Chapter XLVI: Part V (2)

For the Germans who were taken into custody by the Gestapo, chiefly Communists at that time, there was, from my experience and from the information that I had from all sources, a regular pattern of brutality and terror. Upon arrest, the victims would be systematically subjected to indignities and brutalities such as beatings, kicking, pushing downstairs, deprivation of food and all comforts, and threats of much worse. After the victims had been imprisoned--usually in cellars, since both the headquarters at No. 8 Albrechtstrasse and the S.A. meeting places usually had them--they would be beaten with various degrees of severity. If the Gestapo believed that the victim--particularly Communist leaders--had information as to other alleged accomplices they would give systematic beatings, usually when stripped and tied on a table. This would go on often for many days until they had extracted the information they wanted or killed the victim.

Based on all of the reports which I had from many sources, my judgment is that the victims were numbered in the hundreds of thousands all over Germany. Many of them were ultimately released. I can state with certainty that the contemporaneous accounts in foreign newspapers, such as the London Times and the American newspapers which I have seen, are accurate.

The second wave of terror was not so systematic nor so concentrated as to point of time. It was directed chiefly against the Jews, and was chiefly the result of the ruthless and occasionally violent enforcement of numerous decrees and orders, such as the Nurnberg Decrees. After the initial outbreak in March, 1933, and all through that year and the next, the Jews still in Germany had, in many cases, come to believe that things might become a little better and that they could live in some sort of peaceable relationship with the Nazis, even though they were reduced to the status of second or third class citizens. In 1935, however, the pressure on them began to increase and they began to be excluded completely from certain civil activities. The terrorism was continued all the time to some degree; but the enforcement of the new decrees in 1935 was characterized by such brutality and ruthlessness that it warrants special attention. Inadvertent violators were dealt with, for example, with great severity.

The 1938 wave of terror was a very pronounced and definite one. Again the object was the Jews, particularly the wealthy ones. The ostensible occasion was the murder of the German diplomat, von Rieth, by a French Jew, but the violence was in no sense spontaneous. Dr. Best, the Administrative Officer of the Gestapo, told me that the terror had been decided upon and ordered by Hitler himself, and that he, Dr. Best, could, therefore, do nothing about it. Actually that statement corroborated what everyone knew. Innumerable persons with whom I talked and who witnessed the violence told me that at all of the synagogues, which had been set on fire by the Nazis, the fire departments were always present, but never acted except to prevent the fires from spreading to neighboring non-Jewish properties. Nor did the police interfere with any of these acts of vandalism and incendiarism.

I personally did not see any of the violence nor the burning of the synagogues while the acts were being perpetrated, as the mobs throughout Germany commenced to work at midnight on November 8, 1938, and carried through their activities during the early morning hours of November 9. At that time I was on my way to the Wartburg Castle, and on the day of November 9 I saw the burned synagogues and the looted and smashed shops in Eisennach, and later in Berlin. I also know that at this time many of the wealthy Jews, who had previously escaped attack, were arrested, among whom were relatives of American citizens. Pursuant to requests from the United States, some of which were transmitted through the Department of State, I personally intervened with the Gestapo through Dr. Best, and secured the return of nearly twenty victims from the Saxonhausen Concentration Camp. Among these victims were Fritz Warburg and Eugene Garbaty. I think that many, perhaps most of these people, were released in the space of ten days or two weeks with the warning that if they remained in Germany they would have cause to regret it. In all cases the victims were subjected to rough treatment. Those who returned from the concentration camp and whom I saw in my office had their hair closely clipped, a common outward sign that they had been at Saxonhausen.

The Gestapo authorities with whom I spoke on my frequent, and often daily visits to the Gestapo headquarters did not hesitate to state that they regarded Communists in particular as subversive and as an element dangerous to the State, and that it was necessary to wipe them out. Diehls, the first chief of the Gestapo, in particular, whom I saw nearly every day of the March wave of terror in 1933, made no attempt to conceal the systematic character of the roundups of what he called “subversive persons”; though he did attempt to justify it to me as necessary to the safety of the State. While denying that any violence against American citizens was contemplated, he admitted that it was being undertaken against Germans. Terroristic tactics, however, in all their various forms, were so completely and thoroughly the actuating policy, that it would have been wholly redundant to discuss it. They and I both understood that it was the mainspring of all Gestapo activity--indeed of all Nazi activity--and that it was beyond discussion.

On one occasion I received a clear and definite admission of the Nazi terroristic policy with respect to many of their victims. In 1938 I was making strenuous efforts to free a young man from a concentration camp. He had been arrested in March, 1933, for aiding certain of his comrades to escape Germany, and had been sentenced by regular courts to a sentence of 2½ years. When he was released from the Brandenburg Prison at the end of that time, he was taken into custody by the Gestapo and sent to Dachau, the notorious concentration camp, and from there to Buchenwald. I had tried over a long period of time to secure his release by appeals personally to Himmler, Heydrich and Best, and had failed. In 1938, however, I was told by Ministerialraet Krohne, in the Ministry of Justice, that if I could reach Gruppenfuehrer Eiche of the Todtenkopfverbaende (Death’s Head Regiments) I might be successful. Eiche was then the head of all German concentration camps. After having first been told officially by the Gestapo that no such person existed, I was finally able by a ruse to secure his telephone number whereupon, through the recommendation of Krohne, I was able to make an appointment with Eiche at the Saxonhausen Concentration Camp near Berlin. He told me that with respect to Communists and any other persons who were suspected of holding views contrary to the Nazi conception of the State, such persons were “Asociale”, that is, impossible of social assimilation and, therefore, they must be physically eliminated from society or destined to perpetual confinement. Thaelman, the leader of the Communists in the Reichstag, was, as is well known, kept during the Hitler regime in perpetual confinement. His ultimate fate has never been revealed.

On another occasion I was given considerable information by a high official of the Gestapo as to the policy of the Nazis with respect to the Jews. I had had a considerable contact with the head of the Jewish section of the Gestapo, known as the “Judische Abteilung der Gestapo”, one Dr. Hasselbacher, in connection with making arrangements for official representatives of the American Joint Distribution Committee to visit certain Jewish centers throughout Germany, for which visits, of course, the permission of the Gestapo was necessary. These negotiations brought me frequently in touch with Dr. Hasselbacher, whom I came to know very well. He told me that Germany will be made “Judenrein”, that is, clean of Jews. He said that all the Jews who failed to leave Germany would be exterminated. That statement was made in 1938 before the extermination camps were established, but the statement of Hasselbacher clearly indicated the eventual emergence of extermination camps in accordance with the general Nazi plan; for certainly the Jews were unable to leave Germany, even if they had been permitted to do so by the Nazis, as no world-wide arrangement had been made to receive them in other countries.

I had a great deal of experience with the systematic measures which were taken to confiscate property of non-Nazis, particularly Jews. Force of circumstance and a settled governmental policy made this campaign a more gradual one. Drastic and sudden action would have led to the alienation of a great deal of ready assets owned by the Jews and would have tended to destroy the economic value of Jewish-owned property. It would also have resulted in the physical destruction or hiding by Jews of things of value, as indeed did happen to a great extent. Consequently, the Nazis permitted many Jews, particularly those of wealth and position, to remain unmolested for many years, giving the Jews the faithless and false assurance that they were exempted from the general repressive program for various reasons. For example, I knew well the leading German cigarette manufacturer, Eugene Garbaty. Until September, 1938, he was in complete control of his fortune. During that month, however, he was compelled to sell his factory, worth between seven million and ten million marks for the sum of one million marks. In October, 1938, his country estate near Dresden, valued probably over two million marks, was simply confiscated with no payment at all. It was to be used, as the authorities stated, for a welfare center for German Youth. After his experience in the Pogrom of November 8, 1938, Garbaty applied for a passport and received one only after paying a bribe of 500,000 marks to the corrupt Count Heldorf, Chief of Police in Berlin, and enough other fines to equal the million marks that he had received for his factory. He left Germany with nothing, except that earlier, by bribing the customs officials with approximately 250,000 marks, he had been able to get valuable art treasures out of Germany. Garbaty is now a citizen of the United States and is living in Connecticut.

Another instance of the same nature occurred with respect to my landlord, Mr. Franz Rinkel, who told me the entire story of his persecution at the hands of the Nazis. He had a fine house at No. 2 Bruckenalle in Berlin, in which I lived. Rinkel was one of the victims sent to Saxonhausen and whom, after the space of a week, I was able to rescue. One Dr. Lilienthal, a fanatical Nazi lawyer practicing in Berlin, coveted Rinkel’s house. The general system of expropriating the property of the Jews was illustrated in this particular case. My landlord was approached by Dr. Lilienthal and told the price the latter desired to pay, a mere fraction of the value of the estate. He was given a few days to make up his mind to sell at that price. He sold because he knew that if he did not, he would be accused of some trumped-up crime and taken away to the concentration camp. Dr. Lilienthal took possession of Rinkel’s house. I know that on many occasions where it was thought necessary to increase the pressure, the prospective purchaser or his agent would be accompanied by a uniformed S.A. or S.S. man. I know because I lived in the immediate neighborhood and know the individuals concerned, that Baron von Neurath, one time Foreign Minister of Germany, got his house from a Jew in this manner. Indeed, he was my next door neighbor in Dahlem. Von Neurath’s house was worth approximately 250,000 dollars. I know too that Alfred Rosenburg, who lived in the same street with me, purloined a house from a Jew in similar fashion. There were, of course, innumerable instances in which Nazis used their positions in the Party to void debts and the like. An illustration of this were the cases of the persons who came to the Consulate in Berlin and informed us of the circumstances. For example, Max Schussler, an American citizen, made an affidavit which states:

* * * I own several apartment houses in Berlin, one situated at
Ring Strasse 11, Berlin-Steglitz. On the property at Ring Strasse
11 resides a tenant by the name of Hans Zink, who owns and operates
a restaurant in those premises. He has been in arrears in his rent
for about a year. Since the first of February of this year, that
is, since the new Government came into power, he has refused to
pay his rent. I gave instructions to the Sheriff to have him put
out. Yesterday two uniformed men came to my office and spoke to my
secretary and said that if I do not recall the order to the Sheriff
to have Zink evicted, something will happen to me. I did not see
these men. My secretary received them. She stated they wore black
trousers and brown shirts. She referred them to my attorney, Felix
Szkolny, Charlottenstrasse 17, Berlin S.W. 68. They went to the
attorney, but he refused to give the order. They came to my office
again and said to my secretary that if I did not give the order in
writing and hand it over to a certain address within an hour’s
time, something would happen. I then called the police station at
Alexandrinenstrasse 134, Revier No. 113, and a police officer came to
my office and accompanied me to a taxi, when I went home.

About a week before, it may be noted, Zink had come to my office and
insisted on my rescinding the order of eviction, and said, “I care
nothing about law; we are now in power, remember that. Do anything
you please, I am not going out of the office until you cancel the
order”. I called the police, and an officer came. Zink said, “I do
not care what you say”. After about ten minutes the officer put him
out.

At two o’clock Tuesday morning, March 7, I was awakened and faced by
two men with pistols, who had come into the house. They were allowed
to enter by the janitress, as they claimed to be “Hilfspolizei”, and
also by my maid. These two men were accompanied by two others in
civilian clothes, the former wearing the brown National Socialist
uniforms. They said, “Here, dress yourselves, quick too”. My wife
asked them to turn about while she dressed, but they refused. She
was compelled to remove her night gown at the point of a revolver
and stand naked before the intruders. When she protested they said,
“Don’t be theatrical”. My wife then wanted to telephone, but they
said, “No, sit down. Do not touch the telephone”, while they kept
their pistols pointed at us all the time. I sat down. One of them
said, “Have you got a fountain pen? You sign that”. I had to sign
the order to the Sheriff cancelling the order of eviction, and had
to sign another letter to the tenant Zink, stating that the order
of eviction was called off. I hesitated to sign and they drew their
revolvers on me, and my wife in terror fell to her knees, and then
I signed. I asked if they had credentials, and they pointed to the
“Hakenkreuz” on their sleeves and said that was their credentials.
They then said, “If you recall that order tomorrow, you will be
dead”. After I signed, they left * * *

Actually, all Nazis used their positions in the Party as a means of enriching themselves. I have already spoken of the bribe to the customs officials and the Foreign Office officials, which Mr. Garbaty was compelled to pay. Another instance of the venality of the Nazi officials was illustrated in the case of Mendelssohn Bartholdy, who owned a house near me and whom I knew well. He was told by Count Heldorf, Chief of Police in Berlin, through his stooge, one Herr Schmidt, that his passport would cost him 250,000 marks. Bartholdy told me the facts and asked me if he should pay. Knowing the Nazi practices and the danger which he ran as a Jew in Germany, I advised him to pay. He did, got his passport and visa, and left Germany. This happened in November, 1938.

I was informed by a personal friend, a Jewish banker in Berlin, Herr Kempner, whom I believed to be qualified to make an accurate estimate, that the total confiscations from Jews in Germany was between seven and eight billion marks.

I had less experience with the manner in which the Nazis operated in industrial firms. However, from the accounts of numerous American businessmen with manufacturing plants in Germany, accounts which agreed with the information which I had with respect to similar activities in German factories, I know that the Nazis used their Party position to obtain authority and power. Many American businessmen told me that they had serious troubles operating their factories because the Nazi officials in the establishment, usually recruited from the workmen, attempted to take over the management themselves, and engaged consistently and ruthlessly in acts of persecution against non-Nazi workmen. Many German firms were actually dominated by fanatical Nazis, usually persons who had had no previous position of importance, such as janitors, timekeepers and the like. Their position in the Nazi hierarchy gave them importance in the enterprise out of all proportion to their standing and position.

[Signed] Raymond H. Geist

Subscribed and sworn to before me William L. Brewster Vice Consul of the United States of America, duly commissioned and qualified, in Mexico, D. F., Mexico, this 28th day of August 1945.

[Signed] William L. Brewster
Vice Consul of the United States of America
Service No. 6684
Tariff No. 38
No fee prescribed.

COPY OF DOCUMENT 1760--PS

United Mexican States }
Mexico Federal District }
Embassy of the United } SS
States of America }

George S. Messersmith, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:

During the period 1930 to the late spring of 1934, I was Consul General of the United States of America in Berlin. During that period and particularly during the years 1933 and until my departure for Austria in the late spring of 1934, the nature of my work brought me into frequent contact with German Government officials. As background for this statement it is pertinent to state that this contact with German Government officials in the highest categories was necessary by me as Consul General, and some of my principal associates, because of the circumstances of the period.

In the period immediately preceding the coming into power of the National Socialists it was necessary for me and some of my principal associates in the Consulate General to have contact with high officials of the German Government because of unsettled state of affairs in Germany due to the uncertain political situation; this involved difficulties for American firms of various kinds which made the intervention of the Consulate General in the line of its regular duty necessary. In addition to this contact with the officials of the Government, as a matter of further duty I had contact with individuals in all parties in Germany in order to keep myself and therefore our Government currently informed with regard to developments in the political picture in Germany. During that period, and before the National Socialists came into power, I therefore had contact of an informed character with persons in the National Socialist Party for the purpose of securing information as to their aims and objectives, but that contact was, before the access to power of that party, with secondary rather than with the first ranking members thereof.

Immediately after the access to power of the National Socialist Government in the beginning of 1933, all sorts of steps of an arbitrary character were taken by the new Government and by its various agencies and dependencies which affected the rights of American citizens and property and in the carrying through of my official duty as Consul General I had the primary responsibility for the protection of American citizens and property. In consequence of this responsibility I had to see frequently almost all of the high ranking members of the German Government with the exception of Hitler and a very large number of officials below the rank of Minister. The nature of my duties was such that a considerable portion of my days had to be spent in visits on such officials to discuss the protection of American interests and property. Some of these secondary officials I had known before the Party came to power, for information purposes.

It is difficult to explain adequately in a statement of this kind the circumstances under which these officials of the Nazi German Government frequently took occasion to talk to me most frankly about matters of general Nazi policy and to discuss frankly and freely the aims and purposes of the Nazi regime. Frequently our conversations were long and difficult because of the matters which I had to present and on which I had to take the firmest stand. Not infrequently at the end of such official conversations they spoke freely and without any reserve with regard to the aims of the regime.

It is the more important to bring this out in this preliminary section of my statement because I did not at any time conceal from any of these Nazi officials my complete lack of sympathy with the course they were pursuing nor did I hesitate to say to them what I considered was the danger of the course which they were pursuing not only for Germany but for Europe and the rest of the world. Their freedom of expression to me was all the more interesting in view of the fact that I never hesitated to assert in the strongest possible way the rights of the United States and of its citizens when they were violated. It requires a knowledge of the circumstances of the time, of the character and psychology of these high Nazis and secondary Nazi officials to be able to appreciate that the fact that I was forthright in my views and did not hesitate to express them and particularly that we stood out so strongly for the rights of our country and our citizens that led them to respect me and my associates and to reveal to me more than they very probably revealed to other foreign representatives. Whatever the reasons may have been, however, the Nazi Government officials, almost without exception from the highest to the lowest with whom I had contact, were on most occasions amazingly frank in their conversation and without any concealment of their aims.

* * * * * * *

[Omitted is a part of this affidavit in which Mr. Messersmith lists the names, and states his impressions of, the following:

1. Hermann Goering
2. General Milch
3. Hjalmar Schacht
4. Hans Frank
5. Wilhelm Frick
6. Count Schwerin von Krosigk
7. Joseph Goebbels
8. Richard Walther Darre
9. Robert Ley
10. Hans Heinrich Lammers
11. Otto Meissner
12. Franz von Papen
13. Walther Funk
14. General Wilhelm Keitel
15. Admiral Eric von Raeder
16. Admiral Karl Doenitz
17. Dr. Bohle
18. Dr. Stuckert
19. Dr. Krupp von Bohlen
20. Dr. Davidson]

In the late spring or early summer of 1934, I cannot recall the exact date, I left my post as Consul General at Berlin to go to Vienna where I remained until the late spring of 1937. During my stay in Austria, I had intimate official and personal contact with the highest officials of the Austrian Government as well as with many of the secondary and lower ranking officials. I had this intimate contact with these officials of the Austrian Government from the very outset due, undoubtedly, to the fact that when I came to Austria it was already well known that I was an outspoken opponent of all that the Nazi Government and leaders stood for. In consequence, even though I was the Minister of a country which was considered in Austria as having no immediate concern in Austria’s foreign relations, I received much information from the many Austrian officials on developments in Austro-German relations and in their relations with other countries in Europe. Among those whom I saw frequently and from whom I obtained information were the following:

President Miklas
Chancellor Dollfuss
Chancellor Schuschnigg
Foreign Minister Berger-Waldenegg
Police President and Minister of Security, Hofrat Skubl.

In addition, I should add that there were both in Berlin and in Vienna a corps of correspondents, many of whom were of outstanding ability and with whom I was in frequent contact.

Finally, I should say that during my stay in Austria I made fairly frequent trips to Berlin and on many of these saw and talked with the same persons whom I had known during my residence there as Consul-General. Thus I maintained my German sources of information as well as acquiring new Austrian ones.

I feel fully qualified, therefore, to speak with authority on the matters which follow in this statement. The specific conversations and events which I recite are, of course, specific facts which I set forth here as facts. As to many of them, I have refreshed my recollection as details from contemporaneous reports and letters which I wrote during this period. The opinions which I offer are, I believe, fully warranted by the sum total of information which I received from all sources.

From the very beginnings of the Nazi Government, I was told by both high and secondary Government officials in Germany that incorporation of Austria into Germany was a political and economic necessity and that this incorporation was going to be accomplished “by whatever means were necessary”. Although I cannot assign definite times and places, I am sure that at various times and places every one of the German officials whom I have listed earlier in this statement told me this with the exception of Schacht, von Krosigk and Krupp von Bohlen. I can assert that it was fully understood by everyone in Germany who had any knowledge whatever of what was going on that Hitler and the Nazi Government were irrevocably committed to this end and the only doubt which ever existed in conversations or statements to me was “how” and “when”.

At the beginnings of the Nazi regime in 1933, Germany was, of course, far too weak to permit any open threats of force against any country, such as the threat which the Nazis made in 1938. Instead it was the avowed and declared policy of the Nazi Government to accomplish the same results which they later accomplished through force through the methods which had proved so successful for them in Germany--obtain a foothold in the cabinet, particularly in the Ministry of the Interior which controlled the police, and then quickly eliminate the opposition elements. During my stay in Austria I was told on any number of occasions by Chancellor Dollfuss, Chancellor Schuschnigg, President Miklas and other high officials of the Austrian Government that the German Government kept up constant and unceasing pressure upon the Austrian Government to agree to the inclusion of a number of Ministers with Nazi orientation. The English and French Ministers in Vienna with whom I was in constant and close contact confirmed this information through statements which they made to me of conversations which they had with high Austrian officials.

In order to compel the Austrian Government to accept their terms the Nazis resorted to almost every conceivable measure, including economic pressure, propaganda, and most important of all, terroristic acts. My information concerning these terroristic outrages came partly from official communiques of the Austrian Government, partly from responsible news sources, and to a very considerable extent from Skubl, the Police President and later Minister of Public Security, whom I saw frequently and knew well. The Austrian secret police under the direction of Skubl, it should be noted, was one of the most efficient in all of Europe.

The outrages were an almost constant occurrence, but there were three distinct periods during which they rose to a peak. During the first two of these periods--in mid-1933, and in early 1934--I was still in Berlin. However, during that period I was told by high Nazi officials in conversation with them that these waves of terror were being instigated and directed by them. I found no concealment in my conversations with high Nazi officials of the fact that they were responsible for these activities in Austria. These admissions were entirely consistent with the Nazi thesis that terror is necessary and must be used to impose the will of the Party not only in Germany but in other countries. I recall specifically that General Milch was one of those who spoke frankly that these outrages in Austria were being directed by the Nazi Party and expressed his concern with respect thereto and his disagreement with this definite policy of the Party.

During the wave of terroristic acts in May and June 1934, I had already assumed my duties as American Minister in Vienna. The bomb outrages during this period were directed primarily at railways, tourist centers, and the Catholic Church, which latter, in the eyes of the Nazis, were one of the strongest organizations opposing them. I recall, however, that these outrages diminished markedly for a few days during the meeting of Hitler and Mussolini in Venice in mid-June 1934. At that time Mussolini was strongly supporting the Austrian Government and was strongly and deeply interested in maintaining Austrian independence and sovereignty and in keeping down Nazi influence and activity in Austria. At that time also Hitler could not afford an open break with Mussolini and undoubtedly agreed to the short cessation of these bomb outrages on the insistence of Mussolini because he, Hitler, wished to achieve as favorable an atmosphere for the meeting between him and Mussolini as possible. The cessation of the bomb outrages during the Hitler-Mussolini conversations was considered by me and by the Austrian authorities and by all observers at that time as an open admission on the part of Hitler and the German Government that the outrages were systematically and completely instigated and controlled from Germany.

While I cannot recall at this time the details of the terroristic acts, they were fully reported in the Legation despatches of the period. These reports were based upon intimate and frequent contact with high Austrian officials and many of the details I received from the then head of the Austrian Police, Dr. Skubl. While there was no doubt whatever that these outrages had been conducted and directed by Germany, there was ample evidence as to the origin of the outrages from the fact that fragments of the bombs collected by the Austrian police showed that they were of German manufacture and had been introduced from Germany into Austria. While I do not recall having seen any of these bomb fragments myself, I recall specifically having been told by high Austrian authorities that they had seen them and that there was no doubt as to the origin of the bombs. A further proof that these outrages were directed from Germany, although in most cases the bombs were actually planted by Austrian Nazis, is found in the fact that the records of the Vienna Police and Courts at the time will show that when some of these Nazis were arrested they declared proudly that they had committed these acts.

At various times I or A. W. Kliefoth, Counselor of the Legation, reported on these outrages because of their significance. Quotations from some of these despatches are as follows:

Trunks containing inflammable material were placed in the
three leading railway stations of Vienna and timed to explode
simultaneously on the evening of May 6. The damage was very slight.
The police charged the Nazis with the Crime.

An official communique, dated May 10, announced that on the previous
evening a bomb was exploded near the Philadelphia Bridge in Vienna,
wounding two persons. The same evening a bomb was exploded in one of
the local beer gardens, at which a picnic of the Heimwehr was being
held, slightly wounding a woman.

Official despatch from Vienna dated May 15, 1934.

During the past week the continuation of the Nazi terrorist
activities in bombing public places and railway lines, with the
object of damaging the Austrian tourist trade, some of which
are described below, was the source of serious concern to the
authorities. This terrorism was carried out according to a well
organized plan, undoubtedly conducted by Nazi agents in Germany. The
explosives used by the Nazis during the past week, according to the
Foreign Office, were all manufactured in Germany and smuggled into
Austria.

In a communique dated May 24, the authorities also admitted a number
of other bomb outrages at Brannau, Bad Ischl and Dorf an der Pram.
While the damage to both life and property was small--no lives
were lost--the Government admitted its inability to cope with the
situation with the existing measures of security.

The authorities further confirmed officially, on May 25, a bomb
explosion on May 23 in the residence of the Archbishop of Salzburg,
which caused considerable damage. At Monag, near Salzburg, on May 23,
a bomb explosion wrecked a flower-kiosk, causing damages amounting
to 10,000 schillings. A nine year old child was severely injured in
Anleiten, near Ried.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated May 29, 1934.

The Nazi terrorist outrages continued during the past week in spite
of the Government’s notification regarding the application throughout
Austria of martial law for crimes of public violence. These crimes,
now punishable by death, include malicious acts against public order,
and damage to the railway, telegraph, telephone and wireless services
of the State.

The new development in the recent outrages was that many of the acts
were directed against the property of the Roman Catholic Church,
which in the eyes of the Nazis was the strongest organization
opposing the Nazi regime.

In addition to the attempted bombing of the Archbishop’s palace in
Salzburg, a few days previously, a bomb was exploded on May 20 in an
annex to the Archbishop’s palace in Feldkirch, which caused minor
damages. The police charged Nazis with the outrages and arrested a
number of suspects. During the night of May 27, a bomb explosion
broke windows in the churches and vicarages of St. Paul in Carinthia.

In Linz, on May 26, a bomb exploded before the entrance of one of the
schools, breaking 44 windows. The school was empty at the time the
outrage was committed. During the same night, an attempt was made to
blow up the electric works at Brannau, causing a temporary suspension
of the electric service.

Other outrages, not reported by the press, included an attempt to
blow up one of the bridges over the Danube in Vienna on May 30, a
bomb explosion in one of the popular cafes, and numerous bombings of
telephone and newspaper kiosks.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated June 4, 1934.

The National Socialist terrorism in Austria, which started slowly
and cautiously several weeks ago, culminated in a heavy and rather
serious outbreak on June 8 to June 11, threatening not only the
peace and security of the country, but the foreign tourist trade, an
exceedingly important item in Austria’s economic life. The attempts
to wreck the railway lines near Vienna and in other parts of Austria,
as well as terrorist outrages in the principal tourist centers,
occupied the attention of the Government above all other matters.
After a number of important cabinet sessions, new measures were
adopted to counteract the terrorism, and the matter was also the
subject of diplomatic conversations between Austria and Germany.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated June 13, 1934.

The outrages in Austria during the week ending June 23, while almost
as numerous as in the week preceding, were less violent in character.
The attacks were directed, as heretofore, against the quarters of
anti-Nazi associations and persons, public utilities, but less
against the railway communications. Additional stores of explosive
materials were uncovered in Vienna and elsewhere.

* * * * * * *

A recent terrorist explosion in the Vienna School of Agronomy caused
damages amounting to about 40,000 schillings. As a result of the Nazi
outrages, the school has been closed for one week.

In an attempted bomb attack on the post office in Bregenz, the
capital of the Province of Vorarlberg, the police seized a supply
of explosives bearing labels of “Sprengstoffwerke Kloster Lechfeld,
G.m.b.H.”, “Dynamit A.G. Hamburg, Alfred Nobel & Co.”, and “Fabrik
Wurzendorf”, explosive factories domiciled in Germany.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated June 25, 1934.

During the week ending June 30 there were less terrorist outrages of
major importance, but the number of small outrages, bomb explosions,
attacks on electric, water, and railway establishments had not
decreased. The principal attacks were directed against Catholic
institutions, ex-National Socialists, and the city of Salzburg. The
purpose in the latter case was to frighten foreign tourists away from
the Summer Music Festivals at Salzburg.

A bomb which exploded in the Roman Catholic vicarage in Kapfenberg,
in the Province of Styria, on June 24, resulted in the death of the
Chaplain, Reverend Franz Eibel. Several other persons were slightly
injured. The death was one of terrorism, although there were several
cases of attacks. Likewise there were attacks on other Church
institutions in different parts of the country.

A series of outrages were reported on June 28 from Salzburg and
adjoining tourist centers. Bombs were exploded in the market place
and elsewhere, and attempts were made to blow up the electric and
railway communications. The outrages were particularly directed at
Salzburg at this time in view of the forthcoming Summer Festivals,
which ordinarily attract thousands of non-German tourists. Similar
attacks were made the same day in the Provinces of Vorarlberg and
Tyrol.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated July 3, 1934.

A series of lesser outrages were reported from all parts of Austria
on Sunday, July 15. A large amount of explosives were stolen from
a shop in Gloggnitz; the director of the institution was fined 600
schillings and sentenced to two weeks imprisonment for negligence in
guarding the supplies. In Unterkirchen, on July 17, a bomb explosion
damaged the local vicarage and the electric works. On July 18 a bomb
explosion in Innsbruck injured one person, whereas in St. Kathrein
a house was damaged. In Vienna on July 18 a public telephone was
damaged, and set on fire. The perpetrator, a National Socialist, was
immediately apprehended by the Police. At Edlach, a summer resort
about 100 kilometers from Vienna, an attempt was made to bomb the
railway. A similar attempt was made in a Tyrolian mountain railway
station.

Official Despatch from Vienna dated July 26, 1934.

In addition to these outrages, the Nazis attempted to bring pressure upon Austria by means of the “Austrian Legion”. This organization, a para-military force of several thousand men, was stationed near the Austrian border in Germany as a constant and direct threat of violent action against Austria. It was without any question sanctioned by the Nazi Government of Germany as it could otherwise not have existed, and it was armed by them. It was made up of Austrian Nazis who had fled from Austria after committing various crimes in Austria and by Austrians in Germany who were attracted by the idle life and pay given by the German authorities.

After the July Putsch, in August 1934, in Vienna I was told by the British Military Attaché in Vienna of a conversation which he had had with the German Military Attaché in Vienna, General Muff. It may be observed here that to my knowledge General Muff was a rather influential person in Germany and one who played a preponderant role in the German Legation in Vienna. General Muff told the British Military Attaché that he had just been in Germany and had spent three days with Hitler at Berchtesgaden, during which time he had several conversations with Hitler. He said then--in August 1934--that the Austrian Legion had not yet been dissolved and that Hitler had talked at length with him about the Legion. General Muff did not deem it worth while to conceal to the British Military Attaché the fact that the Austrian Legion had been armed and that the Nazis had armed it. I saw General Muff later myself and received the same impression as to these facts although he was not as frank and direct in his statements with me as he had been with the British Military Attaché.

The events of the Putsch of July 25, 1934, are too well known for me to repeat them in this statement. I need say here only that there can be no doubt that the Putsch was ordered and organized by the Nazi officials from Germany through their organization in Austria made up of German Nazis and Austrian Nazis. Dr. Rieth, the German Minister in Vienna, was fully familiar with all that was going to happen and that was being planned. The German Legation was located directly across the street from the British Legation and the Austrian secret police kept close watch on the persons who entered the German Legation. The British had their own secret service in Vienna at the time and they also kept a discreet surveillance over people entering the German Legation. I was told by both British and Austrian officials that a number of the men who were later found guilty by the Austrian Courts of having been implicated in the Putsch had frequented the German Legation. In addition, I personally followed very closely the activities of Dr. Rieth and I never doubted on the basis of all my information that Dr. Rieth was in close touch and constant touch with the Nazi agents in Austria; these agents being both German and Austrian. Dr. Rieth could not have been unfamiliar with the Putsch and the details in connection therewith. I recall, too, very definitely from my conversations with the highest officials of the Austrian Government after the Putsch, their informing me that Dr. Rieth had been in touch with von Rintelen, who it had been planned by the Nazis was to succeed Chancellor Dollfuss had the Putsch been successful.

It may be that Dr. Rieth was himself not personally sympathetic with the plans for the Putsch but there is no question that he was fully familiar with all these plans and must have given his assent thereto and connived therein.

As this Putsch was so important and was a definite attempt to overthrow the Austrian Government and resulted in the murder of the Chancellor of Austria, I took occasion to verify at the time for myself various other items of evidence indicating that the Putsch was not only made with the knowledge of the German Government but engineered by it. I found and verified that almost a month before the Putsch, Goebbels told Signor Cerruti, the Italian Ambassador in Berlin, that there would be a Nazi Government in Vienna in a month. On the evening before the Putsch, a pamphlet appeared in the streets of Berlin from which it appeared that the Nazi Government had full knowledge of what was planned the next day in Vienna. An attempt was made by the German authorities in Berlin to suppress this pamphlet and this effort was partly successful but copies of it were available at the time and I recall an officer of our Embassy in Berlin, whose name I cannot specifically recall at this time, informing me that he had seen a copy thereof. Articles also appeared in some of the German papers of July 25, indicating that they had information as to the time that the Putsch was to take place. I will not go into detail as to the character of the evidence but there is no question from the historical record and the facts as known to me from direct knowledge at the time that the Putsch was engineered and directed by the German Government from Berlin and Munich.

For two years following the failure of the July 25 Putsch, the Nazis remained relatively quiet in Austria. Very few terroristic acts occurred during the remainder of 1934 and as I recall in 1935 and most of 1936; this inactivity was in accordance with directives from Berlin as direct evidence to that effect, which came to my knowledge at that time, proved. Early in January, the Austrian Foreign Minister, Berger-Waldenegg, furnished me a document which I considered accurate in all respects and which stated:

“The German Minister here, von Papen, on the occasion of his last
visit to Berlin, was received three times by Chancellor Hitler for
fairly long conversations, and he also took this opportunity to call
on Schacht and von Neurath. In these conversations the following
instructions were given to him:

“During the next two years nothing can be undertaken which will
give Germany external political difficulties. On this ground,
everything must be avoided which could awaken the appearance of
Germany interfering in the internal affairs of Austria. Chancellor
Hitler will, therefore, also for this reason not endeavor to
intervene in the present prevailing difficult crisis in the National
Socialist Party in Austria, although he is convinced that order
could be brought into the Party at once through a word from him.
This word, however, he will, for foreign political reasons, give
all the less, as he is convinced that the for him desirable ends
may be reached also in another way. Naturally, Chancellor Hitler
declared to the German Minister here, this does not indicate any
disinterestedness in the idea of Austria’s independence. Also, before
everything, Germany cannot for the present withdraw Party members
in Austria, and must, therefore, in spite of the very real exchange
difficulties, make every effort to bring help to the persecuted
National Socialist sufferers in Austria. As a result, Minister of
Commerce Schacht finally gave the authorization that from then on
200,000 marks a month were to be set aside for this end (support of
National Socialists in Austria). The control and the supervision of
this monthly sum was to be entrusted to Engineer Reinthaler, who,
through the fact that he alone had control over the money, would
have a definite influence on the Party followers. In this way it
would be possible to end most quickly and most easily the prevailing
difficulties and division in the Austrian National Socialist Party.

“The hope was also expressed to Herr von Papen that the recently
authorized foundation of German ‘Ortsgruppen’ of the National
Socialist Party in Austria (made up of German citizens in Austria)
would be so arranged as not to give the appearance that Germany is
planning to interfere in Austrian internal affairs.

“He was also informed that an effort would be made through the
easing of the Auslandesperre, particularly with reference to the
more westerly Austrian Alps sections, so that to the German-Austrian
Alpenverein (Alps Association) a particular role was to be given. The
easing of the Auslandesperre was naturally only to be accorded to
those who obligated themselves to visit the more westerly Austrian
Alps sections and to go to fixed towns and live in specified hotels
or inns.”

This policy of the Nazis was dictated solely by considerations of expediency. The basic aim of achieving Anschluss remained wholly unchanged. The brutal murder of Dollfuss, the Austrian Chancellor, and the unquestioned direct attack on Austrian sovereignty through the Putsch, directed by the German Government from Germany, had so shocked public opinion in Austria and in Europe that the Nazis could not afford for the time being to take open action.

That the policy of Anschluss remained wholly unchanged was confirmed to me by Franz von Papen when he arrived in Vienna as German Minister. It will be recalled that he accepted this assignment as German Minister even though he knew that he had been marked for execution in the St. Bartholomew’s massacre on June 30, 1934. When, in accordance with protocol, he paid me a visit shortly after his arrival in Vienna, I determined that during this call there would be no reference to anything of importance and I limited the conversation strictly to platitudes which I was able to do as he was calling on me in my office. I deemed it expedient to delay my return call for several weeks in order to make it clear to von Papen that I had no sympathy with and on the other hand was familiar with the objectives of his mission in Austria. When I did call on von Papen in the German Legation, he greeted me with “Now you are in my legation and I can control the conversation”. In the baldest and most cynical manner he then proceeded to tell me that all of Southeastern Europe, to the borders of Turkey, was Germany’s natural hinterland, and that he had been charged with the mission of facilitating German economic and political control over all this region for Germany. He blandly and directly said that getting control of Austria was to be the first step. He definitely stated that he was in Austria to undermine and weaken the Austrian Government and from Vienna to work towards the weakening of the Governments in the other states to the South and South East. He said that he intended to use his reputation as a good Catholic to gain influence with certain Austrians, such as Cardinal Innitzer, towards that end. He said that he was telling me this because the German Government was bound on this objective of getting this control of Southeastern Europe and there was nothing which could stop it and that our own policy and that of France and England was not realistic.

The circumstances were such, as I was calling on him in the German Legation, that I had to listen to what he had to say and of course I was prepared to hear what he had to say although I already knew what his instructions were. I was nevertheless shocked to have him speak so baldly to me and when he finished I got up and told him how shocked I was to hear the accredited representative of a supposedly friendly state to Austria admit that he was proposing to engage in activities to undermine and destroy that Government to which he was accredited. He merely smiled and said, of course this conversation was between us and that he would, of course, not be talking to others so clearly about his objectives. I have gone into this detail with regard to this conversation as it is characteristic of the absolute frankness and directness with which high Nazi officials spoke of their objectives.

Nazi activities, forced underground in this period, were by no means neglected. The Party was greatly weakened for a time as a result of the energetic measures taken against the Putsch and as a result of the public indignation. Reorganization work was soon begun. In October 1934 the Austrian Foreign Minister, Berger-Waldenegg, furnished me the following memorandum, which he told me had been supplied to the Austrian Government by a person who participated in the meeting under reference.

“A meeting of the chiefs of the Austrian National Socialist Party
was held on the 29th and 30th of September, 1934, at Bad Aibling in
Bavaria.

“The meeting occupied itself principally with the reorganization
of the Austrian National Socialist Party and particularly with the
measures to be taken to this end in the Tirol.

“Measures were decided upon as to the means to be used to create
better contact between the party leadership and its members as well
as with respect to new propaganda measures.

“One principal point on the agenda had reference to the preparatory
measures to be taken for taking over the power in Austria. It
was decided to give to all of the Party Headquarters in Austria
instructions preparatory to new Terroristic acts. The necessary
material, however, is nevertheless until new instructions are issued
not to be transported from the German border into Austria, but shall
be kept assembled at appropriate places on the German side of the
entire Austro-German frontier.

“From a report received by the Party chiefs on the situation in
Vienna and upper Styria, it is established that agreements have been
concluded with the Communists and with the Socialists with respect to
a uniform and common procedure.

“The agents of the Party Direction in Germany have received orders in
every Austrian district to prepare lists of all those persons who are
known to actively support the present Government and who are prepared
closely to cooperate with it.

“When the next action against the Government takes place these
persons are to be proceeded against just as brutally as against all
those other persons, without distinction of party, who are known to
be adversaries of National Socialism.

“In a report of the Party leaders for Austria the following
principles have been emphasized:

“A. The taking over of the power in Austria remains the principal
duty of the Austrian National Socialist Party. Austria has for the
German Reich a much greater significance and value than the Saar. The
Austrian problem is the problem. All combat methods are consecrated
by the end which they are to serve.