1,300 leaders. Those were leaders of the Banne, leaders of the districts or regions, and the corresponding staff of assistants. Of these 1,300 youth leaders, 5 to 10 men were reserve officers.
DR. SAUTER: And how many active officers did you have at that time on your staff or in the leadership corps?
VON SCHIRACH: Active officers were not youth leaders and could not be youth leaders.
DR. SAUTER: Why not? Was that contained in the regulations?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes. An officer was not permitted to be a member of the Party or any one of its organs or affiliated organizations.
DR. SAUTER: Who was responsible to you for the physical education and sports programs in the Hitler Youth?
VON SCHIRACH: Obergebietsführer Von Tschammer-Osten, who was also Reich Sports Leader. In the Olympic year he co-operated very closely with me and voluntarily subordinated himself to me in December or November 1936. He was responsible to me for the entire physical education of the boys and girls.
DR. SAUTER: This Herr Von Tschammer-Osten, who was very well known in the international sports world, was he an officer by profession?
VON SCHIRACH: According to my recollection he had been an officer during the first World War. Then he left the Army and was a farmer by profession. Later on he concerned himself only with questions of physical education and sport. One of his brothers was an active officer.
DR. SAUTER: Did Von Tschammer-Osten become an officer during the second World War?
VON SCHIRACH: No, he did not.
DR. SAUTER: Do you remember that? A document has been submitted here by the Soviet Prosecution, namely a report from Lvov, in which it is stated that the Hitler Youth or the Reich Youth Leadership had conducted courses for young people from Poland, and these young people were to be trained as agents, spies, and parachutists. You have stated today that you take the complete responsibility for the youth leadership. I ask you to tell us something about that.
VON SCHIRACH: We had absolutely no possibilities for espionage training in our youth organization. Whether Heydrich on his part, without my knowledge and without the knowledge of my assistants, had hired youthful agents in Poland and used them within his intelligence service, it is not possible for me to say. I myself did not conduct any espionage training; I had no courses for agents, and courses for training parachutists were out of the question because, after all, I had no air force. Training of that kind could only have been conducted through the Air Force.
DR. SAUTER: Then you, as Reich Youth Leader or, as you were called later, Reich Leader for Youth Education, have never known anything about these things before this Trial? Can you state that under oath?
VON SCHIRACH: That I can state upon my oath. I should like to add that shortly before the war young refugees from Poland came to us in large numbers, but they of course could not return to Poland. The persecution of the Germans in Poland is a historical fact.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, the Prosecution has asserted that in the Hitler Youth a song was sung, “Heute gehört uns Deutschland, und morgen die ganze Welt” (Today Germany belongs to us, tomorrow the whole world); that is the alleged title of that song, and that is supposed to have expressed the will for conquest of the Hitler Youth; is that correct?
VON SCHIRACH: The song says, in the original text which was written by Hans Baumann and is also included in a document here: “Heute da hört uns Deutschland und morgen die ganze Welt” (Germany hears us today and tomorrow the whole world). But it had come to my knowledge also that the song, from time to time, was being sung in the form which has been mentioned here. For that reason I issued a prohibition against singing the song which differed from the original text. I also prohibited, years ago, the song “Siegreich wollen wir Frankreich schlagen” (Victoriously we will conquer France) from being sung by the German Hitler Youth.
DR. SAUTER: You prohibited the last mentioned song entirely?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Out of consideration for your French guests?
VON SCHIRACH: Not out of consideration for guests but because it was contrary to my political conceptions.
DR. SAUTER: Thus, Mr. President, I submit the correct text which I got from a song book. It is Number Schirach-95 of the Schirach document book.
In connection with the question of whether the Hitler Youth intended a premilitary training of youth, I should like to put the following additional questions. Did the physical and sport training of youth apply only to the boys, Herr Von Schirach?
VON SCHIRACH: No. Of course all young people received physical training.
DR. SAUTER: Also the girls?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Is it correct that your efforts directed toward the physical training and physical strengthening of youth also applied to the physically handicapped and to the blind and other young people who from the very outset could not be used for military purposes?
VON SCHIRACH: Very early in our work I included the blind and deaf and the cripples in the Hitler Youth. I had a periodical especially issued for the blind and had books made for them in Braille. I believe that the Hitler Youth was the only organization in Germany which took care of these people, except for special organizations of the NSV (National Socialist Welfare Organization) and so on.
DR. SAUTER: I ask, in connection with that, Mr. President, that you take notice of Document Schirach-27 of the Schirach document book. That is a long article entitled “Admission of Physically Handicapped Young People in the Hitler Youth,” where the deaf, dumb, and blind are especially mentioned and their training to enable them to take up a professional occupation.
MR. DODD: I have refrained all day from making any objection, but I think this examination has gone very far afield. We have made no charge against this defendant with respect to the blind, the deaf, the lame, and halt. He keeps going way back to the Boy Scouts and we haven’t gotten to any of the relevant issues that are between us and this defendant. At the present rate I fear we will never get through.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, we have listened to this somewhat long account of the training of the Hitler Youth. Don’t you think you can go on to something more specific now? We have got a very fair conception, I think, of what the training of the Hitler Youth was; and we have got all these documents before us.
DR. SAUTER: I shall try, Mr. President, to proceed according to your wishes so far as it is at all possible.
Witness, is it correct that you personally intervened with Hitler to prevent the re-establishment of cadet academies as institutions for purely military training?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, that is correct. I prevented the re-establishment of cadet academies.
DR. SAUTER: I come now to another chapter. The defendant has been accused of wrecking the Protestant and Catholic youth organizations. What can you say in answer to that?
VON SCHIRACH: First, the following: I wanted, as I have already explained, the unification of all our youth. I also wanted to bring the Protestant organizations, which were not very large numerically, and the numerically very large Catholic organizations into the Hitler Youth, particularly because some of the organizations did not limit themselves to religious matters but competed with the Hitler Youth in physical training, hikes, camping, and so on. In this I saw a danger to the idea of unity in German national education, and above all I felt that among young people themselves there was a very strong tendency toward the Hitler Youth. The desertion from the confessional organizations is a fact. There were also many clergymen who were of the opinion that the development should perhaps take the following direction: All youth into the Hitler Youth; the religious care of the youth through clergymen; sports and political work through youth leaders.
In 1933 or 1934—but I think it was as early as 1933—Reich Bishop Müller and the Protestant Bishop Oberheidt approached me on their own initiative and proposed that I incorporate the Protestant youth organizations into the Hitler Youth. Of course I was very happy about that proposal and accepted it. At that time I had no idea that there was opposition to Reich Bishop Müller within the Protestant Church. I found out about that only much later. I believed that I was acting with the authority and in the name of the Evangelical Church, and the other bishop who accompanied him further strengthened this belief of mine. Even today I still believe that with the voluntary incorporation of the Protestant youth into the Youth State, Müller acted in accordance with the will of the majority of the Protestant youth themselves; and in my later activity as Youth Leader I frequently met former leaders from the Protestant youth organizations, who had leading positions with me and worked in my youth organization with great enthusiasm and devotion.
Through that incorporation of Protestant youth—I should like to stress this—spiritual ministration to youth was not limited or hindered in any way; there never was a restriction of church services for youth in Germany, either then or later. Since Protestant youth had been incorporated on the basis of an agreement between the Church and the Hitler Youth, there was practically only a dispute about youth education between the Catholic Church and the Hitler Youth.
In May or June 1934 I asked personally to participate in the negotiations for the Reich Concordat because I wanted to eliminate entirely the differences between the Catholic Church and the Hitler Youth. I considered an agreement in this field to be very important and in fact I was allowed to participate in these negotiations which took place in June ’34 in the Reich Ministry of the Interior under the chairmanship of Reich Minister for the Interior Frick. On the Catholic side Archbishop Gröber and Bishop Berning took part in the negotiations; and at that time I personally proposed a formula for co-operation, which met with the approval of the Catholic side, and I believed that I had found the basis for agreement in this sphere.
The conferences were unfortunately interrupted on the evening of 29 June; and on 30 June ’34 we experienced the so-called “Röhm Putsch,” and the negotiations were never resumed. That is not my fault, and I bear no responsibility for that. Hitler simply did not want to accept the consequences of the Concordat. I personally desired to conclude that agreement, and I believe that the representatives of the Church saw from these negotiations and from certain later conferences with me that the difficulties did not originate with me. At any rate Bishop Berning came to me, I believe in 1939. We discussed current questions between the youth leadership and the Church. I believe that he also got the impression at that time that it was not I who wanted to make difficulties.
The difficulties arose at that time from the increasingly strong influence of Martin Bormann, who tried to prevent absolutely any kind of agreement between the Party offices and the Church or between the youth leadership and the Church.
In the course of the dispute about the leadership of confessional youth organizations and their incorporation, animated public discussions arose. I myself spoke at various meetings. Statements were issued by the Church also, which according to the state of affairs, were more or less sharp. But I did not make statements inimical to religion in connection with that subject, nor did I at any time during my life.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, is it correct that in 1937 you concluded an agreement with the Church to the effect that the Hitler Youth should, in principle, not be on duty on Sundays during church time, so that the children could attend religious services, and furthermore, that on account of this agreement you ran into considerable difficulties?
VON SCHIRACH: That is correct.
DR. SAUTER: Will you tell us very briefly about that?
VON SCHIRACH: I do not believe one can say that it was an agreement with the Church. If I remember correctly, I issued a decree based on various letters I had received from clergymen—which to a very great extent took into account the wishes expressed in these letters. I then issued that decree and I gather from many affidavits which have been sent by youth leaders to me recently that that decree was very carefully obeyed.
Difficulties arose in the Party Chancellery on account of my attitude. Bormann, of course, was an energetic enemy of such a basic concession to the Church, and Hitler himself—I don’t know whether it was in connection with this decree, but, at any rate, in connection with the regulation of the dispute between the youth leadership and the Church—also reprimanded me once.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, I have a small book here, entitled A Good Year 1944, with the sub-title “Christmas Gift of the War Welfare Service of Reich Leader Von Schirach.” I submit that book as Document Number Schirach-84 to the Tribunal for judicial notice. On Page 55 is a picture of the Madonna. On Page 54 is a Christian poem written by the defendant, with the title “Bavarian Christmas Crib.” On the lower half of Page 54 there is the famous “Wessobrunner Prayer,” the oldest prayer in the German language, dating from the eighth century.
Witness, is it also correct that on account of the Christian content of that book you had difficulties with Reichsleiter Bormann; and if so, what were they?
VON SCHIRACH: That is correct. I had that Christmas gift made for, I believe, 80,000 to 100,000 soldiers and sent to them at the front as late as 1944. I did not hear anything directly from Bormann, but he suddenly asked for 10 copies of that book; and I was informed by people who were near the Führer in his headquarters that he used that book in some way in order to incite Hitler against me.
I should like to add that at all times of my life, at any rate insofar as I have written poetry, I have expressed myself in the same way as in this poem. Also in the collection of poems, The Flag of the Persecuted, which I do not have here unfortunately but which was distributed among the youth in a very large edition, where my revolutionary poems can be found, there are poems of a Christian content which, however, were not reprinted by the Party press in the newspapers and therefore did not become so well-known as my other verses. But I should like to express quite clearly that I was an opponent of confessional youth organizations, and I wish to make it just as clear that I was not an opponent of the Christian religions.
DR. SAUTER: Not an opponent?
VON SCHIRACH: Of course not.
DR. SAUTER: Did you leave the Church?
VON SCHIRACH: In spite of many hints by Bormann, I never left the Church.
DR. SAUTER: May I, Mr. President, ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of Documents Schirach-85 to 93, inclusive, of the Schirach document book. All of these are documents from the period when he was Reich Youth Leader and show his attitude toward the Church.
VON SCHIRACH: May I add something to that?
DR. SAUTER: If you please.
VON SCHIRACH: As far as my religious attitude is concerned, I always identified myself with the thoughts expressed in Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre about religions in general and the importance of the Christian religion in particular. I should like to say here that in my work as an educator I was mistaken in holding the opinion that positive Christianity existed outside of the Church.
However, I never made any anti-Christian statements; and I should like to say here for the first time in public that in the closest circles of the Hitler Youth I have always expressed a very unequivocal belief in the person and teachings of Christ. Before educators of the Adolf Hitler School—a fact which naturally was never allowed to come to the knowledge of the Party Chancellery—I spoke about Christ as the greatest leader in world history and of the commandment to “Love thy neighbor” as a universal idea of our culture. I believe that there are also several testimonials by youth leaders about that in your possession, Mr. Attorney.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, I shall refer to that later. I should like to begin a new chapter now. In 1940 you were dismissed as Reich Youth Leader?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: And you were succeeded by Axmann who has already been mentioned. But you remained connected with youth education through what office?
VON SCHIRACH: Through the office of the Reichsleiter of Youth Education.
DR. SAUTER: And in addition to that you received another title, I believe?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, I became Deputy of the Führer for the Inspection of the Hitler Youth.
DR. SAUTER: Was that only a title, or was that some kind of office?
VON SCHIRACH: That was an office to the extent that the Reichsleiter office was concerned with youth work in the Party sector. The Youth Leader of the German Reich—that was Axmann as my successor—also had a field of activity in the State, and I too became competent for that by my appointment as inspector.
DR. SAUTER: How did your dismissal as Reich Youth Leader come about, and why were you called specifically to Vienna as Gauleiter? What can you tell us about that?
VON SCHIRACH: At the end of the French campaign, in which I participated as an infantryman, I was in Lyon when a wireless message from the Führer’s headquarters was received, and the chief of my company told me that I had to report to the Führer’s headquarters. I went there at once; and at the Führer’s headquarters, which was at that time situated in the Black Forest, I saw the Führer standing in the open speaking to Reich Foreign Minister Von Ribbentrop. I waited a while, maybe a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes, until the conversation had ended and then reported at once to Hitler and there, outside, before the Casino building where later we all had our meal together, he told me the following in about 10 minutes:
I should propose to him a successor for the leadership of the youth. He intended for me to take over the Reich Gau Vienna. I at once suggested my assistant, Axmann, who was not a man who advocated physical or military training but was concerned with social work among the youth, and that was most important to me. He accepted this proposal...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, we need not go through Axmann’s qualifications, need we? Is it material to the Tribunal to know what his successor was like?
DR. SAUTER: Axmann? Axmann was successor as Reich Youth Leader.
THE PRESIDENT: What I was asking you was whether it was material for the Tribunal to know the qualities of Axmann. We have nothing to do with that.
DR. SAUTER: Herr Von Schirach, you can be more brief about that point, can you not?
VON SCHIRACH: Hitler then said that I should keep my job as Reich Leader of Youth Education and that I should assume at the same time the office of the Inspector of Youth and that I should go to Vienna as the successor to Bürckel. In Vienna, especially in the cultural field, serious difficulties had arisen; and therefore I was to direct my attention to the case of the institutions of culture, particularly of theaters, art galleries, libraries, and so forth; and I was to be especially concerned about the working class. I raised the objection that I could carry out that cultural work only if independent of Goebbels, and Hitler promised at that time that this independence would be fully safeguarded; but he did not keep that promise later.
And lastly he said that he was sending the Jewish population away from Vienna, that he had already informed Himmler or Heydrich—I do not remember exactly what he said—of his intentions, or at least would inform them. Vienna had to become a German city, and in that connection he even spoke of an evacuation of the Czech population.
That concluded that conversation. I received no other instructions for this office, and then we dined together as usual. I took my leave then and went to Berlin to talk to my assistants.
DR. SAUTER: Vienna was considered at that time, if I am correctly informed, the most difficult Gau of the Reich; is that right?
VON SCHIRACH: Vienna was by far the most difficult political problem which we had among the Gaue.
DR. SAUTER: Why?
VON SCHIRACH: Because—I learned the details only from other persons in Berlin, after I had received my mission from Hitler—in Vienna the population had sobered considerably after the first wave of enthusiasm over the Anschluss had subsided. Herr Bürckel, my predecessor, had brought many officials to Vienna from the outside; and the German system of administration, which was in no wise more practicable or efficient than the Austrian, was introduced there. This resulted in a certain over-organization in the administrative field, and Bürckel had started on a Church policy which was more than unsatisfactory. Demonstrations took place under his administration. On one occasion the palace of the archbishop was damaged. Theaters and other places of culture were not taken care of as they should have been. Vienna was experiencing a feeling of great disillusionment. Before I got there I was informed that if one spoke in the streetcars with a North-German accent, the Viennese took an unfriendly attitude.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, what duties did you have or what offices did you hold in Vienna?
VON SCHIRACH: In Vienna I had the office of Reich Governor (Reichsstatthalter), which included two administrations, the municipal administration and the national administration. In addition, I was Reich Defense Commissioner for Wehrkreis XVII, but only until 1942. In 1942, the Wehrkreis was subdivided, and each Gauleiter of the Wehrkreis became his own Reich Defense Commissioner.
DR. SAUTER: And then you also were Gauleiter?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes, I was also Gauleiter, the highest official of the Party.
DR. SAUTER: In other words, you represented city, state, and Party, all at once—the highest authority of city, state, and Party in Vienna?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes. Now the situation was such in the administration that there was an official representative to take charge of national affairs, namely, the Regierungspräsident; for the municipal administration there was another representative, the mayor; in the Party, the Deputy Gauleiter in Vienna had the title of Gauleiter.
I should not like to belittle my responsibility for the Gau by explaining that, and I want to protect the exceptionally efficient Deputy Gauleiter who was there. I just want to say that in order to clarify my position.
DR. SAUTER: What really was your position as Reich Defense Commissioner, Witness? Was that a military position, or what was it?
VON SCHIRACH: That was not a military position at all. The Reich Defense Commissioner was simply the head of the civil administration, in contrast to the situation prevailing during the first World War, where the head of the civil administration was assigned to and subordinated to the commanding general; in this war the Reich Defense Commissioner was co-ordinate with him, not subordinate.
The tasks of the Reich Defense Commissioner—at least, that is how I saw my tasks—were at certain intervals, to co-ordinate the most pressing problems of food economy, transportation—that is, local and distant transportation, coal supplies, and price regulation for the Gaue of Vienna, Upper Danube, and Lower Danube, all of which belonged to Wehrkreis XVII.
There were several meetings for that purpose—I believe three all together. In 1942 the reorganization which I previously mentioned took place. Bormann carried his point against the Reich Marshal. The Reich Marshal was of the opinion that the Reich Defense Commissioner had to be Defense Commissioner for the entire Wehrkreis. Bormann wanted each Gauleiter to be Defense Commissioner, and so that led to the division. From 1942 on I was only Reich Commissioner for Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, it seems that a decree was issued at that time—will you please tell me when you were informed about it—namely, a decree by Reichsleiter Bormann, that not more than two Gauleiter could meet.
VON SCHIRACH: That is not a decree by Bormann; that was an order by Hitler.
DR. SAUTER: What were its salient points?
VON SCHIRACH: I must explain that briefly. Because of the fact that the Reich Commissariat was subdivided, I had to meet from time to time with the Reichsstatthalter of other provinces in order to discuss the most important questions, especially concerning our food economy. However, I believe it was in 1943, Dr. Ley came to me in Vienna and brought me an official order from the Führer, according to which it was considered illegal—that was the way he expressed it—for more than two Gauleiter to meet for a conference.
At that time I looked at Dr. Ley speechless; and he said:
“Yes, that does not concern you alone. There is still another Gauleiter who has called a conference of more than two, and that fact alone is already considered as virtual mutiny or conspiracy.”
DR. SAUTER: Witness, when you were in Vienna, were you given a further mission which took up much of your time? Please tell us briefly about that.
VON SCHIRACH: I had just started to work in Vienna when, in October 1940, I received an order to appear at the Reich Chancellery.
DR. SAUTER: Will you please be very brief.
VON SCHIRACH: And there Hitler personally gave me the mission of carrying out the evacuation of all German youth from areas endangered by aerial attack, and simultaneously to carry out the evacuation of mothers and infants; and he said that that should begin in Berlin and then gradually take in the entire Reich. He said that education was of secondary importance now; the main thing was to maintain the nervous energy of the youth and to preserve life. However, I asked at once that I be given the possibility of establishing an educational organization, and I did so.
I do not wish to speak about details, but one of the demands, which I made at once—this is important in connection with the Indictment—was that there should be no difficulties placed in the way of young people’s participation in church services. That was promised to me, and it was expressed very clearly in my first directives for the children’s evacuation. The youth leaders who were active in this field of my organizational work will confirm this.
DR. SAUTER: This evacuation of children to the country was a very extensive task, was it not?
VON SCHIRACH: It was the most difficult, and from a psychological point of view, the most complicated work which I ever carried out. I transferred millions of people in this way; I supplied them with food, with education, with medical aid, and so on. Of course that work took up my time fully or to a large extent only during the first years. After that I had trained my assistants for that kind of work.
DR. SAUTER: Later, as I have heard from you, you tried from time to time to report to Hitler about your successes and about problems requiring decision. How often during the entire years of the war were you admitted to discuss that important field of work with Hitler?
VON SCHIRACH: Mr. Attorney, I am afraid I have to correct you. I never tried to report to Hitler about my successes, but only about my problems.
DR. SAUTER: Problems, yes.
VON SCHIRACH: About that entire program of evacuation of children I could only report to him twice; the first time in 1940, after I had got the whole program under way, and the second time in 1941, when the evacuation had reached very large proportions.
And about Vienna I could only report on very rare occasions, and in 1943 the possibility of reporting ceased altogether with the breach of relations which I will describe later.
DR. SAUTER: Then, during your period in Vienna you became the Chairman of the Würzburg Bibliophile Society.
VON SCHIRACH: That is an honorary office, the Würzburg Bibliophile Convention had appointed me Chairman of the German Bibliophile Society.
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor, Schirach—Number Schirach-1 of the document book makes reference to that matter, and I submit it as a piece of evidence. It it an affidavit by an old anti-Fascist, Karl Klingspor, an honorary member of the society, who gives valuable information about the character of the Defendant Von Schirach.
And in addition, Herr Von Schirach, I believe you were the Chairman of the Southeast Europe Society, is that correct?
VON SCHIRACH: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: In brief, what was the mission of that society?
VON SCHIRACH: It had as its purpose the improvement of trade relations, economic relations, with the southeast. Its functions were essentially in the field of research and representation.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, what were your main Viennese activities?
VON SCHIRACH: My principal activities in Vienna were social work and cultural work, as I have already explained before.
DR. SAUTER: Social work and cultural work?
VON SCHIRACH: These were the two poles which dominated my entire political life.
DR. SAUTER: I come now to the particular accusations which have been made against you by the Prosecution concerning that period in Vienna. Among other things you have been accused of participating in the so-called slave-labor program, and I ask you to state your position concerning that, and in that connection also to deal with Directive Number 1 of the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, of 6 April 1942, which was presented, I believe, as Document 3352-PS. Please go ahead.
VON SCHIRACH: Maybe I would do best to start with the decree by which Gauleiter were appointed Plenipotentiaries for the Allocation of Labor under the Plenipotentiary General.
DR. SAUTER: 6 April 1942.
VON SCHIRACH: In the way of documentary material that decree contains no more than that the Gauleiter could make suggestions and submit requests to the competent offices for the allocation of labor. But they were held responsible—I do not know whether by this decree or another one—for the supervision of the feeding and quartering, et cetera, of foreign workers. This feeding and quartering, et cetera, of foreign workers was—in my Gau and I believe also in all other Gaue of the Reich—mainly in the hands of the German Labor Front.
The Gauobmann of the German Labor Front in Vienna reported to me very frequently about the conditions among German workers and foreign workers in the Gau. He often accompanied me on inspection tours of industries; and from my own observations I can describe my impressions here of the life of foreign workers in Vienna as far as I could watch it.
I well remember, for instance, my visit to a large soap factory where I saw barracks in which Russian and French women were living. They had better quarters there than many Viennese families which lived six or eight people in the usual one-room apartments with kitchen. I remember another inspection where I saw a billet of Russian workers. It was clean and neat, and among the Russian women who were there I noticed that they were gay, well-nourished, and apparently satisfied. I know about the treatment of Russian domestic workers from the circle of my acquaintances and from the acquaintances of many assistants; and here, also, I have heard, and in part observed myself, that they were extremely well treated.
Let me say something in general about Vienna as a place for foreign workers. For centuries foreign workers have worked in Vienna. To bring foreign workers from the southeast to Vienna is no problem at all. One likes to go to Vienna, just as one likes to go to Paris. I have seen very many Frenchmen and French women working in Vienna, and at times I spoke with them. I also talked to French foremen in the factories. They lived as tenants somewhere in the city, just like any other private person. One saw them in the Prater. They spent their free time just as our own native workers did.
During the time I was in Vienna, I built more factory kitchens than there are in any other Gau in Germany. The foreign workers frequented these kitchens just as much as the native workers.
About treatment at the hands of the population, I can only say that the population of a city which has been accustomed for centuries to work together with foreign elements, will spontaneously treat any worker well who comes from the outside.
Really bad conditions were never reported to me. From time to time it was reported that something was not going well here or there. It was the duty of the Gauobmann of the Labor Front to report that to me. Then I immediately issued a directive from my desk by telephone to the regional food office or the quota office for the supply of material, for kitchens or heating installations, or whatever it was. At any rate, I tried within 24 or 48 hours to take care of all complaints that came to me.
While we are on the subject I would like to give my impression of the use of manpower in general. I am not responsible for the importation of labor. I can only say that what I saw in the way of directives and orders from the Plenipotentiary General, namely the Codefendant Sauckel, always followed the line of humane, decent, just, and clean treatment of the workers who were entrusted to us. Sauckel literally flooded his offices with such directives.
I considered it my duty to state that in my testimony.
DR. SAUTER: These foreign workers, who were in the Gau Vienna and for whom you do not consider yourself responsible, were they employed in the armament industry or elsewhere?
VON SCHIRACH: A large portion was employed in agriculture, some in the supply industry. Whether there were some directly in the armament industry I could not say. The armament industry was not accessible to me in all its ramifications, even in my functions as Gauleiter, because there were war production processes which were kept secret even from the Reichsstatthalter.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, in connection with the subject of Jewish forced labor, a letter was read, Document 3803-PS. It is, I believe, a handwritten letter from the Defendant Kaltenbrunner to Blaschke. Blaschke, I believe, was the second mayor of Vienna.
VON SCHIRACH: He was the mayor of Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: This is a letter of 30 June 1944. In that letter Kaltenbrunner informs Blaschke that he had directed that several evacuation transports should be sent to Vienna-Strasshof. “There are four transports,” it says in the letter, “with about 12,000 Jews, which will arrive in the next few days.” So much about the letter. Its further content is only of importance because of what it says in the end—and I quote:
“I beg you to arrange further details with the State Police Office, Vienna, SS Obersturmbannführer Dr. Ebner, and SS Obersturmbannführer Krumey, of the Special Action Command Hungary, who is at present in Vienna.”
Did you have anything to do with that matter, and if so what?
VON SCHIRACH: I do not know of the correspondence between the Codefendant Kaltenbrunner and the mayor of Vienna. To my knowledge Camp Strasshof is not within Gau Vienna at all. It is in an altogether different Gau. The designation, “Vienna-Strasshof,” is, therefore, an error. The border runs in between the two.
DR. SAUTER: And were you informed of the matter itself at that time, or only here in the courtroom?
VON SCHIRACH: I know of that matter only from this courtroom, but I remember that mention was made about the use of Jewish workers in connection with the building of the Southeast Wall or fortifications. The Southeast Wall, however, was not in the area of Reich Gau Vienna. It was a project in the area of Gau Lower Danube, Lower Austria, or Styria. I had nothing to do with the construction of the Southeast Wall; that was in the hands of Dr. Jury, that is, the O. T....
DR. SAUTER: O. T. is the Organization Todt?
VON SCHIRACH: ...the Organization Todt. And in the other part of the border it was in the hands of Dr. Uiberreither, the Gauleiter of Styria, and his technical assistants.
DR. SAUTER: So I can sum up your statement to mean that you had nothing to do with these things because they were matters which did not concern your Gau.
VON SCHIRACH: Yes. I cannot understand what connection there should be with Gau Vienna. Whether the mayor intended to divert some of these workers for special tasks in Vienna is not known to me. I do not know about that matter.
DR. SAUTER: In the same connection, Witness, another document has been submitted, 1948-PS, a file note of 7 November 1940. That was a date on which you had already been Gauleiter in Vienna for several months and it, too, concerns forced labor of the Jews who were capable of work. That file note was written on stationery with the heading “The Reichsstatthalter in Vienna,” and apparently the note in question was written by a Dr. Fischer. Who is Dr. Fischer? What did you, as Reichsstatthalter, have to do with that matter? What do you know about it?
VON SCHIRACH: First of all, Dr. Fischer is not known to me personally. I do not want to dispute the possibility that he may have been introduced to me once and that I do not remember him; but I do not know who Dr. Fischer is. At any rate, he was not an expert working in my central office. I assume that he may have been an official, because his name appears in connection with another document also. He was probably the personal consultant of the Regierungspräsident. The note shows that this official used my stationery, and he was entitled to do that. I believe several thousand people in Vienna were entitled to use that stationery, according to the usage of German offices.
On this note he has put down a telephone conversation with the Gestapo from which it can be seen that the Reich Security Main Office—that is Heydrich—was the office which decided, by internal directives to the Gestapo, on the use of Jewish manpower.
The Regierungspräsident wanted to know more about that; but I believe one cannot draw the conclusion from this that I was informed about cruelties committed by the Gestapo, as the Prosecution has concluded. It is doubtful whether I was in Vienna at all at that time. I want to remind you of my other tasks, which I have described before.
However, if I was there, I certainly did not concern myself with the work of cleaning up the streets. But I should like to say that the variety of my tasks caused me to establish an organizational structure which did not exist in other Gaue, namely, the Central Office of the Reich Leader.
DR. SAUTER: Perhaps you will tell us, before concluding for today, approximately how many officials in Vienna were subordinated to you.
VON SCHIRACH: I guess it may have been about 5,000 officials and employees.
DR. SAUTER: Shall I continue, Mr. President? It is 5:00 o’clock.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn.