Front matter (continued 13)

The overwhelming majority of Cases, however, over which sentences were pronounced, represent mistreatments which occurred when the inmates first entered the institution, when they received their prison clothing, or during drill hours. These mistreatments were carried out without rhyme or reason. The fact that the defendants in these cases were motivated neither by political purposes nor by personal revenge against outrages suffered formerly can be learned from the following circumstances.

1. Amongst the mistreated persons there were quite a number that never belonged to any parties of the left. Some of them were even old members of the movement. The following cases are proof of that:

2. Case Prueger

On 6.3.1934 the Kreisleiter of the German Labor Front for the food industry, member of the Nazi Party, was brought in for offending the Kreisleiter and two other persons. When being brought in, Turke beat his face with his fist and subsequently, in a small room, he was heavily beaten with sticks, whips and other instruments. * * *

* * * 2. The methods as well as the detailed circumstances of mistreatment show that lust for torture was the only motivation in a great number of cases. The following case illustrates that fact especially well.

The defendant Schupp frequently had to supervise the drill of inmates. On 5 or 6 March 1935 he called the inmate Lindner out of formation without any apparent reason and asked him for his name and domicile. Then he pressed, without any cause, his burning cigarette upon the end of Lindner's nose with the result that the latter received a burn for which he later required medical treatment. The court in this case, as in several others, expressly maintains that Schupp only acted out of sheer lust of torture. * * *

* * * Furthermore, may I state as far as the question of further mitigation of sentences are concerned that the court in pronouncing sentence has already weighed to the fullest extent all possible mitigating circumstances, the awful consequences of cruel mistreatment of human beings should otherwise result in a far more severe judicial expiation. Also it must not be over-looked that altogether only those members of the concentration camp staff were brought into court who took an especially active and cruel part in the mistreatments. Furthermore, the sentence was not aggravated by the fact that the Court affirmed, for purely judicial reasons, that the defendants were officials and sentenced them for committing bodily harm while carrying out a public office. The sentence expressly states that the court did not stress the fact that the accused SA men were officials in determining the punishment because they had not received proper training as officials and they probably do not wish to be referred to as such. (Compare page 144 of the Sentence). In these circumstances the mitigation of sentences already granted in the decree of 31 October 1935 seem an extensive favor. If, nevertheless, I suggest subsequently a further reduction of sentence, based upon new evidence of some of the defendants, I can only justify my action because I believe that, according to circumstances, the defendants in one or the other case of mistreatment may have partly acted out of revolutionary motives.

As to what parts the individual defendants played in these criminal acts I refer to the last two columns in the table handed over with the report of 28 August 1935. The following statements as to the individual defendants may be made.

1. Jaehnichen:

Sentence: 6 years imprisonment.

Reduction of Sentence: to be released on probation after 4 years 6 months.

Jaehnichen is an old member of the S.A. who through his bad example has fostered the increase of excesses, but at first he was motivated undoubtedly by a certain revolutionary anger and by the fact that he wanted to maintain exemplary discipline amongst the inmates. A further mitigating fact is that his participation in the unusually serious mistreatment of the Jew Ambross, who later committed suicide, was inspired by the belief that he was dealing in this case with a despoiler of German girls. With these facts, being what they are, a further reduction in sentence, amounting to one year, seems justifiable.

2. Putzler:

Sentence: 3 years 9 months imprisonment.

Reduction of Sentence: to be released on probation after 2 years 6 months.

His sentence is based essentially on the especially cruel mistreatments during questionings of inmates. Even though his acts in this connection seem to be pure vindictive torture, as for example the use of the dripping device, one may, nevertheless, say that at least at first he was motivated by the desire to obtain truthful statements. On the other hand, Putzler participated in serious excesses also during times other than the questioning periods and played a leading part in them. To give an example, he tore out inmate Ricke's beard. A further reduction of the sentence by 6 months seems under these circumstances a far going favor * * *

* * * I want to remark, in conclusion, that the defendants as well as the defense, believe since 29.11.1935 that all defendants had been finally pardoned by the decision of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor. It is further to be learned from remarks by defendants not in custody that in case of a complete pardon those still in custody would leave prison under the accompaniment of a band or would be solemnly received by a band on return to their home town.

Appendix

Upon application of the Reich Minister of Justice I hereby grant in the case against Rudolp Jaehnichen and others, for mistreatment of persons committed to protective custody in Hohnstein Concentration Camp (16. St. A. 3431 34 Dresden prosecutor) the following mitigation of sentences as enumerated in Column 6:

Sentence Prison Term Mitigation of Sentence granted thus far. To be released conditionally after New Suggestion of the Reichs Minister of Justice. To be Released Conditionally after Decision of The Fuehrer & Chancellor

# Name Yrs. Mos. Yrs. Mos. Yrs. Mos.

1 Jaehnichen 6 -- 4 6 3 6

2 Putzler 3 9 3 -- 2 6

3 Hanz Meier 3 -- 2 6 2 --

4 Herbert Meier 3 3 2 6 No further reduct.

5 Tuerke 3 -- 2 6 No further reduct.

6 Lehman 3 -- 2 6 No further reduct.

7 Leuschner 2 6 2 -- 1 3

8 Rohmkopf 2 6 2 -- No further reduct.

10 Haensel 2 6 1 6 No further reduct.

11 Karge 1 8 1 4 1 --

12 Sikora 1 6 1 2 1 28 days

13 Stachowski 1 6 No reduction No reduction

14 Schupp 1 6 1 2 No further reduct.

15 Heinicker 1 6 1 2 -- 9

16 Hausch 1 4 -- 8 -- 6

17 Kuehnel 1 -- -- 9 -- 6

20 Schmeling 1 -- -- 9 No further reduct.

21 Kahnis 1 -- -- 9 No further reduct.

22 Uhleman 1 -- -- 6 No further reduct.

23 Stuerzkober -- 10 -- 6 No further reduct.

Berlin December 1935 THE FUEHRER AND CHANCELLOR

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 786-PS

Note

1. Just now, at 1030, State Secretary Dr. Meissner telephoned and asked me to deliver the following message to the Minister, whom he had been unable to contact:

Concerning the pardon of those sentenced in connection with the maltreatment in the Hohnstein Concentration Camp, Herr Bouhler informed him yesterday that he had reported to the Fuehrer on the result of the fresh inquiries, which he and Reich Governor Mutschmann had instituted. The Fuehrer has now decided to remit all other sentences remaining. State Secretary Meissner wished to inform the Ministry of Justice of this, so that it might be made the subject of corresponding decrees. He, State Secretary Meissner, mentioned that the Minister of Justice had likewise been commissioned by the Fuehrer to carry out special inquiries, to determine in which cases the motives for maltreatment had been sadistic and therefore a pardon would be out of place. The Minister of Justice would have to be given the opportunity of reporting to the Fuehrer his ideas, based on his still inconclusive investigations. Herr Bouhler also stated that the Minister of Justice was still at liberty to do so. The Fuehrer merely desired that his inquiries be hastened as much as possible so that the statement could be made within the next few weeks and that, in any case, he submit a decree granting full pardon.

State Secretary Meissner, when finally summing up, therefore requested that, should the Minister not approve of a total pardon, a double decree be submitted.

2. The Minister for his favourable consideration.

Berlin, 29th November 1935 [Signature illegible]

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 787-PS

Berlin, 18 June, 1935 The Reich Ministry of Justice Z.F. g 10 390/35

1. Communication to the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor with addition of a certified copy of B1. 9-10 d.A., thus far

Subject: Motion of the Reich deputy in Saxony concerning the nolle-prossing of the criminal procedure against Oberregierungsrat Vogel in Dresden on account of bodily injury while in office.

16 St.A 107/34 (StA.Dresden) Inclosure: 1 loose sheet.

The prosecuting authority in Dresden has indicated Oberregierungsrat Erich Vogel in Dresden (case designation 16 STA. 4 107/34) on account of bodily injury while in office. The following subject matter is the basis of the case:

Vogel belongs to the Gestapo office of the province of Saxony since its foundation and is chief of Main section II, which formerly bore the title Zub [Zentralstelle fuer Umsturzbekaempfung] (Central office for combatting revolt). In the process of combatting efforts inimical to the State Vogel carried out several so called borderland actions in the year 1933 in which a large number of politically unreliable persons and persons who had become political prisoners in the border territories were taken into protective custody [Schutzhaft] and brought to the Hohnstein protective custody camp. In the camp serious mistreatment of the prisoners has been going on at least since summer of 1933. The prisoners were not only, as in protective custody camp Bredow near Stettin, beaten into a state of unconsciousness for no reason, with whips and other tools but were also tortured in other ways, as for instance with a drip-apparatus especially constructed for the purpose, under which the prisoners had to stand so long that they came away with serious purulent wounds of the scalp. The guilty SA-leaders and SA-men were sentenced to punishments of 6 years to 9 months of imprisonment by the main criminal court of the provincial court in Dresden of 15 May 1935 (16 StA. 3431.34). Vogel, whose duties frequently brought him to the camp, took part in this mistreatment, insofar as it happened in the reception room of the camp during completion of the reception formalities, and in the supply room, during issuing of the blankets. In this respect it should be pointed out that Vogel was generally known to the personnel of the camp—exactly because of his function as head of the Zub—and his conduct became at least partly a standard for the above-named conduct of the SA-leaders and men.

One of the border actions took place on 3 August 1935. Vogel had ordered the arrest of the persons who were brought to the camp at that time, and therefore also had responsibilities relative to their proper treatment. On account of the large number of those who were brought in, a pay office of the administration building in the lower castle yard was adapted as a makeshift reception room to help dispose of the formalities. The reception was being taken care of by Truppfuehrer [T/Sgt] Felix Sikora. He hit every incoming person without cause violently across the face with a steel ruler, so that it resounded loudly. In addition the prisoners, when brought in, were spoken to roughly and at the same time beaten, partly even literally pushed into the room. Vogel stayed in the reception room a long time and watched these proceedings without doing anything about them. In his presence, for instance, the SA-man Mutze dealt such blows to one man, without provocation, that he turned around on himself. As already stated, Vogel not only took no steps against this treatment of the prisoners, but he even made jokes about it and stated that it amused him the way things were popping here.

In the supply room Vogel himself took a hand in the beating amid the general severe mistreatment. The SA-man there employed whips and other articles and beat the prisoners in such a manner that serious injuries were produced, the prisoners partly became unconscious and had to lie in the dispensary a long time. Vogel was often present in the supply room during the mistreatment. At least in the following cases he personally laid violent hands upon prisoners.

a. On the occasion of the borderland action of 3 August 1933 Vogel was in the chamber in the rear portion of the area, where the prisoners as a rule do not enter. At first Vogel observed from there the severe mistreatment which was administered to the prisoners at the counter where the blankets were issued. Then he had a prisoner brought to the rear chamber and swung several blows of his fist at his head.

b. On 12 November 1933 Vogel arrived at the camp together with Regierungsrat Dr. Wolf from Leipzig and again entered the chamber. On this day several prisoners were brought in. Vogel pointed out one of the prisoners to the SA-men present in the room, among whom were Sturmmann Walter Rohmkopf, Truppfuehrer Herbert Meier, and Truppfuehrer Georg Lehmann, and declared, in effect, that this man "should get his ass particularly full". He also stated that the prisoner had offended or threatened one of his people. Upon this invitation the prisoner was laid across the counter in the usual manner, held fast by the head and arms, and then beaten for a considerable time by the SA men with whips and other articles. Along with this Vogel himself took part in the beating for a time, and after this mistreatment slapped him again, so that the prisoner appeared green and blue in the face. The prisoner is the tinsmith Hans Kuehitz, who bore the nickname Johnny. Upon his departure Vogel gave the head of the supply room, Truppenfuehrer Meier from 5 to 6 reichsmarks with the stated reason that the SA men "had sweated so". The money was then distributed by Meier to those SA-comrades who had taken part in the mistreatment.

Under the date of 20 May 1935 the Reich Deputy in Saxony forwarded to me with a recommendation Vogel's petition for nolle prossing dated 10 May, 1935, which was addressed to him, and a copy of which is attached.

I do not wish to approve this petition. The mistreatments which took place in the camp of Hohnstein are more numerous and in their fashion more serious than the cases of mistreatment in the well-known protective custody camp Bredow, near Stettin. As in the case of Bredow an authoritative official of the State Secret Police, in like manner as SS-Sturmfuehrer Dr. Hoffmann, shot on 30 June, 1934, knowing of the mistreatment and for the most part instigating it himself, Oberregierungsrat Vogel, as an authoritative member of the supervisory agency of the camp for the State Secret Police of Saxony, knew of the mistreatment and to an extent even took part in it. By his actions he supported the convicted SA-leaders and men in their deeds and thereby bears the largest part of responsibility for the criminal acts committed there. It would not be right to let this participant, who in view of his training, his position of leadership, and his office, must have recognized the objectionability of the proceedings in the camp with particular clarity, go unpunished while the SA-leaders and men received considerable sentences—even if not very severe in comparison with their deeds. A nolle prossing of the case against Vogel would represent unearned granting of favors to a more highly placed participant, and therefore one endowed with more responsibility, and would be considered as such by all persons involved. It would stand in starkest irreconcilable contradiction to the treatment of the Stettin cases.

Signed: Dr. Guertner 2. To the Minister, respectfully 3. 1 month.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 788-PS

The Secretary of the State and Chief of the Office of the President.

Berlin W8, 25 June 1935 Voss-Strasse 1 RP 3/52/35 Your Nr. Z.F. g 10 398/35 of 18 June 1935

Subject: Nolle-Prosse of Criminal Proceeding against Oberregierungsrat Vogel for committing bodily injury while in Office.

Before making a decision, the Fuehrer and Reich-Chancellor wants to discuss personally with the Reich-Governor of Saxony the complaints brought forward against Oberregierungsrat Vogel and the events connected with them. Therefore I shall withhold further information and request that until then further action on this procedure be also withheld.—

/s/ Dr. Meissner.

To the Reich Minister of Justice, Berlin W 8.

The Secretary of the State and Chief of the Office of the President

Berlin W8, 9 Sept 1935 Voss-Strasse 1

RP 3125/35 Your Nr. Z.F. g 10 398/35 of 18 June 1935

Subject: Nolle-prosse of Criminal Proceedings against Oberregierungsrat Vogel for committing bodily injury while in Office.

With reference to my letter of 25 June 1935—RP 3152/35—I am able to inform you that the Fuehrer and Reichs-Chancellor has decided for annulment of the criminal proceedings against Oberregierungsrat Vogel for his having committed bodily injury.

On the Fuehrer's behalf I request presentation of the draft of the decree for annulment.—

/s/ Dr. Meissner

To the Reich Minister of Justice, Berlin.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 789-PS

[Penciled note:] Duplicate

Nov. 23, 1939, 1200 hours. Conference with the Fuehrer, to which all Supreme Commanders are ordered. The Fuehrer gives the following speech:

The purpose of this conference is to give you an idea of the world of my thoughts, which governs me in the face of future events, and to tell you my decisions. The building up of our armed forces was only possible in connection with the ideological [weltanschaulich] education of the German people by the Party. When I started my political task in 1919, my strong belief in final success was based on a thorough observation of the events of the day and the study of the reasons for their occurrence. Therefore, I never lost my belief in the midst of set-backs which were not spared me during my period of struggle. Providence has had the last word and brought me success. On top of that, I had a clear recognition of the probable course of historical events, and the firm will to make brutal decisions. The first decision was in 1919 when I after long internal conflict became a politician and took up the struggle against my enemies. That was the hardest of all decisions. I had, however, the firm belief that I would arrive at my goal. First of all, I desired a new system of selection. I wanted to educate a minority which would take over the leadership. After 15 years, I arrived at my goal, after strenuous struggles and many set-backs. When I came to power in 1933, a period of the most difficult struggle lay behind me. Everything existing before that had collapsed. I had to reorganize everything beginning with the mass of the people and extending it to the armed forces. First reorganization of the interior, abolishment of appearances of decay and defeatist ideas, education to heroism. While reorganizing the interior, I undertook the second task: to release Germany from its international ties. Two particular characteristics are to be pointed out: secession from the League of Nations and denunciation of the disarmament conference. It was a hard decision. The number of prophets who predicted that it would lead to the occupation of the Rhineland was large, the number of believers was very small. I was supported by the nation, which stood firmly behind me, when I carried out my intentions. After that the order for rearmament. Here again there were numerous prophets who predicted misfortunes, and only a few believers. In 1935 the introduction of compulsory armed service. After that militarization of the Rhineland, again a process believed to be impossible at that time. The number of people who put trust in me, was very small. Then the beginning of the fortification of the whole country especially in the west.

One year later, Austria came, this step also was considered doubtful. It brought about a considerable reinforcement of the Reich. The next step was Bohemia, Moravia and Poland. This step also was not possible to accomplish in one campaign. First of all, the western fortification had to be finished. It was not possible to reach the goal in one effort. It was clear to me from the first moment that I could not be satisfied with the Sudeten-German territory. That was only a partial solution. The decision to march into Bohemia was made. Then followed the erection of the Protectorate and with that the basis for the action against Poland was laid, but I wasn't quite clear at that time whether I should start first against the east and then in the west or vice-versa. Moltke often made the same calculations in his time. Under pressure the decision came to fight with Poland first. One might accuse me of wanting to fight and fight again. In struggle I see the fate of all beings. Nobody can avoid a struggle if he does not want to lose out. The increasing number of people requires a larger living space [Lebensraum]. My goal was to create a logical relation between the number of people and the space for them to live in. The struggle must start here. No people can get away from the solution of this task or else it must yield and gradually die out. That is taught by history. First migration of peoples to the southwest, then adaptation of the number of people to the small space by emigration. In the last years, adaptation of the people to insufficient space, by reducing the number of births. This would lead to the death and weakening of the blood of the people. If a people chooses that course all their weaknesses are mobilized. One yields to the force of the outside and uses this force against one's self by killing of the child. This means the greatest cowardice, decimation of the number, and loss of value. I decided a different way: adaptation of the living space to the number of people. One acknowledgement is important. The state has a meaning only if it supports the maintenance of its population potential. In our case 82 millions of people were concerned. That means the greatest responsibility. He who does not want to assume this responsibility is not worthy of belonging to the mass of the people. That gave me the strength to fight. It is one eternal problem to bring the number of Germans to a proper relationship to the available space. Security of the needed space. No calculated cleverness is of any help, solution only with the sword. A people unable to produce the strength to fight must withdraw. Struggles are different than those of 100 years ago. Today we can speak of a racial fight. Today we fight for oilfields, rubber, treasures of the earth, etc. After the peace of Westphalia Germany disintegrated. Disintegration, impotence of the German Reich was determined by decree. This German impotence was removed by the creation of the Reich when Prussia realized her task. Then the opposition between France and England began. Since 1870 England has been against us. Bismarck and Moltke were certain that there would have to be one more action. The danger at that time was of a two-front war. Moltke was at times in favor of a preventive war. To take advantage of the slow progress of the Russian mobilization. German armed might was not fully employed. Insufficient sternness of the leading personalities. The basic thought of Moltke was the offensive. He never thought of the defense. Many opportunities were missed after Moltke's death. The solution was only possible by attacking a country at a favorable moment. Political and military leadership always declared that it was not yet ready. In 1914 there came the war on several fronts. It did not bring the solution of these problems. Today the second act of this drama is being written. For the first time in 67 years it must be made clear that we do not have a two-front war to wage. That which has been desired since 1870 and considered as impossible of achievement has come to pass. For the first time in history we have to fight on only one front, the other front is at present free. But no one can know how long that will remain so. I have doubted for a long time whether I should strike in the east and then in the west. Basically I did not organize the armed forces in order not to strike. The decision to strike was always in me. Earlier or later I wanted to solve the problem. Under pressure it was decided that the east was to be attacked first. If the Polish war was won so quickly, it was due to the superiority of our armed forces. The most glorious appearance in history. Unexpectedly small expenditures of men and material. Now the eastern front is held by only a few divisions. It is a situation which we viewed previously as unachievable. Now the situation is as follows: The opponent in the west lies behind his fortifications. There is no possibility of coming to grips with him. The decisive question is: how long can we endure this situation? Russia is at present not dangerous. It is weakened by many incidents today. Moreover, we have a pact with Russia. Pacts, however, are only held as long as they serve the purpose. Russia will hold herself to it only so long as Russia considers it to be to her benefit. Even Bismarck thought so. Let one think of the pact to assure our back. Now Russia has far-reaching goals, above all the strengthening of her position in the Baltic. We can oppose Russia only when we are free in the West. Further Russia is striving to increase her influence on the Balkans and is striving toward the Persian Gulf. That is also the goal of our foreign policy. Russia will do that which she considers to benefit her. At the present moment it has retired from internationalism. In case she renounces this, she will proceed to Pan-Slavism. It is difficult to see into the future. It is a fact that at the present time the Russian army is of little worth. For the next one or two years the present situation will remain.

Much depends on Italy, above all on Mussolini, whose death could alter everything. Italy has a great goal for the consolidation of her empire. Those who carry this idea are fascism and the Duce, personally. The court is opposed to that. As long as the Duce lives, then it can be calculated that Italy will seize every opportunity to reach her imperialistic goal. However, it is too much to ask of Italy, that it should join in the battle before Germany has seized the offensive in the west: Just so Russia did not attack until we had marched into Poland. Otherwise Italy will think that France has only to deal with Italy, since Germany is sitting behind its West Wall. Italy will not attack until Germany has taken the offensive against France. Just as the death of Stalin, so the death of the Duce can bring danger to us. Just how easily the death of a statesman can come I myself have experienced recently. The time must be used to the full, otherwise one will suddenly find himself faced with a new situation. As long as Italy maintains this position then no danger from Jugoslavia is to be feared. Just so is the neutrality of Rumania achieved by the position of Russia. Scandinavia is hostile to us because of Marxistic influences, but is neutral now. America is still not dangerous to us because of its neutrality laws. The strengthening of our opponents by America is still not important. The position of Japan is still uncertain, it is not yet certain whether she will join against England.

Everything is determined by the fact that the moment is favorable now; in 6 months it might not be so anymore.

As the last factor I must name my own person in all modesty: irreplaceable. Neither a military nor a civil person could replace me. Assassination attempts may be repeated. I am convinced of the powers of my intellect and of decision. Wars are always ended only by the destruction of the opponent. Everyone who believes differently is irresponsible. Time is working for our adversary. Now there is a relationship of forces which can never be more propitious, but can only deteriorate for us. The enemy will not make peace when the relationship of forces is unfavorable for us. No compromise. Sterness against ourselves. I shall strike and not capitulate. The fate of the Reich depends only on me. I shall deal accordingly. Today we have a superiority such as we have never had before. After 1914 our opponents disarmed themselves of their own accord. England disregarded the construction of her fleet. The fleet is no longer sufficiently large to safeguard the shipping lanes. Only two modern new constructions: Rodney and Nelson. New construction activity only in the cruisers of the Washington class, which were, however, an unsatisfactory type. The new measures can become effective only in 1941. In the Abyssinian war England did not have enough strength to occupy the Tana Sea. At Malta, Gibraltar and London little anti-aircraft protection. Since 1937 a renewal of rearmament. At present however, only a small number of divisions, which must form the nucleus of new divisions. Material for the army being gathered together from all over the world. Not before next summer is a positive action to be expected. The British army has only a symbolic meaning. Rearmament in the air is proceeding. The first phase will end in the spring of 1940. Anti-aircraft has only guns from the last war. A German flyer is safe from English anti-aircraft fire at 6000 meters altitude. The navy will not be fully rearmed before one to two years [1-2 Jahren], I have the greatest experience in rearmament and I know the difficulties which must be overcome therein.

After 1914 France reduced the length of service. After 1914 decrease of military might. Only in some special branches are we inferior. Only the French Navy was modernized. In the time after the war the French army deteriorated. There were no changes until Germany rearmed and announced her demands.

In summary:

1. The number of active organizations in Germany is greatest. 2. Superiority of the Luftwaffe. 3. Anti-aircraft beyond all competition. 4. Tank corps. 5. Large number of anti-tank guns, five times as many as 1914 machine guns. 6. German artillery has great superiority because of the 10.5 gun. 7. French superiority in howitzers and mortars does not exist.

Numerical superiority, but also the value of the individual soldier is greater than for the others. I am most deeply pained when I hear the opinion that the German army is not individually as valuable as it should be. The infantry in Poland did not accomplish what one should have expected from it. Lax discipline. I believe that the soldiers must be judged in their relative value in comparison with the opponent. There is no doubt that our armed forces are the best. Every German infantryman is better than the French. Not the exhilaration of patriotism but tough determination. I am told that the troops will only advance if the officers lead the way. In 1914 that was also the case. I am told that we were better trained then. In reality we were only better trained on the drill field, but not for the war. I must pay the present leadership the compliment that it is better than it was in 1914. Mention of the collapse while storming Liege. There was nothing like this in the campaign in Poland.

Five million Germans have been called to the colors. Of what importance if a few of them collapse. Daring in the army, navy and Luftwaffe. I can not bear it when one says the army is not in good shape. Everything lies in the hands of the military leader. I can do anything with the German soldier if he is well led. We have succeeded with our small navy in clearing the North Sea of the British. Recognition of the small navy, especially the High Command of the Navy.

We have a Luftwaffe which has succeeded in safeguarding the entire living space of the Germans.

The land army achieved outstanding things in Poland. Even in the West it was not shown that the German soldier is inferior to the French.

Revolution from within is impossible. We are superior to the enemy numerically in the West. Behind the Army stands the strongest armament industry of the world.

I am disturbed by the stronger and stronger appearance of the English. The English are a tough enemy. Above all on defence. There is no doubt that England will be very much represented in France at the latest in six to eight months.

We have an Achilles heel: The Ruhr. The progress of the war depends on the possession of the Ruhr. If England and France push through Belgium and Holland into the Ruhr, we shall be in the greatest danger. That could lead to the paralyzing of the German power of resistance. Every hope of compromise is childish: Victory or defeat! The question is not the fate of a national-socialistic Germany, but who is to dominate Europe in the future. The question is worthy of the greatest efforts. Certainly England and France will assume the offensive against Germany when they are armed. England and France have means of pressure to bring Belgium and Holland to request English and French help. In Belgium and Holland the sympathies are all for France and England. Mention of the incident at Venlo: The man who was shot was not an Englishman, but a Dutch General Staff officer. This was kept silent in the press. The Dutch government asked that the body of the Dutch officer be given up. This is one of their greatest stupidities. The Dutch press does not even mention the incident anymore. At a given time I shall use that to motivate my action. If the French army marches into Belgium in order to attack us, it will be too late for us. We must anticipate them. One more thing. U-boats, mines, and Luftwaffe (also for mines) can strike England effectively, if we have a better starting point. Now a flight to England demands so much fuel that sufficient bomb loads cannot be carried. The invention of a new type mine is of greatest importance for the Navy. Aircraft will be the chief mine layers now. We shall sow the English coast with mines which cannot be cleared. This mine warfare with the Luftwaffe demands a different starting point. England cannot live without its imports. We can feed ourselves. The permanent sowing of mines on the English coasts will bring England to her knees. However, this can only occur if we have occupied Belgium and Holland. It is a difficult decision for me. None has ever achieved what I have achieved. My life is of no importance in all this. I have led the German people to a great height, even if the world does hate us now. I am setting this work on a gamble. I have to choose between victory or destruction. I choose victory. Greatest historical choice, to be compared with the decision of Frederick the Great before the first Silesian war. Prussia owes its rise to the heroism of one man. Even there the closest advisers were disposed to capitulation. Everything depended on Frederick the Great. Even the decisions of Bismarck in 1866 and 1870 were no less great. My decision is unchangeable. I shall attack France and England at the most favorable and quickest moment. Breach of the neutrality of Belgium and Holland is meaningless. No one will question that when we have won. We shall not bring about the breach of neutrality as idiotically as it was in 1914. If we do not break the neutrality, then England and France will. Without attack the war is not to be ended victoriously. I consider it as possible to end the war only by means of an attack. The question as to whether the attack will be successful no one can answer. Everything depends upon the favorable instant. The military conditions are favorable. A prerequisite however, is that the leadership must give an example of fanatical unity from above. There would not be any failures if the leaders always had the courage a rifleman must have.

Individual acknowledgments: The enemy must be beaten only by attack. Chances are different today than during the offensive of 1918. Numerically we can use more than 100 divisions. With respect to men, reserves can be supplied. The material situation is good. Moreover that which is not ready today must be ready tomorrow. The whole thing means the end of the World War, not just of a single action. It concerns not just a single question but the existence or non-existence of the nation.

I ask you to pass on the spirit of determination to the lower echelons.

1. The decision is irrevocable.

2. The only prospect for success, if the whole armed forces are determined.

The spirit of the great men of our history must hearten us all. Fate demands from us no more than from the great men of German history. As long as I live I shall think only of the victory of my people. I shall shrink from nothing and shall destroy everyone who is opposed to me. I have decided to live my life so that I can stand unshamed if I have to die. I want to destroy the enemy. Behind me stands the German people, whose morale can only grow worse. Only he who struggles with destiny can have a good intuition. In the last years I have experienced many examples of intuition. Even in the present development I see the prophecy.

If we come through this struggle victoriously—and we shall come through victoriously—our time will enter into the history of our people. I shall stand or fall in this struggle. I shall never survive the defeat of my people. No capitulation to the outside forces, no revolution from the interior forces.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 795-PS

CONVERSATION WITH GENERAL KEITEL on 17 August 1939

[Identified by General Keitel as a memorandum of Admiral Canaris]

I reported my conference with Jost to Keitel. He said that he would not pay any attention to this action, as the Fuehrer had not informed him and had only let him know that we were to furnish Heydrich with Polish uniforms. He agreed that I instruct the General Staff. He says that he does not think much of actions of this kind. However, there is nothing else to be done if they have been ordered by the Fuehrer, that he could not ask the Fuehrer how he had planned the execution of this special action. In regard to Dirschau he has decided that this action would be executed only by the army.

I then reported my conference with Roatta. He told me that he thought it very good if Mussolini would tell the Fuehrer in definite terms that he would not enter the war. He personally is of the opinion that Mussolini would join anyhow. I answered him that I believed this improbable by reason of the conference between Ciano and Ribbentrop which I reported to him once more in detail. He says that the Fuehrer had told him contrarywise. Based on my reports he had to conclude that the Fuehrer does not tell him—Keitel—everything. Furthermore, I told him that I had learned from Count Marogna that the King of Italy had told King Alfonse a few days ago that he would not sign under any circumstances if Mussolini should present the order for mobilization.

In connection with this Keitel expresses the opinion that it is quite interesting to note that even a country like Italy which is governed by a dictatorship does not think much of war. How much more so must it be in the democratic countries? He is confident that the English would not interfere. I tried to contradict his views and say that the English would certainly at once institute a blockade and would destroy our merchant shipping. Keitel believes this to be of no great importance as we would receive oil from Rumania. I answered that this is not the deciding factor and that we could not resist a blockade for a long time and that England would fight against this with all their means if we should use force against the Poles and if it were to come to bloodshed. I told him that the English would have acted in precisely the same manner, had any bloodshed occurred when we marched into Czechoslovakia. I tried to explain to Keitel the consequences of economic warfare for Germany and tell him that we have only very few means to counteract it. Just a short while ago I had heard that we could only send 10 submarines into the Atlantic Ocean. Keitel thinks that it should be easy to force Rumania to surrender her oil after the conquest of Poland. I called his attention to the actions of the English in the Balkans and tried to explain to him that the English would certainly have everything prepared in the Balkans for such an eventuality. Bulgaria would not be useful to us as an ally as it would be attacked at once by Rumania and Turkey.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 798-PS

The Fuehrer's speech to the Commanders in Chief on 22 August 1939

I have called you together to give you a picture of the political situation, in order that you may have insight into the individual elements on which I have based my decision to act and in order to strengthen your confidence.

After this we will discuss military details.

It was clear to me that a conflict with Poland had to come sooner or later. I had already made this decision in spring, but I thought that I would first turn against the West in a few years, and only afterwards against the East. But the sequence cannot be fixed. One cannot close one's eyes even before a threatening situation. I wanted to establish an acceptable relationship with Poland in order to fight first against the West. But this plan, which was agreeable to me, could not be executed, since essential points have changed. It became clear to me, that Poland would attack us in case of a conflict with the West. Poland wants access to the sea. The further development became obvious after the occupation of the Memel region, and it became clear to me that under circumstances a conflict with Poland could arise at an inopportune moment. I enumerate as reasons for this reflection:

1. First of all two personal constitutions:

My own personality and that of Mussolini.

Essentially it depends on me, my existence, because of my political activities. Furthermore the fact that probably no one will ever again have the confidence of the whole German people as I do. There will probably never again be a man in the future with more authority than I have. My existence is therefore a factor of great value. But I can be eliminated at any time by a criminal or an idiot.

The second personal factor is the Duce. His existence is also decisive. If something happens to him, Italy's loyalty to the alliance will no longer be certain. The basic attitude of the Italian court is against the Duce. Above all, the court sees in the expansion of the empire a burden. The Duce is the man with the strongest nerves in Italy.

The third factor favorable for us is Franco. We can ask only benevolent neutrality from Spain. But this depends on Franco's personality. He guarantees a certain uniformity and steadiness of the present system in Spain. We must take into account the fact that Spain does not as yet have a Fascist party of our internal unity.

On the other side a negative picture as far as decisive personalities are concerned. There is no outstanding personality in England or France.

For us it is easy to make decision. We have nothing to lose; we can only gain. Our economic situation is such, because of our restrictions, that we cannot hold out more than a few years. Goering can confirm this. We have no other choice, we must act. Our opponents risk much and can gain only a little. England's stake in a war is unimaginably great. Our enemies have men who are below average. No personalities. No masters, no men of action.

Besides the personal factor, the political situation is favorable for us; in the Mediterranean rivalry among Italy, France, and England, in the Orient tension, which leads to the alarming of the Mohammedan world.

The English empire did not emerge from the last war strengthened. From a maritime point of view, nothing was achieved. Conflict between England and Ireland. The South African Union became more independent. Concessions had to be made to India. England is in great danger. Unhealthy industries. A British statesman can look into the future only with concern.

France's position has also deteriorated particularly in the Mediterranean.

Further favorable factors for us are these:

Since Albania there is an equilibrium of power in the Balkans. Yugoslavia carries the germ of collapse because of her internal situation.

Rumania did not grow stronger. She is liable to attack and vulnerable. She is threatened by Hungary and Bulgaria. Since Kemal's death, Turkey has been ruled by small minds, unsteady, weak men.

All these fortunate circumstances will no longer prevail in 2 to 3 years. No one knows how long I shall live. Therefore conflict better now.

The creation of Greater Germany was a great achievement politically, but militarily it was questionable, since it was achieved through a bluff of the political leaders. It is necessary to test the military. If at all possible, not by general settlement, but by solving individual tasks.

The relation to Poland has become unbearable. My Polish policy hitherto was in contrast to the ideas of the people. My propositions to Poland (Danzig corridor) were disturbed by England's intervention. Poland changed her tone toward us. The initiative cannot be allowed to pass to the others. This moment is more favorable than in 2 to 3 years. An attempt on my life or Mussolini's could change the situation to our disadvantage. One cannot eternally stand opposite one another with cocked rifle. A suggested compromise would have demanded that we change our convictions and make agreeable gestures. They talked to us again in the language of Versailles. There was danger of losing prestige. Now the probability is still great that the West will not interfere. We must accept the risk with reckless resolution. A politician must accept a risk as much as a military leader. We are facing the alternative to strike or to be destroyed with certainty sooner or later.

Reference to previous risks.

I would have been stoned if I had not carried my point. The most dangerous step was the invasion of the neutral zone. Only a week before, I got a warning through France. I have always accepted a great risk in the conviction that it may succeed.

Now it is also a great risk. Iron nerves, iron resolution.

The following special reasons strengthen my idea. England and France are obligated, neither is in a position for it. There is no actual rearmament in England, just propaganda. It has done much damage that many reluctant Germans said and wrote to Englishmen after the solution of the Czech question: The Fuehrer carried his point because you lost your nerve, because you capitulated too soon. This explains the present propaganda war. The English speak of a war of nerves. It is one element of this war of nerves to present the increase of armament. But how is British rearmament in actual fact? The construction program of the Navy for 1938 has not yet been filled. Only mobilization of the reserve fleet. Purchase of fishing steamers. Considerable strengthening of the Navy, not before 1941 or 1942.

Little has been done on land. England will be able to send a maximum of 3 divisions to the continent. A little has been done for the air force, but it is only a beginning. AA defense is in its beginning stages. At the moment England has only 150 AA guns. The new AA gun has been ordered. It will take a long time until enough have been produced. Fire directors are lacking. England is still vulnerable from the air. This can change in 2 to 3 years. At the moment the English air force has only 130,000 men, France 72,000 men, Poland 15,000 men. England does not want the conflict to break out for two or three years.

The following is characteristic for England. Poland wanted a loan from England for rearmament. England, however, only gave credit in order to make sure that Poland buys in England, although England cannot deliver. This means that England does not really want to support Poland. She does not risk 8 millions pounds in Poland, although she put half a billion into China. England's position in the world is very precarious. She will not accept any risks.

France lacks men (decline of the birth rate). Little has been done for rearmament. The artillery is antiquated. France did not want to enter on this adventure. The West has only two possibilities to fight against us:

1. Blockade: It will not be effective because of our autarchy and because we have sources of aid in the east.

2. Attack from the west from the Maginot line: I consider this impossible.

Another possibility is the violation of Dutch, Belgium, and Swiss neutrality. I have no doubts that all these states as well as Scandinavia will defend their neutrality by all available means. England and France will not violate the neutrality of those countries. Actually England cannot help Poland. There remains an attack on Italy. A military attack is out of the question. No one is counting on a longer war. If Mr. von Brauchitsch had told me that I would need 4 years to conquer Poland I would have replied: then it cannot be done. It is nonsense to say that England wants to wage a long war.

We will hold our position in the West until we have conquered Poland. We must be conscious of our great production. It is much bigger than in 1914-1918.

The enemy had another hope, that Russia would become our enemy after the conquest of Poland. The enemy did not count on my great power of resolution. Our enemies are little worms. I saw them in Munich.

I was convinced that Stalin would never accept the England offer. Russia has no interest in maintaining Poland and Stalin knows that it is the end of his regime no matter whether his soldiers come out of a war victoriously or beaten. Litvinow's replacement was decisive. I brought about the change toward Russia gradually. In connection with the commercial treaty we got into political conversation. Proposal of a non-aggression pact. Then came a general proposal from Russia. Four days ago I took a special step, which brought it about that Russia answered yesterday that she is ready to sign. The personal contract with Stalin is established. The day after tomorrow von Ribbentrop will conclude the treaty. Now Poland is in the position in which I wanted her.

We need not be afraid of a blockade. The East will supply us with grain, cattle, coal, lead and zinc. It is a big arm, which demands great efforts. I am only afraid that at the last minute some Schweinhund [literally, swineherd's dog; figuratively, filthy person] will make a proposal for mediation.

The political arm is set farther. A beginning has been made for the destruction of England's hegemony. The way is open for the soldier, after I have made the political preparations.

Today's publication of the non-aggression pact with Russia hit like a shell. The consequences cannot be overlooked. Stalin also said that this course will be of benefit to both countries. The effect on Poland will be tremendous.

Goering answers with thanks to the Fuehrer and the assurance that the armed forces will do their duty.

PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 812-PS

[Seal] Salzburg, 22 Aug. 1939 The Gauleiter Chiemsee Personal! Only direct delivery! To the Reich Minister Dr. Arthur SEYSS-INQUART, VIENNA I Ballhausplatz 2 Dear Dr. Seyss:

I have received your letter of 19 August 1939, in which you asked me to inform you what I know of those matters, which among others, are the subject of your correspondence with Buerckel.

I do not wish to discuss sundry talks and all that has been brought to my notice in the course of time by different people. I wish to clarify essentially my own attitude.

On the 5th of July 1939 I was asked by telephone by the Reich Commissioner Gauleader Buerckel if I was in possession of the memorandum of Globus regarding the events of March. I told him that I do not have this memorandum and that I never possessed a single part of it, that I furthermore did not then participate in the matter and do not know its content. Because of official requests by Buerckel I have entrusted him with a report accompanied by a letter written on the 6th July.

If Buerckel now writes to you that certain statements were confirmed by me, I feel obliged to entrust you with a copy each of my copies of those two documents, which were only written in single originals. I shall specially inform Buerckel of this. I connect this with the declaration, that I have given—apart from those written explanations—no confirmations, declarations, or criticisms whatsoever regarding you and your attitude and that I have authorized nobody to refer to any statements of mine.

Since the beginning of our collaboration I have always expressed and represented forcefully my ideas regarding yourself and my opinion of your personality. This conception of mine was the very basis of our collaboration. The events of February and March have not changed this, especially since I considered the political success of the 11th March merely as a confirmation of the intentions and convictions which have equally induced both of us to collaborate.

As far as Globus is concerned you are fully aware of his species which I judged always and in every situation only by its good side. I believe that you already talked to Globus about the occurrences between the 11th of March 1938 and today; and I am convinced that he will tell you everything that is bothering him, if you will speak to him about this matter, as is your intention.

With the best regards and HEIL HITLER! Yours 2 enclosures. [signed] Friedl Rainer

Copy. Salzburg, 6 July 1939 To the Reich Commissar Gauleiter Josef Buerckel Vienna I Parliament Dear Party Member Buerckel!

Soon after taking over in Austria, Klausner, Globocnik, and I flew to Berlin to report to Hitler's deputy, Hess, about the events which led to our taking over the government. We did this because we had the impression that the general opinion, perhaps also Hitler's own, was that the liberation depended more on Austrian matters of state rather than the party. To be more exact. Hitler especially mentioned Dr. Seyss-Inquart alone; and public opinion gave him alone credit for the change and thus believed him to have played the sole leading role.

This conception does not, however, correspond to the true proportions of powers and to the conditions of leadership which were completely clear until 12 March 1938. At that time I gave a short report in Klausner's behalf to the deputy of Hitler and also submitted a short summary of the developments since 1934. I made no single copy of this. I did not take part in further actions of this kind since they seemed to me to be too much connected with personal feelings. I think the main reason for the fact that the person of Dr. Seyss-Inquart seemed to Hitler and to public opinion to have stepped in the limelight in those March days, was that no position existed in the party from which one might have presented oneself to the public; and that there was no man who had the guts to let himself be presented. The actual reason was that the party leadership had to remain secret during the whole illegal fight, secret even from the Reich German public. He who wanted to direct correctly the political battle of the Austrian nazism had to forego public fame. Leopold did not want to forego that and made such decisive political mistakes that his recall became necessary. The person of Klausner never longed for fame and was therefore not suitable to appear gloriously after the taking over of power. The two powers behind Klausner—I consider the dynamic part of Globocnik and the political part of myself—were bound from the beginning, as collaborators of Klausner's, to put him to the fore.

We saw in March and April how a false picture about the actual leadership conditions developed from this fact which could not be corrected in spite of our attempts to that effect. This was an important factor for the varying moods of Globocnik who hoped especially from you that you would emphasize for Hitler and also for the public the role of the party during the events preceding 12 March 1938. I limited myself to address this verbal and written declaration to party member Hess, and furthermore to secure the documents from the March days. In addition, I spoke at every available opportunity about the fight of the party. I did not undertake steps to give just credit to other persons for the glory which was excessively ascribed to one person, Dr. Seyss-Inquart; and I would not do that, primarily because I appear as a beneficiary, and furthermore because I believe that I would not gladden Hitler by doing so. I am also convinced that Dr. Seyss-Inquart did not act crookedly, and furthermore that Hitler does not want to commit an act of historical justice by special preference of his person, but that he is attracted to him personally. It really is of no great account to Hitler if this or that person was more or less meritorious, in this sector of the great fight of the movement. Because, in the last analysis, by far the greatest part is to be ascribed only to him; he alone will be considered by history as the liberator of Austria. I, therefore, considered it best to accept existing conditions and look for new fertile fields of endeavor in the party.

If I should be asked to describe—without personal interest—the role of the party according to my best conviction, I am ready to do so at any time. For this reason I promised yesterday to submit to you again a short summary, and to make it available for your confidential use. Of this letter and of this abbreviated description I retain the sole copy.

Heil Hitler! Rainer e.h. 1 Enclosure

COPY.

Report on the events in the NSDAP of Austria since the beginning of the last stage of battle until the seizure of power on the 11th March 1938.

In 1933 the Party fought a parliamentary battle. By the seizure of power in the Reich it gained considerably in numbers. It started to try to enforce new elections in order to gain admission into the government. By these means it should have taken over the government. The enemies recognized this fact, and the Government Dollfuss preceded, while tolerating the reds, to force the NSDAP from its legal plane in order to render it innocuous. In this the government used legal tricks, thereby practically doing away progressively with the democratic constitution. The first attempts of the government were answered by the Party with an increase of pressure; and the government's breaches of constitution were answered by arbitrary acts with the assumption that it might thus be able to overthrow the government. This assumption was wrong; at that time the government had the backing of all anti-German foreign countries, and it felt sufficiently strong to prohibit the NSDAP, and confession of adherence to the NSDAP, and subsequently to treat as high treason the confession in favor of the "Anschluss".

Thus the first stage of battle commenced which ended with the July rising of 1934. The decision for the July rising was right, and the execution of it was faulty. The result was a complete destruction of the organization; the loss of entire groups of fighters through imprisonment or flight into the "Alt-Reich"; and with regard to the political relationship of Germany to Austria, a formal acknowledgement of the existence of the Austrian State by the German Government. With the telegram to Papen, instructing him to reinstitute normal relationships between the two states, the Fuehrer had liquidated the first stage of the battle; and a new method of political penetration was to begin. By order of the Fuehrer the Landesleitung Munich was dissolved, and the party in Austria was left to its own resources.

There was no acknowledged leader for the entire party in Austria. New leaderships were forming in the mine Gaus. The process was again and again interrupted by the interference of the police; there was no liaison between the formations, and frequently there were two, three or more rival leaderships. The first evident, acknowledged speaker of almost all the Gaus in Autumn 1934 was engineer Reinthaller (already appointed Landesbauernfuehrer [leader of the country's farmers] by Hess). He endeavoured to bring about a political appeasement by negotiations with the government, with the purpose of giving the N.S.D.A.P. legal status again, thus permitting its political activities. Simultaneously Reinthaller started the reconstruction of the illegal political organization, at the head of which he had placed engineer Neubacher.

The first attempt to create a legal political organization which was to negotiate with the Government while a secret illegal organization existed, did not succeed; it brought about quarrels in almost all Gaus and ended with pressure of the illegal branch against the policy of appeasement of Reinthaller, and with the latter's retirement as Landesleiter [country leader]. The successor, Neubacher, head of the illegal organization, was not recognized by all the Gaus, because meanwhile the former Gauleader of Lower Austria, Captain Leopold, was released; and he claimed the country leadership because of his seniority in the party. In Carinthia at about that time, Klausner with his collaborators Globocnik, Rainer, Longhin and Pawlowski had reconstructed and readied the Gau Carinthia. The Gau Carinthia kept away from the quarrels of the leaders, and arbitrated the differences between Leopold and Neubacher, and finally effected a solution in such a way that Neubacher and his adherents recognized Leopold as the country leader; and Leopold appointed Neubacher to be his deputy. The points of friction between those two groups were not yet eliminated. Those differences did not remain concealed from the police; and the police got hold of a polemic by the group of Leopold against the group of Neubacher, on the strength of this material they arrested Leopold and Neubacher.

At that time the success of the calm attitude of the Gau Carinthia was crowned by the fact that after these arrests the representatives of all the Gaus came to Carinthia to offer Klausner the country leadership. By order of Klausner Dr. Rainer reported at these conferences the political referendum and developed the political conception as adopted by the Gau Carinthia on the basis of which, as a matter of fact, an agreement was reached. In July 1935 Klausner became the head of the movement without, however adopting the title of country leader because he considered it wrong as long as the country leader Leopold was imprisoned, but he looked upon himself as the speaker of the college of Gauleaders. With the consent of the representatives of all the Gaus, Klausner at that time appointed Globocnik as co-worker for the organizational part, and Rainer as co-worker for the political part of his task.

In August some further arrests took place, the victims of which were, apart from the Gauleaders, also Globocnik and Rainer. Schattenfroh then claimed, because of an instruction received from the imprisoned Leopold, to have been made deputy country leader. A group led by engineer Raffelsberger had at this time also established connections with departments of the Alt-Reich (Ministry of Propaganda, German Racial Agency, etc.) and made an attempt to formulate a political motto in the form of a program for the fighting movement of Austria. In Spring of 1936 Schattenfroh was arrested; he had named party member Hinterleitner of Linz as his successor as managerial country leader. In March Klausner was arrested in connection with the arrest of about 60 leading Nazis, whereas Dr. Rainer was released. Hinterleitner again followed those directives which were set down at the conferences at Carinthia in the Spring of 1935; and in May 1936 he appointed Rainer, Globocnik and engineer Hiedler to the country leadership in the following spheres of influence:

Rainer to be chief of the political staff; Hiedler as chief of the organization; and Globocnik as liaison officer with the Reich and as organizer of all the auxiliary bases outside of Austria.

The principles of the construction of the organization were: The organization is the bearer of the illegal fight and the trustee of the idea to create a secret organization, in a simple manner and without compromise, according to the principle of organizing an elite to be available to the illegal land-party council upon any emergency. Besides this, all political opportunities should be taken and all legal people and legal chances should be used without revealing any ties with the illegal organization. Therefore, co-operation between the illegal party organization and the legal political aides was anchored at the top of the party leadership. All connections with the party in Germany were kept secret in accordance with the orders of the Fuehrer. These said that the German state should officially be omitted from the creation of an Austrian NSDAP; and that auxiliary centers for propaganda, press, refugees, welfare, etc. should be established in the foreign countries bordering Austria.

Hinterleitner already contacted the lawyer Seyss-Inquart, who had connection with Dr. Wachter which originated from Seyss-Inquart's support of the July uprising. On the other side Seyss-Inquart had a good position in the legal field and especially well-established relations with Christian-Social politicians. Dr. Seyss-Inquart came from the ranks of the "Styrian Heimatschutz" and became a party member when the entire "Styrian Heimatschutz" was incorporated into the NSDAP. Another personality who had a good position in the legal field was Col. Glaise-Horstenau who had contacts with both sides. The agreement of 11 July 1936 was strongly influenced by the activities of these two persons. Papen mentioned Glaise-Horstenau to the Fuehrer as being a trusted person.

At that time the Fuehrer wished to see the leaders of the party in Austria in order to tell them his opinion on what Austrian National-Socialists should do. Meanwhile Hinterleiter was arrested, and Dr. Rainer became his successor and leader of the Austrian party. On 16 July 1936, Dr. Rainer and Globocnik visited the Fuehrer at the "Obersalzburg" where they received a clear explanation of the situation and the wishes of the Fuehrer. On 17 July 1936, all illegal Gauleiters met in Anif near Salzburg, where they received a complete report from Rainer on the statement of the Fuehrer and his political instructions for carrying out the fight. At the same conference the Gauleiters received organizational instructions from Globocnik and Hiedler.

Upon the proposal of Globocnik, the Fuehrer named Lt. Gen. [Gruppenfuehrer] Keppler as chief of the mixed commission which was appointed, in accordance with the state treaty of 11 July 1936, to supervise the correct execution of the agreement. At the same time Keppler was given full authority by the Fuehrer for the party in Austria. After Keppler was unsuccessful in his efforts to cooperate with Leopold, he worked together with Dr. Rainer, Globocnik, Reinthaller as leader of the peasants, Kaltenbrunner as leader of the SS, and Dr. Jury as deputy-leader of the Austrian party, as well as with Glaise-Horstenau and Seyss-Inquart.

Regarding internal conditions, it was clear that full recognition of the party leadership was given by Seyss-Inquart. He was also in permanent contact with Capt. Leopold, and there were never any serious conflicts between them. But he also acknowledged the correctness of Dr. Rainer's political interpretations, and the actual leadership of Dr. Rainer in all political actions. The situation was much the same with Glaise-Horstenau who was whole-heartedly for Rainer and Globocnik but always carefully guarded the legal party position of Leopold.

Due to the cooperation of the above-mentioned people with group leader Keppler and other officials of the Reich and due to the activities of other contact-men in Austria, it was possible to obtain the appointment of Seyss-Inquart as "Staatsrat" (councillor of state) in July 1937. Due to the same facts, the Chancellor Dr. Schuschnigg was forced to take a new so-called "satisfactory action". Through all this a new and stronger political position was won in the Austrian system. The National-Socialist Party became acceptable again in the political field and became a partner with whom one had to negotiate, even when it was not officially incorporated into internal Austrian political developments. This complicated political maneuver, accompanied by the steadily increasing pressure from the Reich, led to the talks between the Fuehrer and Schuschnigg at the Obersalzberg. Here Gruppenfuehrer Keppler presented the concrete political demands of the fighting underground movement, which he estimated according to his personal experiences and the information he received. The results of these talks were the right of a free acknowledgment of the National Socialist movement on the one hand and the recognition of an independent Austrian state on the other hand, as well as the appointment of Seyss-Inquart as Minister of Interior and Public Safety, as a person who will guarantee to both sides the proper carrying out of the agreements. In this way Seyss-Inquart occupied the key position and was in the center of all obvious political actions. A legal base in the government was won for the party. This resulted in a paralysis of the "system apparatus" (Schuschnigg government) at a time when a revolution needed to be carried out. Through this, the basis for a new attack on the Schuschnigg government was won.

Another result of the agreement was the appointment by the Fuehrer of Leopold as a member of the Staff of Hess. After a long, personal talk with Klausner, the Fuehrer appointed him as leader of the Austrian National Socialists, upon recommendation of Keppler. The relationship between Seyss-Inquart and Klausner was as follows: Seyss-Inquart acknowledged unconditionally the party leadership and actions taken by it; and he also acknowledged Klausner as the leader of the party. As a party member he was under the command of Klausner and received orders from him. But as a result of the agreement at Berchtesgaden and the statement the Fuehrer made to him during his state visit in Berlin, Seyss-Inquart was the personal trustee of the Fuehrer and directly responsible to him for the illegal NSDAP in Austria within the confines of his political sphere. Seyss-Inquart also acknowledged the free political initiative of the party leader of Austria.

The "Landesleitung" received word about the planned plebiscite through illegal information services, on 9 March 1938 at 10 a.m. At the session which was called immediately afterwards, Seyss-Inquart explained that he had known about this for only a few hours, but that he could not talk about it because he had given his word to keep silent on this subject. But during the talks he made us understand that the illegal information we received was based on truth, and that in view of the new situation, he had been cooperating with the "Landesleitung" from the very first moment. Klausner, Jury, Rainer, Globocnik and Seyss-Inquart were present at the first talks which were held at 10 a.m. There it was decided that first, the Fuehrer had to be informed immediately; secondly, the opportunity for the Fuehrer to intervene must be given to him by way of an official declaration made by Minister Seyss-Inquart to Schuschnigg; and thirdly, Seyss-Inquart must negotiate with the government until clear instructions and orders were received from the Fuehrer. Seyss-Inquart and Rainer together composed a letter to Schuschnigg, and only one copy of it was brought to the Fuehrer by Globocnik, who flew to him on the afternoon of 9 March 1938.

Negotiations with the government were not successful. Therefore they were stopped by Seyss-Inquart in accordance with the instructions he received from the Fuehrer. On the 10th March all preparations for future revolutionary actions had already been made, and the necessary orders given to all units leaders. During the night of the 10th to 11th, Globocnik returned from the Fuehrer with the announcement that the Fuehrer gave the party freedom of action and that he would back it in everything it did. Rainer then gave the final instruction for Friday, the 11th of March, and explained that three situations might develop within the following days:

1st Case: The plebiscite will not be held. In this case, a great demonstration must be held.

2nd Case: Schuschnigg will resign. In this case, a demonstration was ordered in taking over the government power.

3rd Case: Schuschnigg will take up the fight. In this case, all party leaders were ordered to act upon their own initiative, using all means to capture the position of power.

Dr. Seyss-Inquart took part in these talks with the Gauleiters.

On Friday, 11 March, the minister Glaise-Horstenau arrived in Vienna after a visit with the Fuehrer. After talks with Seyss-Inquart he went to see the chancellor. At 11:30 a.m. the "Landesleitung" had a meeting at which Klausner, Rainer, Globocnik, Jury, Seyss-Inquart, Glaise-Horstenau, Fishboeck and Muehlmann participated. Dr. Seyss-Inquart reported on his talks with Dr. Schuschnigg which had ended in a rejection of the proposal of the two ministers.

In regard to Rainer's proposal, von Klausner ordered that the government be presented with an ultimatum, expiring at 1400 hours, signed by legal political, "Front" men, including both ministers and also State Councillors Fishboeck and Jury, for the establishment of a voting date in three weeks and a free and secret ballot in accordance with the constitution.

On the basis of written evidence which Glaise-Horstenau had brought with him a leaflet, to be printed in millions of copies, and a telegram to the Fuehrer calling for help, were prepared.

Klausner placed the leadership of the final political actions in the hands of Rainer and Globocnik. Schuschnigg called a session of all ministers for 2:00 p.m. Rainer agreed with Seyss-Inquart that Rainer would send the telegram to the Fuehrer and the statement to the population at 3:00 p.m. and at the same time he would start all necessary actions to take over power unless he received news from the session of the ministers' council before that time. During this time all measures had been prepared. At 2:30, Seyss-Inquart 'phoned Rainer and informed him that Schuschnigg had been unable to take the pressure and had recalled the plebiscite but that he had refused to call a new plebiscite and had ordered the strongest police measures for maintaining order. Rainer asked whether the two ministers had resigned, and Seyss-Inquart answered "No." Rainer informed the "Reichskanzlei" through the German Embassy, and received an answer from Goering through the same channels that the Fuehrer will not consent to partial solutions and that Schuschnigg must resign. Seyss-Inquart was informed of this by Globocnik and Muehlmann; talks were had between Seyss-Inquart and Schuschnigg: Schuschnigg resigned. Seyss-Inquart asked Rainer what measures the party wished taken. Rainer's answer: Reestablishment of the government by Seyss-Inquart, legalization of the party, and calling up of the SS and SA as auxiliaries to the police force. Seyss-Inquart promised to have these measures carried out, but very soon the announcement followed that everything might be threatened by the resistance of Miklas. Meanwhile word arrived from the German Embassy that the Fuehrer expected the establishment of a government under Seyss-Inquart with a national majority, the legalization of the party, and permission for the legion to return, all within the specified time of 7:30 p.m.; otherwise, German troops would cross the border at 8:00 p.m. At 5:00 p.m., Rainer and Globocnik, accompanied by Muehlmann, went to the Chancellor's office to carry out this errand.

Situation: Miklas negotiated with Ender for the creation of a government which included, blacks, reds and National Socialists, and proposed the post of Vice-Chancellor to Seyss-Inquart. The latter rejected it and told Rainer that he was not able to negotiate by himself because he was personally involved, and therefore a weak and unpleasant political situation might result. Rainer negotiated with Zernette. Director of the cabinet Huber, Guide Schmidt, Glaise-Horstenau, Legation Councillor Stein, Military Attache General Muffe, and the "Gruppenfuehrer" Keppler, who had arrived in the meantime, were also negotiating. At 7:00 p.m. Seyss-Inquart entered the negotiations again. Situation at 7:30 p.m.: Stubborn refusal of Miklas to appoint Seyss-Inquart as Chancellor; appeal to the world in case of a German invasion.

Gruppenfuehrer Keppler explained that the Fuehrer did not yet have an urgent reason for the invasion. This reason must first be created. The situation in Vienna and in the country is most dangerous. It is feared that street fights will break out any moment because Rainer ordered the entire party to demonstrate at 3 o'clock. Rainer proposed storming and seizing the government palace in order to force the reconstruction of the government. The proposal was rejected by Keppler but was carried out by Rainer after he discussed it with Globocnik. After 8:00 p.m. the SA and SS marched in and occupied the government buildings and all important positions in the city of Vienna. At 8:30 p.m. Rainer, with the approval of Klausner, ordered all Gauleiters of Austria to take over power in all eight "gaus" of Austria, with the help of the SS and SA and with instructions that all government representatives who try to resist should be told that this action was taken on order of Chancellor Seyss-Inquart.

With this, the revolution broke out, and this resulted in the complete occupation of Austria within three hours and the taking over of all important posts by the party. * * *

The seizure of power was the work of the party supported by the Fuehrer's threat of invasion and the legal standing of Seyss-Inquart in the government. The national result in the form of the taking over of the government by Seyss-Inquart was due to the actual seizure of power by the party on one hand, and the political efficiency of Dr. Seyss-Inquart in his territory on the other; but both factors may be considered only in the relation to the Fuehrer's decision on 9 March 1938 to solve the Austrian problem under any circumstances and the orders consequently issued by the Fuehrer.

6.7.1939 Rainer e. h.

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 829-PS

TOP SECRET Copy The Chief of the OKW WFST. / Abt. L (IV/Qu) Nr. 002060/41 g. Kdos. F.H. Qu., 16 September 1941 40 copies, 32nd copy Subject: Communist insurrection in the occupied territories.

1. Since the campaign against Soviet Russia started there have been communist insurrections everywhere in the territories occupied by Germany. The actions range from propaganda and assaults against single members of the armed forces to open revolt and spreading guerilla warfare.

It should be noted that this is a mass movement which is centrally directed from Moscow and to which also the single and seemingly trifling incidents are to be ascribed occurring in areas which have been quiet so far.

Due to the manifold political and economic tensions in the occupied territories we must also expect nationalistic and other groups to take advantage of the situation and to instigate difficulties for the German occupation troops by joining the communist insurrection.

This way an increasing danger for the German conduct of the war arises which becomes apparent first by generally unsafe conditions for the occupation troops and already has led to troops being detached to the main centers of the unrest.

2. Previous measures to counteract this general communist insurrection have proved inadequate.

The Fuehrer has now ordered that everywhere the most drastic means are to be employed in order to quench the movement within the shortest time possible.

Only in this manner which has always been employed successfully by great nations in the history of their conquests quiet can be restored.

3. The following directives are to be observed:

a. In each case of revolt against the German occupation force Communist sources are to be suspected regardless of what the individual circumstances are.

b. To nip the plots in the bud the most drastic means are to be employed immediately at the first provocation in order to make the authority of the occupation force prevail and to prevent further spreading. Attention should be paid to the fact that a human life in the countries concerned often means nothing and only by unusual severity can a deterrent effect be achieved. In these cases the life of one German soldier must be atoned for by the death sentence for 50 to 100 communists, as a rule. The manner of execution shall further increase the deterrent effect.

The opposite procedure to use relatively mild punishment first and to do with the threat of more severe action as a deterrent is not in accordance with these principles and therefore should not be employed.

c. The political relationships between Germany and the respective country in question are irrelevant for the attitude of the military occupation authorities.

To the contrary, it is to be considered and emphasized by propaganda that striking with energy will also liberate the native populations from communist criminals and result to their benefit.

Clever propaganda of this kind consequently will not cause undesirable reactions of the friendly parts of the population on account of the severe measures against the communists.

d. Native men will generally be a failure in the execution of such measures of force. Their strengthening brings an increased danger for our own troops and therefore must not be allowed.

However, prizes and rewards should be lavishly offered to the population in order to ensure its cooperation in a suitable way.

e. If as an exception court martial is to be opened in connection with communist revolts or other offenses against the German occupation force, the most drastic penalties are to be imposed.

In such cases the death penalty only can be an actual means having deterrent effect. Particularly acts of espionage and sabotage and attempts to join a foreign army are, as a rule, to be punished with death. Also in cases of bearing arms without permission the death sentence is to be imposed in general.

4. The commanders in the occupied territories see to it that these principles are made known to all military offices without delay which have to deal with communist acts of revolt.

Certified /s/ Keitel [signature illegible] M.V.J. Distribution:

Commander of Armed Forces South-East [W. Bfh. Suedost] 1st copy

with additional copies for Commander Serbia 2nd copy

with additional copies for Commander Salonika-Aegean Sea 3rd copy

with additional copies for Commander Southern Greece 4th copy

with additional copies for Commander Crete 5th copy

Commander of Armed Forces Norway 6th copy

Commander of Armed Forces Netherlands 7th copy

Commander of Armed Forces Eastern Territory 8th copy

Commander of Armed Forces Ukraine 9th copy

Plenipotentiary for the Armed Force with the Reich Protector in Bohemia and Moravia 10th copy

High Command of the Army—OKH (operational sec.) 11th copy

[O.Qu.IV] 12th copy

(Gen. Qu.) with additional copy for 13th copy

Mil Cdr. France 14th copy

Mil. Cdr. Belgium and Northern France 15th copy

Mil. Cdr. in the Gouv. Gen. 16th copy

Chief of Armament and Cdr. of Reserve 17th copy

with add. copy for Cdr. German Troops in Denmark 18th copy

Chief of Air Force (General Staff) 19th copy

Chief of Navy [OKM] Chief of naval operations [SKL] 20th copy

Armistice Commission [W.St.K.] Wiesbaden 21st copy

Foreign Office, attention ambassador [?] Ritter 22nd copy

Verfuegungsstab Frankfurt/Oder via L II 23rd copy

Verfuegungsstab Breslau OKW 24th copy

Operational Staff of the Armed Forces [WFST] 25th copy

Abt.L 26-32nd copy

WPr. 33rd copy

Office Ausl./Abw. 34th copy

Counterintelligence Abw. III 35th copy

Foreign department Abt. Ausl. 36th copy

Economic Armament office 37th copy

AWA 38th copy

WR 39th copy

Liaison-office [V.O.] at Gen. Gouv. Cracow 40th copy

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 833-PS

SECRET High Command of the Armed Forces Berlin, 2 February 1942.

Foreign office/Intelligence/Intell. Dept. III No. 570/1.42 g (ZR/ III C 2

Subject: Prosecution of crimes against the Reich or the occupying forces in the occupied territories

Wehrm. High Command 7 Feb. 1942 No. 221 / 42 g further: to: 149/10 10 Reference: None Inclosures: 3

In the enclosure are transmitted

1. a decree of the Fuehrer and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of 7.12.41

2. an executory decree of the same day

3. a circular of the Chief of the Armed Forces High Command of 12.12.41

The decree carries a basic innovation. The Fuehrer and commander in chief of the armed forces commands that crimes of the specified sort committed by civilians of the occupied territories are to be punished by the pertinent courts martial in the occupied territories only when

(a) The sentence calls for the death penalty and (b) the sentence is pronounced within 8 days after the arrest.

Only when both conditions are met does the Fuehrer and commander in chief of the armed forces hope for the desired deterrent effect from the conduct of punitive proceedings in the occupied territories.

In other cases in the future the accused are to be secretly brought to Germany and the further conduct of the trial carried on here. The deterrent effect of these measures lies

(a) in allowing the disappearance of the accused without a trace,

(b) therein, that no information whatsoever may be given about their whereabouts and their fate.

This decree brings only insignificant changes of their activity to the intelligence [Abwehr] agencies. Now as before the intelligence agencies determine the time for the arrest of the espionage and sabotage suspect. However, in conjunction with establishment of the time it must however be considered now that previous to the arrest evidence fully sufficient for the conviction of the perpetrator must if possible be on hand, for further investigation hardly comes into question after the seizure, since a sentence must take place within 8 days, or on the other hand further investigation on the spot by confrontation is made impossible by the evacuation of the prisoners to Germany. Therefore contact should be made with the pertinent military court previous to the arrest in order to check on the question as to whether or not the collected evidence suffices.

When in the opinion of the pertinent court martial and/or the military commander an immediate conviction on the spot is not possible, and the perpetrators are therefore to be evacuated to Germany, the intelligence agencies will inform Reich security headquarters [Reichssicherheitshauptamt] in Berlin SW 11, Prinz Albrecht-Str. 8, attention of Herr Kriminaldirektor Fischer, directly, with a statement of the exact number of prisoners and the groups that belong together according to the circumstances of the individual case. Insofar as in individual cases the superior commander has an urgent interest in the conviction by a Wehrmacht court, this will be brought to the attention of Reich security headquarters. A copy of the whole report to Reich security headquarters is to be sent to the Foreign Office/Intelligence, Intelligence Department III.

The Reich security headquarters will determine a state police office, depending on accommodation possibilities, which will take over the prisoners. This state police office makes contact with the proper intelligence office and arranges the details of the evacuation, particularly if it will be handled by the secret military police, military police, or by the Gestapo itself, as well as manner and place of transfer of subjects.

The decree of the Fuehrer is to be applied, to begin with, only in the occupied western territories (Norway, Netherlands, Belgium, and Northern France, France).

The intelligence agencies must make report to the chief of staff on the above regulations decreed by the foreign office intelligencer.

For the Chief of the Wehrmacht High Command Signature: CANARIS Distribution:

To (Intelligence III) 127

For information:

West (Armed Forces Operational staff.) 1

WR 15

Foreign Office Intelligence Z, ZR 2

Foreign Department 1

Intelligence III

W, H, M, Air FPdW, F, C, C1, C2, each 1 9

Wi 1

U 2

Reich Security Headquarters, Department IV E, attention of Kriminaldirektor Fischer 1

Original 1

Supply 40

——

200

====

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 835-PS

SECRET High Command of the Armed Forces 14 n 16.18 WR(1/3) Berlin W 35, Tirpitzufer 72-76 2 September 1944 Telephone Local 218191 Long distance 218091

Refer to file number date and content.

To the German Armistice Commission re letter of 10.8.44 Az. 630/44.

For information to: OKW/WFSt/Qu/Verw.1, WFSt/Foreign Office Group.

Concerns: Status of Political Prisoners.

Reference: Fuehrer decree of 30.7.44 (OKW/WFSt/Qu 2/Verw.1 Nr. 009169 g.K.) and decree OKW of 18.2.44 (WFSt/Qu 2/Verw.1 Nr. 009169 g.K.) WR 1/3 Nr. 79/44 g.K.

Conforming to the decrees, all non-German civilians in occupied territory who have endangered the security and readiness for action of the occupying power by acts of terror and sabotage or in other ways are to be surrendered to the security police and to the security service (SD). Only those prisoners are excepted who were legally sentenced to death or were serving a sentence of confinement prior to the announcement of these decrees. Included in the punishable acts which endanger the security or readiness of action of the garrison power are also those of a political nature. The declaration of the senior office of the SS [Protection Corps] and Police with the Military Commander of France that he cannot answer questions about political prisoners during Anglo-American operations, includes therefore all political prisoners in the occupied French territories seized recently or to be seized in the near future.

The treatment of prisoners who are condemned according to the decree of the Fuehrer of December 7, 1941 OKW/WR (I/3/4 14 n 16 Nr. 165/41 g) and who have no communication with the outer world, will soon be discussed with all interested officers.

By order

Sig. Dr. Lehmann For correctness BDC—OKW—1643 [Signature illegible.]

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 837-PS

SECRET National Socialist German Labour Party Fuehrer's Deputy. The Brown House, Munich-33, February 3rd 1939 SECRET Order No. 5/39 g (Not for Publication)

Subject: National league of Germans abroad [Volksbund fuer das Deutschtum in Ausland] and the German Eastern League [Bund Deutscher Osten]

The Director of the Agency for Racial Germans [Volksdeutsche Mittelstelle] SS-Gruppenfuehrer Lorenz, has instigated on my behalf the following new ruling for questions affecting racial work and work in the border country.

1. The National League of Germans abroad [VDA] is the association responsible for national work beyond the frontiers. At the head of the association, the new statutes of the VDA provide for a League Directorate consisting for the most part of leading party members in place of an independent League Director, whose office has been cancelled. Professor Karl Haushofer (Gen. ret.) has taken over the chairmanship of this Directorate. Party member Paul Meike is business manager of the League Directorate of the VDA and in this capacity he combines membership of the department of the Agency for Racial Germans with managing the VDA on lines which are in accordance with the instructions of the Director of the Agency for Racial Germans. Thus the VDA can no longer take action on its own which affects the whole association. The VDA is organized into State Associations [Landesverbaende], which correspond in area to the Gaue of the NSDAP.

2. The German Eastern League [BDO] is the association responsible for work on the border country. SS-Oberfuehrer Dr. Behrends, the deputy of the Director of the Agency for Racial Germans, is charged, until further notice, with its direction. Party Member Hoffmeyer is the responsible manager of the German Eastern League. He directs its business affairs according to the instructions of the Director of the Agency for Racial Germans, and is a member of the staff of the Agency for Racial Germans. The BDO is organized into State Groups, whose regional borders correspond to those of the "Gaue" of the NSDAP.

3. All other associations for racial work and work in the border country (Patriotic Associations) [Heimattreue Verdaende] etc., are alternately transferred, according to their activities, to the associations mentioned under 1 and 2. The managers of VDA and BDO are commissioned to take the necessary measures for the incorporating of these associations.

4. The VDA is solely responsible for racial work beyond the frontiers. I herewith forbid the Party, its organizations and affiliated associations from all racial work abroad. The only competent body for this task is the Agency for Racial Germans, and the VDA as its camouflaged tool. Within the Reich the VDA, generally speaking, is responsible only for providing the means for racial work beyond the frontiers. The VDA must be supported in this in every way by the Party offices. Any outward appearance of a connection with the Party is, however to be avoided.

5. The BDO is at the disposal of the Gauleiters of the frontier "Gaue" for political duties on the frontiers. In addition, the establishment of a frontier territory bureau [Granzlandamt] for the following "Gaue" has been agreed to, in cases where such a bureau is not already in existence:

East Prussia, Pomerania, Mark Brandenburg, Silesia, Sudetenland, Bavarian Ostmark, Upper Danube, Lower Danube.

In all other "Gaue," special frontier territory bureaux or representatives would be superfluous and are therefore not to be established. Should they already exist, they are to be dissolved.

The activity of the BDO and the VDA is to be supported in every way by the Party offices. The National Socialist leadership of both associations will ensure energetic cooperation on their part in all tasks assigned to them by the NSDAP. Their nature is determined by considerations of foreign policy, and the associations must bear this in mind when representing them in public.

Signed: R. HESS Certified [signed] Witt (WITT) Distribution: II d

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 838-PS

NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS' PARTY The Deputy of the Fuehrer The Brown House, Munich 33, 3 June 1939 Stabsleiter Circular No. 122139

Subject: Adherents to Christian Science who are members of the Party

In decree No. 51/1939, dated 6 March 1939 the deputy of the Fuehrer has forbidden that members of the Party be followers of Christian Science due to the outspoken international connections of Christian Science and he decreed that wherever double-membership exists it will have to be annulled immediately.

I request that the leaders of the organizations of the Party issue the necessary decree within the realm of their jurisdiction and also make sure that no double-membership of Christian Science and of party organizations exist.