“It is the historical merit of Der Stürmer to have enlightened the broad masses of our people in a popular way as to the Jewish world danger. Der Stürmer is right in not carrying out its task in a purely aesthetic manner, for Jewry has shown no regard for the German people. We have, therefore, no reason for being considerate toward our worst enemy. What we fail to do today, the youth of tomorrow will have to suffer for bitterly.”
My Lord, it may be that this defendant is less directly involved in the physical commission of the crimes against Jews, of which this Tribunal have heard, than some of his co-conspirators. The submission of the Prosecution is that his crime is no less the worse for that reason. No government in the world, before the Nazis came to power, could have embarked upon and put into effect a policy of mass extermination in the way in which they did, without having a people who would back them and support them and without having a large number of people, men and women, who were prepared to put their hands to their bloody murder. And not even, perhaps, the German people of previous generations would have lent themselves to the crimes about which this Tribunal has heard, the killing of millions and millions of men and women.
It was to the task of educating the people, of producing murderers, educating and poisoning them with hate, that Streicher set himself; and for 25 years he has continued unrelentingly the education—if you can call it so—or the perversion of the people and of the youth of Germany. And he has gone on and on as he saw the results of his work bearing fruit.
In the early days he was preaching persecution. As persecutions took place he preached extermination and annihilation; and, as we have seen in the ghettos of the East, as millions of Jews were being exterminated and annihilated, he cried out for more and more.
That is the crime that he has committed. It is the submission of the Prosecution that he made these things possible—made these crimes possible—which could never have happened had it not been for him and for those like him. He led the propaganda and the education of the German people in those ways. Without him the Kaltenbrunners, the Himmlers, the General Stroops would have had nobody to carry out their orders. And, as we have seen, he has concentrated upon the youth and the childhood of Germany. In its extent his crime is probably greater and more far-reaching than that of any of the other defendants. The misery that they caused finished with their incarceration. The effects of this man’s crime, of the poison that he has injected into the minds of millions and millions of young boys and girls and young men and women lives on. He leaves behind him a legacy of almost a whole people poisoned with hate, sadism, and murder, and perverted by him. That German people remains a problem and perhaps a menace to the rest of civilization for generations to come.
My Lord, I submit that the Prosecution’s case against this man as set out in the Indictment is proved.
My Lord, Lieutenant Brady Bryson, of the United States Delegation, will present to the Court the case against Schacht.
LIEUTENANT BRADY O. BRYSON (Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States): May it please the Tribunal, a document book has been prepared and filed and the appropriate number of copies has been delivered to the defendants.
We ask the Tribunal’s permission to file within the next few days a trial brief which now is in the process of preparation.
Our proof against the Defendant Schacht is confined to planning and preparation of aggressive war.
THE PRESIDENT: What was it you said about the trial brief?
LT. BRYSON: We ask permission to file a trial brief within the next few days, as our brief is not yet ready.
THE PRESIDENT: I see.
LT. BRYSON: Our proof against the Defendant Schacht is limited to planning and preparation for aggressive war and to membership in a conspiracy for aggressive war.
The extent of Schacht’s criminal responsibility as a matter of law, under the Charter of the Tribunal, will be developed in our brief. Only a few of our 50-odd documents have been previously submitted in evidence. We have taken special pains to avoid repetition and cumulative proof; but for the sake of continuity we would like, in several instances, simply to draw the Tribunal’s attention to evidence previously received, with an appropriate reference to the transcript of the Record.
Before commencing our proof, we wish to state our understanding that the Defendant Schacht’s control over the German economy was on the wane after November 1937, and that by the time of the aggression on Poland his official status had been reduced to that of Minister without Portfolio and personal adviser to Hitler. We know too that he is sometimes credited with opposition to certain of the more radical elements of the Nazi Party; and I further understand that at the time of capture by United States forces he was under German detention in a prison camp, having been arrested by the Gestapo in July 1944.
Be this as it may, our proof will show that at least up until the end of 1937 Schacht was the dominant figure in the rearming of Germany and in the economic planning and preparation for war, that without his work the Nazis would not have been able to wring from their depressed economy the tremendous material requirements of armed aggression, and that Schacht contributed his efforts with full knowledge of the aggressive purposes which he was serving.
The details of this proof will be presented in four parts:
First, we will very briefly show that Schacht accepted the Nazi philosophy prior to 1933 and supported Hitler’s rise to power.
Second, proof of the contribution of Schacht to German rearmament and preparation for war will be submitted. This evidence will also be brief, since the facts in this respect are well-known and have already been touched upon by Mr. Dodd in his presentation of the case on economic preparation for war.
Third, we will show that Schacht assisted the Nazi conspiracy purposely and willingly with knowledge of, and sympathy for, its illegal ends.
And last, we will prove that Schacht’s loss of power in the German Government did not in any sense imply disagreement with the policy of aggressive war.
We turn now to our proof that Schacht helped Hitler to power.
Schacht met Göring for the first time in December 1930, and Hitler early in January 1931 at Göring’s house. His impression of Hitler was favorable. I offer in evidence Exhibit USA-615 (Document 3725-PS), consisting of an excerpt from a pre-trial interrogation of Schacht under date of 20 July 1945, and quote two questions and answers related to this meeting, near the middle of the first page of the interrogation.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to give us the Exhibit number? You haven’t given us the other number?
LT. BRYSON: This is an interrogation, Sir, and it will not have two.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you got a number for it?
LT. BRYSON: You will find it in your document book in the back, labeled “Schacht Interrogation of 20 July 1945.” I quote from the middle of the first page:
“Q: ‘What did he’ ”—that is, Hitler—“ ‘say?’
“A: ‘Oh, ideas he expressed before, but it was full of will and spirit.’ ”
And near the bottom of the page:
“Q: ‘What was your impression at the end of that evening?’
“A: ‘I thought that Hitler was a man with whom one could co-operate.’ ”
After this meeting Schacht allied himself with Hitler; and at a crucial political moment in November 1932, he lent the prestige of his name, which was widely known in banking, financial, and business circles throughout the world, to Hitler’s cause. I offer in evidence Exhibit USA-616 (Document 3729-PS) consisting of excerpts from a pre-trial interrogation of Schacht on 17 October 1945. I wish to quote, beginning at the top of Page 36 of this interrogation. This is the interrogation of 17 October 1945, at Page 36. I may say that when I refer to the page numbers, I speak of the page of the document book:
“Q: