Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB
[graphic]

AFFIDAVIT

I, Hildegard Kunze, being duly sworn, declare:

1. I am 20 years old and was employed as a typist and stenographer in Subsection IV-A 4 b of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt [RSHA] from April 1942 until April 1945. The chief of this Subsection was Adolph Eichmann. The work of the Section concerned the confiscation of Jewish property, Aryanization, and the classification of Jews and of first and second degree hybrids.

2. I distinctly remember a letter that was processed in the section some time late in 1943 or early 1944, signed by SeyssInquart and addressed either to Himmler or Kaltenbrunner. It was in the form of a report on the progress of his administration of the Netherlands. In this letter it was stated that on the whole everything in Holland was going according to plan and that he had progressed further with measures in Holland than was the case in Germany, and that he would consider it right if his measures were to be adopted for Germany, too.

3. I remember that either in this report or another report he suggested that all Jews privileged to remain in Holland should be sterilized. Subscribed and sworn to be- The foregoing statements have

fore me this 8th day of Jan- been made voluntarily under uary 1946 at Nurnberg, oath.

Germany. signed:

Smith W. Brookhart Jr. (signed] Hildegard Kunze

Lt. Col. I G D

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 3661-PS

COPY

Schaulen, 8 September 1941

Schr.-Hp
The Regional Commissar in Schaulen.
To the Reich Commissar for the Eastland (Ostland) Riga
Re: SS Colonel (Standartenfuehrer) Jaeger

A Captain Stasys Senulis, residing in Schadow, Ponnewesch district, appeared today at the office of the Regional Commissariat in Schaulen, stating that he had been ordered by SS Colonel Jaeger to seize all silver and gold articles of Jewish ownership. He had been in Schadow and also in Radviliskis. Both mayors, acting on instructions from the Regional Commissar, had refused to deliver up these articles.

[ocr errors]
[graphic]

I strictly forbade Senulis to carry out the order of SS Colonel Jaeger, and I beg you to prohibit Jaeger from taking any independent arbitrary measures relating to the Jews.

The two certificates, copies of which are enclosed, were taken from Captain Senulis.

This fresh incident clearly demonstrates that Colonel Jaeger does not consider himself bound by the instructions issued by the Reich Commissar and by the Regional Commissar regarding the seizure of Jewish property and that he meddles in matters that do not concern him.

If the SS continues to overreach itself in this fashion, I, as Regional Commissar, must refuse to accept responsibility for the orderly confiscation (Erfassung) of Jewish property.

Furthermore, I shall take every opportunity to emphasize to the heads of districts and the mayors that they are not to take orders from offices other than those of the Reich Commissar the Commissar General, and the Regional Commissar.

Because of the importance of this matter, a letter of similar content is being sent to the Commissar General in Kauen.

[Signed] Gewecke Enc.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 3697-PS

Extract from an Austrian court document in the proceedings

against Dr. Rudolf Neumayer.]

Copy

Vg 1 b Vr 445/45 Hv 187/45 Third day of Trial—30 January 1946 Commencement: 9 a. m. Present: Tribunal, Defendant, Defense Counsel as on the first day of the

trial. Secretary: JAng. Trumler. The Witness Wilhelm Miklas, personal particulars in File No.

29 adds: resident in Vienna I. Wildpretmarkt No. 1, not

related to the accused. The Defense states that it will waive the swearing in of this witness.

The Prosecuting Attorney also states that it will waive the swearing in of this witness.

[graphic]
[graphic]

The Witness: Warned to tell the truth and not sworn in after it was agreed upon to waive the oath.

The President: Since when have you known the defendant?

The Witness: Actually only since his appointment as Finance Minister in 1936. I cannot remember the exact date now.

The President: That is to say since November 1936. Do you perhaps know the reasons why the Chancellor fixed on the defendant at the time when the Finance Minister, Dr. Draxler, resigned from the Cabinet?

The Witness: I do not know the reason. For me the order of the Austrian Chancellor was alone decisive, who himself chose the members for his Cabinet. In this case I naturally raised no objection, particularly as I knew that this was done in agreement with the National Council. I also do not know the reasons why the Chancellor felt obliged to fix on the person of Dr. Neumayer. Obviously the Chancellor wished to have someone who was not a political outstanding expert in financial affairs. That was my

. impression.

The President: After Dr. Neumayer's appointment as Finance Minister you must have come repeatedly into contact with him on the occasion of receptions and certain other State occasions. Did you become better acquainted with the defendant?

The Witness: I did not often come into contact with the defendant, even privately.

The President: Cannot you tell us something about the events of 12 February 1938—that is, about the Chancellor's journey to Berchtesgaden and the results which followed-how the change of government, etc., came about?

The Witness: I only know one thing, that on 11.11.1938 a socalled "Patriotic Ball (Vaterlaendischer Ball”] took place in Vienna. The newspapers wrote at the time that this was the first official State ball in Austria since the government of the “Patriotic Front (Vaterlaendische Front"]. In this connection I remarked that I could look back on a period of 52 years' work as a State Official and that I was not a member of the "Patriotic Front”. I always declined to become one, because of my position as President. I was convinced that the head of the State must be above all parties. One can imagine how difficult that was to carry through. I had a very difficult position. I did not attend this official State ball of the Patriotic Front, but went with my wife to Mariazell that day. There I received a telephone message from the then Secretary of State, Dr. Guido Schmidt, who informed me that a meeting had been arranged in Berchtesgaden between the Chancellor and the Head of the German State, Hitler.

[graphic]

I would point out in this connection that we had received terrible drubbings by Germany in the economic and political spheres in the years preceding 1938; I would point for instance to the 1000 Mark embargo, which considerably curtailed our tourist traffic in the Western Alps. I would point out that this telephone conversation took place perhaps as early as 10.11.38. In any case I was asked by Dr. Guido Schmidt what I thought of the Chancellors meeting with Hitler in Berchtesgaden. To this I said: "It is of course very difficult”. It was intimated to me that the Chancellor desired this discussion, it was only a question of asking the President if he was in favor of it. I asked what was to be the aim of this discussion whereupon I was told that the object was to clear up the misunderstandings which had arisen in Austria in the execution of the Agreement of July 1936. This Agreement of 1936 was drawn up by the Government alone and was exacted by Germany and accepted, and remained a "gentleman's agreement.” It was thus no State Agreement but a pact between the two heads of the Austrian and German Governments. The President had naturally nothing to sign. It is thus that this “gentleman's agreement” came about. It was also the same with the "Berchtesgaden Protocol." Germany, through the 1000 Mark embargo, had, as already mentioned, taken our best tourist traffic in the Western Alps away from us, so that there was ill-feeling in the Western areas.

Replying to a question by the Prosecuting Attorney: The witness states: Is it indeed true that at that time (11.11.1938) the 1000 Mark embargo was no longer a matter of the moment.

The President: Did the invitation regarding the meeting between the Chancellor and Hitler in Berchtesgaden come from Austria or from Hitler, i.e., from Germany?

The Witness: This invitation came from Germany through Herr v. Papen. Consequently the Chancellor, Dr. Schuschnigg, went to Berchtesgaden accompanied by Dr. Guido Schmidt. On their return from the Berchtesgaden journey they gave a short report on the manner in which the discussion had taken place. I have only heard one thing regarding the contents of the Berchtesgaden Protocol, that Dr. Guido Schmidt sat for hours in an adjoining room of the Berghof and tried, together with Hitler's confidants, to alter this or that point of the Protocol in Austria's favor, or to let it drop altogether. This was all done in Austria's interest. Dr. Guido Schmidt has therefore rendered service to Austria in a certain sense. The protocol was handed over by Hitler in the form of an ultimatum. I was told all this by Dr. Guido Schmidt.

[graphic]

The President: What did the Chancellor report to you regarding the discussion at Berchtesgaden?

The Witness: The Chancellor informed me that certain points had been agreed upon regarding an interchange of officials, particularly with regard to officers of the Armed Forces. Thus the Chancellor gave information on matters which one can discuss among friends. These are the principal points which the Chancellor mentioned to me. The Chancellor reported further that, with regard to the remodelling of the Government, the entry of Seyss-Inquart into Dr. Schuschnigg's Government and his appointment as Minister of the Interior was demanded. That was a direct command by Hitler. After much hesitation and under the influence of the reception at Berchtesgaden, as well as of military pressure behind the scenes Hitler is said to have raved during this discussion—the Chancellor undertook the desired remodelling of his Cabinet. If this demand of Hitler was not fulfilled, there was the greatest danger of the outbreak of war. Hitler granted the Chancellor a short period of time in order that Dr. Schuschnigg could discuss this demand with his people.

I think the Chancellor was allowed a period up to 15.11.1938. The authoritative members of the Austrian Government declared at that time that we must endeavour to yield. There was the danger of the outbreak of a second war, which might have been a terrible danger for the whole of Europe.

This remodelling of Dr. Schuschnigg's Cabinet, by the appointment of Seyss-Inquart as Minister of the Interior, took place during this period. Seyss-Inquart was thus made Minister of the Interior and immediately brought in the National Socialists in the National Socialist spirit [im nationalsozialistischen Sinne] to reinforce the police, as in a similar instance at the time of Dr. Dollfuss, and, as happened previously under the Social-Democratic government, when the “Republican Defensive Confederation” [Republikanisch Schutzbund] was formed. You can imagine what a difficult position I had between these parties, which had their own private military forces. In my position as President I was so to say the whipping boy of the government, the party for the moment in power.

The President: You now appointed Seyss-Inquart Minister of the Interior in accordance with the demand? Were you acquainted with him before this, or did you only now make his acquaintance?

The Witness: I only made his acquaintance on his appointment as Minister of the Interior; before that I did not know him. I had only heard that he was doing quite well out in Doebling, in

[ocr errors]
« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »