“Question: ‘You have always been proud of that fact, I take it.’
“Answer: ‘I wouldn’t say proud, but satisfied.’ ”
Is that still your position?
SCHACHT: In reply to that I should like to say: The question of mefo bills was quite certainly a system of finance which normally would never have been attempted. I made a detailed statement on this subject when I was questioned by my attorney. On the other hand, however, I can say that this question was examined by all legal experts in the Reichsbank and by means of this subterfuge, as you put it, a way was found which was legally possible.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: No, I didn’t put it that way; you said so.
SCHACHT: No, no. I mean the sentence you have just quoted as being my answer. I beg your pardon. The matter was investigated from a legal viewpoint, and we assured ourselves that it could be done in this way. Moreover, I am still satisfied today that I contributed to the rearmament, but I wish that Hitler had made different use of it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, on your 60th birthday Minister of War Blomberg said that, “Without your help, my dear Mr. Schacht, there could have been no rearmament,” did he not?
SCHACHT: Yes, those are the sort of pleasantries which one exchanges on such occasions. But there is quite a bit of truth in it. I have never denied it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is the way it looks to me.
Now, when you finally made some suggestion that the armament should stop or slow up, as I understand, you made that suggestion without knowing what the armament was.