Part I, page 1565, appointed about 16 Gauleiter as Reich Defense

Commissars, concerning which I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice. Later, under the impact of mounting military reverses and an increasingly strained war economy, more and more important administrative functions were put on a Gau basis. The Party Gaue became the basic defense areas of the Reich, and each Gauleiter became a Reich Defense Commissar by a decree of the Ministerial Council for the Defense of the Reich of 16 November 1942, 1942 _Reichsgesetzblatt_, Part I, page 649, of which I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice. In the course of the war additional functions were entrusted to the Gauleiter, so that at the end, with the exception of certain special matters such as police affairs, almost all phases of the German war economy were co-ordinated and supervised by them. For instance, regional authority over price control was put under the Gauleiter as Reich Defense Commissars, and housing administration was placed under the Gauleiter as Gau Housing Commissars. Toward the end of the war the Gauleiter were charged even with the military and quasi-military tasks. They were made commanders of the Volkssturm in their areas and were entrusted with such important functions as the evacuation of civilian population in the path of the advancing Allied armies as well as measures for the destruction of vital installations.

The structure and organization of the Party Gaue were substantially repeated in the lower levels of the Reich Party organization such as the Kreise, Ortsgruppen, Zellen, and Blocks. Each of these was headed by a political leader who, subject to the Führer principle and the orders of superior political leaders, was a sovereign within his sphere. The Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party was in effect a “hierarchy of descending Caesars.” Each of the subordinate Party levels, such as the Kreise, Ortsgruppen, and so on, was organized into offices, or Ämter, dealing with the various specialized functions of the Party. But the number of such departments and offices diminished as the Party unit dropped in the hierarchy, so that, while the Kreis office contained all or almost all of the offices in the Gau (such as the deputy, the staff office leader, an organization leader, school leader, propaganda leader, press office leader, treasurer, judge of the Party court, inspector, and the like), the Ortsgruppe had less, and the Zellen and Blocks still fewer.

The Kreisleiter was appointed and dismissed by Hitler upon the nomination of the Gauleiter and directly subordinate to the Gauleiter in the Party hierarchy. The Kreis usually consisted of a single county. The Kreisleiter, within the Kreis, had in general the same position, powers, and prerogatives granted the Gauleiter in the Gau. In cities they constituted the very core of Party power and organization. I quote again from Page 17 of Document 1893-PS, Page 17 of the English translation:

“The Kreisleiter carries over-all responsibility towards the Gauleiter within his zone of sovereignty for the political and ideological training and organization of the Political Leaders, the Party members, as well as the population”.

The Ortsgruppenleiter was the local chapter leader. The area of the Ortsgruppenleiter was comprised of one or more communes, or, in a town, a certain district. The Ortsgruppe was composed of a combination of blocks and cells according to local circumstances, and contained up to 1,500 households. The Ortsgruppenleiter also had a staff of office leaders to assist him in the various functional activities of the Party. All other Political Leaders in his area of responsibility were subordinate to and under the direction of the Ortsgruppenleiter. For example, the leaders of the various affiliated organizations of the Party, within his area, such as the German Labor Front and the Nazi organizations for lawyers, students, and civil servants, were all subordinate to the Ortsgruppenleiter. In accordance with the Führerprinzip, the Ortsgruppenleiter, or local chapter leaders, were appointed by the Gauleiter and were directly under and subordinate to the Kreisleiter.

The Party manual provides as follows with reference to the Ortsgruppenleiter, and I quote from Pages 16 and 17 of Document 1893-PS:

“As Hoheitsträger”—bearer of sovereignty—“he is competent for all expressions of the Party will; he is responsible for the political and ideological leadership and organization within his zone of sovereignty.

“The Ortsgruppenleiter carries the over-all responsibility for the political results of all measures initiated by the offices, organizations, and affiliated association of the Party. . . .

“The Ortsgruppenleiter has the right to protest to the Kreisleiter against any measures contrary to the interests of the Party with regard to a united political appearance in public.”

The Zellenleiter was responsible for from four to eight blocks. He was the immediate superior of, and had control and supervision over, the Blockleiter. His mission and duties, according to the Party manual, corresponded to the missions of the Blockleiter. I quote from the last paragraph of Page 15, just one line of that same document: “The missions of the cell-leader correspond to the missions of the block-leader.”

The Blockleiter was the one Party official who was peculiarly in a position to have continuous contact with the German people. The block was the lowest unit in the Party pyramidal organization. The block of the Party comprised 40 to 60 households and was regarded by the Party as the focal point upon which to press the weight of its propaganda. I quote from Pages 13 and 14 of this same document:

“The household is the basic community upon which the block and cell system is built. The household is the organizational focal point of all Germans united in an apartment, and includes roomers, domestic help, _et cetera_. . . . The Blockleiter has jurisdiction over all matters within his zone relating to the Movement, and is fully responsible to the Zellenleiter.”

The Blockleiter, as in the case of other Political Leaders, was charged with planning, disseminating, and developing a receptivity to the policies of the Nazi Party among the population in his area of responsibility. It was also the expressed duty of the Blockleiter to spy on the population. I quote from Pages 14 and 15 of this same document:

“It is the duty of the Blockleiter to find people disseminating damaging rumors and to report them to the Ortsgruppe, so that they may be reported to the respective State authorities.

“The Blockleiter must not only be a preacher and defender of the National Socialist ideology towards the member of the Nation and Party entrusted to his political care, but he must also strive to achieve practical collaboration of the Party members within his block zone. . . .

“The Blockleiter shall continuously remind the Party members of their particular duties towards the people and the state. The Blockleiter keeps a list (card file) about the households. . . . In principle, the Blockleiter will settle his official business verbally, and he will receive messages verbally and pass them on in the same way. Correspondence will only be used in cases of absolute necessity. . . . The Blockleiter conducts National Socialist propaganda from mouth to mouth. He will eventually awaken the understanding of the eternally dissatisfied as regards the frequently misunderstood or wrongly interpreted measures and laws of the National Socialist Government. . . . It is not necessary for him to fall in with complaints and gripes about possibly obvious shortcomings of any kind in order to demonstrate solidarity. . . . A condition to gain the confidence of all people is to maintain absolute secrecy in all matters.”

It will be shown that there were in Germany nearly half a million Blockleiter. Large though this figure may appear, there can be no doubt that these officials were in and of the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party. Though they stood at the broad base of the Party pyramid rather than at its summit, where rested the Reichsleiter, by virtue of this fact they were stationed at close intervals throughout the German civil population.

THE PRESIDENT: I think, Colonel Storey, it would be an assistance to the Tribunal if you could tell us, that is, at some time convenient to yourself, approximately how many there were of each of these ranks in the corps.

COL. STOREY: If Your Honor please, that is the next subject.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

COL. STOREY: It may be doubted that the average German ever looked upon the face of Heinrich Himmler. But the man in the street in Nazi Germany could not have avoided an uneasy acquaintance with the Blockleiter in his own neighborhood. As it is the “cop on the beat” rather than the chief magistrate of the nation who symbolizes law enforcement to the average man and woman, so it was the Blockleiter who represented to the people of Germany the police state of Hitler’s Germany. In fact, as may be inferred from the evidence, the Blockleiter were “little Führers” with real and literal power over the civilians in their domains. As proof of the authority of the Blockleiter to exercise coercion and the threat of force upon the civil population, I quote from Document 2833-PS, which is an excerpt from Page 7 of the magazine entitled _The Face of the Party_, Document 2833-PS. It is just a line of quotation:

“Advice and sometimes also the harsher form of education is employed if the faulty conduct of an individual harms this individual himself, and thus also the community.”

Before I get to the numbers, I wanted to deal with the Hoheitsträger.

THE PRESIDENT: Don’t you think it is time to break off?

COL. STOREY: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Until 2 o’clock.

[_A recess was taken until 1400 hours._]

_Afternoon Session_

COL. STOREY: Your Honors will notice that we have substituted an enlarged chart for the photostatic copy that was introduced in evidence this morning. Another thing I would like to call Your Honors’ attention to is the fact that the other chart, the big one, was dated 1945 and therefore did not show the Defendant Hess because of his flight to England in 1941, and it will be recalled that the Defendant Hess occupied the position before Bormann directly under the Führer in the Party organization.

We now take up the Hoheitsträger. The Hoheitsträger, diverting from the text, is shown on this chart very well; and all of those shown in black blocks constitute the Hoheitsträger, beginning with the Führer and going down the vertical column clear down to the Blockleiter.

Within the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party certain of the political leaders possessed a higher degree of responsibility than others, were vested with special prerogatives, and constituted a distinctive and elite group within the Party hierarchy. Those were the so-called Hoheitsträger, or bearers of sovereignty, who represented the Party within the area of jurisdiction, which is a section of Germany, the so-called “Hoheitsgebiet.” I now quote from Page 9 of the English translation of Document 1893-PS:

“Among the political leaders, the Hoheitsträger assume a special position. Contrary to the other political leaders who have departmental missions . . . the Hoheitsträger themselves are in charge of a geographical sector known as the Hoheitsgebiet”—sectors of sovereignty.

“The Hoheitsträger are:

“The Führer, the Gauleiter, the Kreisleiter, the Ortsgruppenleiter, the Zellenleiter, and the Blockleiter.

“Hoheitsgebiete are:

“The Reich, the Gau, the Kreis, the Ortsgruppe, the Zelle, the Block.

“Within their sector of sovereignty the Hoheitsträger have sovereign political rights. They represent the Party within their sector. The Hoheitsträger supervise all Party offices within their jurisdiction and are responsible for the maintenance of discipline.”

If Your Honors please, that is Page 9 of the English translation, if you find it, of 1893.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

COL. STOREY: “The directors of offices, _et cetera_, and of the affiliated organizations are responsible to their respective Hoheitsträger . . . as regards their special missions. The Hoheitsträger are superior to all political leaders, managers, and so forth, within their sector. As regards personal consideration, Hoheitsträger are endowed with special rights . . . .

“The Hoheitsträger of the Party are not to be administrative officials . . . but are to move in a continuous vital contact with the political leaders of the population within their sector. The Hoheitsträger are responsible for the proper and good supervision of all members of the nation within their sector . . . .

“The Party intends to achieve a state of affairs in which the individual German will find his way to the Party . . . .”

The distinctive character of the Politische Leiter constituting the Hoheitsträger and their existence and operation as an identifiable group are indicated by the publication of a magazine entitled _Der Hoheitsträger_ whose distribution was limited by regulation of the Reich Organization Leader to the Hoheitsträger and certain other designated Politische Leiter. I now refer to Document 2660-PS, which I offer in evidence; and I would like to digress from the published manuscript and call Number 2660-PS Exhibit Number USA-325. I would like to exhibit this book to Your Honors. This is the book itself and it is for the Hoheitsträger, with a very limited distribution, and I quote from the inside cover of this magazine which reads as follows—it is right in the beginning:

“_Der Hoheitsträger_, the contents of which is to be handled confidentially, serves only for the orientation of the competent leaders. It may not be loaned out to other persons.”

Then follows a list of the Hoheitsträger and other political leaders authorized to receive the magazine. The magazine states, in addition, that the following are entitled to receive it—I would like to emphasize the ones to receive it:

“Commandants, unit commanders, and ‘Ordensburg’ members; The Reich, Shock Troop, and Gau speakers of the NSDAP; the Obergruppenführer and Gruppenführer of the SA, the SS, the NSFK”—which is the Flying Corps—“and the NSKK”—the Party Motor Corps—“Obergebietsführer and Gebietsführer of the HJ”—that is the Hitler Jugend.

The fact that this magazine existed, that it derived its name from the commanding officers of the Leadership Corps, that it was distributed to the elite of the Leadership Corps, in other words, that a house bulletin was circulated down the command channels of the Leadership Corps is probative of the fact that the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party was a group or an organization within the meaning of Article 9 of the Charter.

An examination of the contents of the magazine _Der Hoheitsträger_ reveals a continuing concern by the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party in measures and doctrines which were employed throughout the course of the conspiracy charged in the Indictment. I shall not trouble the Tribunal nor encumber the record by offering in evidence exhaustive enumeration of these matters; but it may serve to clarify the plans and policies of the inner elite of the Leadership Corps by indicating that a random sampling of articles published and policies advocated in the various issues of the magazine from February 1937 to October 1938 included the following:

Slanderous anti-Semitic articles, attacks on Catholicism and the Christian religion and the clergy; the need for motorized armament; the urgent need for expanded Lebensraum and colonies; persistent attacks on the League of Nations; the use of the block and cell in achieving favorable Party votes, the intimate association between the Wehrmacht and the political leadership; the racial doctrines of Fascism, the cult of leadership; the role of the Gaue, Ortsgruppen, and Zellen in the expansion of Germany; and related matters all of which constituted elements and doctrinal techniques in the carrying out of the conspiracy charged in the Indictment.

The political leaders were organized according to the leadership principle. I quote from the fourth paragraph of Page 2 of Document 1893-PS, at the bottom of the page, and top of Page 3:

“The basis of the Party organization is the Führer idea. The public is unable to rule itself either directly or indirectly . . . . All political leaders stand as appointed by the Führer and are responsible to him. They possess full authority toward the lower echelons. . . . Only a man who has gone through the school of subordinate functions within the Party has a claim to the higher Führer offices. We can only use ‘Führer’ who have served from the ground up. Any political leader who does not conform to these principles is to be dismissed or to be sent back to the lower offices, as Blockleiter, Zellenleiter, for further training. The political leader is not an office worker but the political deputy of the Führer . . . . With the political leader we are building the political leadership of the State . . . . The type of the political leader is not characterized by the office which he represents. There is no such thing as a political leader of the NSBO, _et cetera_, but there is only the political leader of the NSDAP.”

Each political leader was sworn in yearly. According to the Party manual the wording of the oath was as follows; and I quote from the second paragraph on Page 3, Document 1893-PS:

“I pledge eternal allegiance to Adolf Hitler; I pledge unconditional obedience to him and the Führer appointed by him.”

The _Organization Book of the NSDAP_ also provides, and I quote from Page 3, Paragraph 4, of the same document:

“The political leader is inseparably tied to the ideology and the organization of the NSDAP. His oath only ends with his death or with his expulsion from the National Socialist community.”

Appointment of political leaders:

With respect to the appointment of the political leaders constituting the Leadership Corps of the Party, I quote from Page 4 of the _Organization Book_, which is Document 1893-PS:

“1. The Führer appoints the following political leaders:

“a) Reichsleiter and all political leaders within the Reichsleitung”—Reich Party Directorate—“including women’s leaders; b) Gauleiter, including the political leaders holding offices in the Gauleitung”—Gau Party Directorate—“including Gau women’s leaders; c) Kreisleiter. . . .

“2. The Gauleiter appoints:

“a) The political leaders and women’s leaders within the Gau Party Directorate . . . b) the political leaders and the directors of women’s leagues in the Kreis Party Directorate; c) Ortsgruppenleiter.

“3. The Kreisleiter appoints the political leaders and the directors of the women’s leagues of the Ortsgruppen including the block and cell leaders . . . .”

The power of Hoheitsträger to call upon other Party formations:

The Hoheitsträger among the Leadership Corps were entitled to call upon and utilize the various Party formations as necessary for the execution of the Nazi Party policies.

The Party manual provides, with respect to the power and authority of the Hoheitsträger to requisition the services of the SA—and I quote from Page 11 of this same Document 1893-PS:

“The Hoheitsträger is responsible for the entire political appearance of the Movement within this zone. The SA leader of that zone is tied to the directives of the Hoheitsträger in that respect . . . . The Hoheitsträger is the ranking representative of the Party to include all organizations within his zone. He may requisition the SA located within his zone from the respective SA leader if they are needed for the execution of a political mission. The Hoheitsträger will then assign the mission to the SA . . . . Should the Hoheitsträger need more SA for the execution of a political mission than is locally available, he then applies to the next higher office of sovereignty which, in turn, requests the SA from the SA office in his sector.”

According to the Party manual, the Hoheitsträger had the same authority to call upon the services of the SS and NSKK as they possessed with respect to the SA.

With respect to the authority of the Hoheitsträger to call upon the services of the Hitler Youth (the HJ), the Party manual states, and I quote from Page 11, the last paragraph of that translation:

“The political leader has the right to requisition the HJ”—that is the Hitler Jugend—“in the same manner as the SA for the execution of a political action . . . .

“In appointing leaders of the HJ . . . the office of the HJ must procure the approval of the Hoheitsträger of its zone. This means that the Hoheitsträger can prevent the appointment of leaders unsuited for the leadership of youth. If his approval has not been procured, an appointment may be cancelled if he so requests.”

An example of the use of the Party formations at the call of the Leadership Corps of the Party is provided by the action taken by the Reichsleiter for Party Organization of the National Socialist Party, Dr. Robert Ley, leading to the deliberate dissolution of the Free Trade Unions on 2 May 1933. I quote from Document 392-PS, Exhibit Number USA-326, which is a copy of the directive issued by the Defendant Ley on 21 April 1933, reproduced on Pages 51-52 of the _Social Life in New Germany_ by Professor Müller. In this directive the late Defendant Ley directed the employment of the SA and the SS in the occupation of trade unions and for taking trade union leaders into protective custody. I now quote from Paragraph 6 of Page 1 of Document 392-PS. It is the third and fourth paragraph from the bottom of the page:

“SA as well as SS are to be employed for the occupation of trade union properties and for the taking of personalities, who come into question, into protective custody.

“The Gauleiter is to proceed with his measures on a basis of the closest understanding with the competent regional cell director.”

I also quote from the second paragraph of Page 2 of that same document which reads, quoting:

“The following are to be taken into protective custody: All trade union chairmen, the district secretaries and the branch directors of the ‘Bank for Workers, Employees, and Officials, Incorporated,’ included.”

I now offer in evidence Document 2474-PS, Exhibit Number USA-327, which is a copy of a decree issued by the Defendant Hess as Deputy of the Führer, dated 25 October 1934, which underwrites the authority of the Hoheitsträger with respect to Party formations. I quote from the numbered Paragraphs 1, 5, and 6 of Page 1 of Document 2474-PS which reads as follows—Page 1 of the English translation:

“The political leadership within the Party and its political representation towards all offices, state or others which are outside of the Party, lie solely and exclusively with the Hoheitsträger”—bearers of sovereignty—“which is to say with me, the Gauleiter, Kreisleiter, and Ortsgruppenleiter. . . .

“The departmental workers of the Party organizations, such as Reichsleiter, office directors, _et cetera_, as well as the leaders of the SA, SS, HJ, and the subordinate affiliations, may not enter into binding agreements of a political nature with State and other offices except when so authorized by their Hoheitsträger.

“In places where the territories of the units of the SA, SS, HJ, and the subordinate affiliations do not coincide with the zones of the Hoheitsträger, the Hoheitsträger will give his political directives to the ranking leader of each unit within his zone of sovereignty.”

It was the official policy of the Leadership Corps to establish close and co-operative relations with the Gestapo. The Tribunal will recall that the head of the German Police and SS, Himmler, was a Reichsleiter on the top level of the Leadership Corps. Without offering in evidence a decree issued by the Defendant Bormann as Chief of Staff of the Deputy of the Führer, dated 26 June 1935, I ask the Court to take judicial knowledge; and I quote:

“In order to effect a closer contact between the offices of the Party and its organizations with the Directors of the Secret State Police,”—Gestapo—“the Deputy of the Führer requests that the directors of the Gestapo be invited to attend all the larger official rallies of the Party and its organizations.”

That is from the 1935 edition, Page 143, dated the 26th June 1935, _The Decrees of the Deputy of the Führer_.

With reference to the meetings and conferences among the Hoheitsträger of the Leadership Corps, it is the contention of the Prosecution that the members of the Leadership Corps constituted a distinctive and identifiable group or organization. It is strongly supported by the fact that the various Hoheitsträger were under an absolute obligation to meet and confer periodically, not only with the staff officers of their own staffs, but with the political leaders and staff officers immediately subordinate to them. For example, the Gauleiter was bound to confer with his staff officers (such as his deputy and so forth, which included the school leader, propaganda leader, press leader, his Gau Party judge, and so on) every 8 to 14 days. Furthermore, the Gauleiter was obligated to meet with the various Gauleaders subordinate to him once every 3 months for a 3-day convention for the purpose of discussing and clarifying Nazi Party policies and directives, for hearing basic lectures on Party policy, and for the mutual exchange of information pertinent to the Party’s current program. The Gauleiter was also obligated to meet at least once a month with the leaders of the Party formations and affiliated organizations within his Gau area, such as the leaders of the SA, and SS, Hitler Youth, and others. In support of these statements, I quote from Page 8 of Document 1893-PS. I don’t think it is necessary to read all of that:

“Leader conferences in the district:

“A. District Leaders.”

If Your Honor please, with your permission I will omit the reading of that because it was really summarized in my previous statement. I will quote Subparagraph (d):

“(d) The bearer of sovereignty will meet at least once a month with the leaders of the SA, SS, NSKK, HJ, as well as the RAD and the NSFK who are within the zone, for the purpose of mutual collaboration.”

The _Organization Book_ of the Party imposes a similar requirement of regular and periodical conferences and meetings upon all the other Hoheitsträger, including the Kreisleiter, Ortsgruppenleiter, Zellenleiter, and Blockleiter.

The clear consequence of such regular and obligatory conferences and meetings by all the Hoheitsträger, both with their own staff officers and with the political leaders and staff officers subordinate to them, was that basic Nazi policies and directives issued by Hitler and the leader of the Party Chancellery, the Defendant Bormann, directly through the chain of command of the Hoheitsträger, and functional policies issued by the various Reichsleiter and Reich officeholders down functional and technical channels, were certain to be notified to, received, and understood by the bulk of the membership of the Leadership Corps.

If I may digress from my text and call attention to this chart, you will see the dotted lines connecting down from the Party level, Gau level, to similar offices in the lower level.

Now I next come to the statistics relating to the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party and the evidence relating to the size of the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party. As previously shown, the Leadership Corps comprised the sum of officials of the Nazi Party including, in addition to Hitler and the members of the Reichsleitung, such as the Reichsleiter and the Reich officeholders, a hierarchy of Hoheitsträger, which I have described, as well as the staff officers attached to the Hoheitsträger. I now offer in evidence Document 2958-PS, Exhibit Number USA-325; and this is Issue Number 8, 1939, of the official Leadership Corps organ _Der Hoheitsträger_, similar to the one I exhibited a moment ago, and this is for the year 1939. This shows that there were: 40 Gaue and 1 Foreign Gau, each led by a Gauleiter—that is 41; 808 Kreisleiter; 28,376 Ortsgruppenleiter; 89,378 Zellenleiter; and 463,048 Blockleiter.

However, as shown by the evidence previously introduced, the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party was composed not only of the Hoheitsträger, but also of the staff officers or officeholders attached to the Hoheitsträger. The Gauleiter, for example, was assisted by a deputy Gauleiter, several Gau inspectors, and a staff which was divided into main offices (Hauptämter) and offices (Ämter) including such departments as the Gau staff office, treasury, education office, propaganda office, press office, university teachers, communal policy, and so forth. As previously shown, the staff office structure of the Gau was substantially represented in the lower levels of the Leadership Corps organization such as the Kreise, the Ortsgruppen, and so on. The Kreise and the smaller territorial areas of the Party were also organized into staff offices dealing with the various activities of the Leadership Corps. But, of course, the importance and the number of such staff offices diminished as the unit dropped in the hierarchy; so that, while the Kreisleiter staff contained all or most of the departments mentioned for the Gau, the Ortsgruppe had fewer departments and the lower ones fewer still.

Firm figures have not been found as to the total number of staff officers, as distinguished from the Hoheitsträger or political commanders themselves, included within the Leadership Corps.

With respect to the scope and composition of the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party, the Prosecution adopts the view and respectfully submits to this Tribunal, that in defining the limits of the Leadership Corps, staff officers should only be included down to and including the Kreis. Upon this basis, the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party did constitute the Führer, the members of the Reichsleitung, the five levels of the Hoheitsträger, and the staff officers attached to the 40-odd Gauleiter and the 800 or 900 Kreisleiter. Adopting this definition of the Leadership Corps, it will be seen that the total figure for the membership of that organization, based upon the statistics cited from the basic handbook for Germany, amounts to around 600,000. And by excepting the staff officers of the lower levels, as is provided in the Indictment, and as just defined, and without prejudice to any later individual action against those excepted, we think the figure of around 600,000 is approximately correct.

It is true that this figure is based upon an admittedly limited view of the size of the membership of the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party, for the evidence has shown that the Leadership Corps, in effect, embraced staff officers attached to the subordinate Hoheitsträger; and the inclusion of such staff officers in the estimation of the size of the Leadership Corps, if we had so recommended, would have been considerably enlarged so that the final figure, if we had included staff officers to the Blockleiter, would have been 2,000,000, in round numbers.

MR. FRANCIS BIDDLE (Member for the United States): What reason is there for excluding them?

COL. STOREY: For this reason, Your Honor, a person on the last level of Blockleiter might have called on an individual laborer who might have been on his staff; but he certainly did not have the discretion that a staff leader did, for example, or the Gauleiter, say, as a propaganda man who disseminated information down as well as helped participate in plans and policies of the upper organization.

The subordinate staff officers thus excluded were responsible functionally to the higher staff officers with respect to their particular specialty, such as propaganda, Party organization, and so on, and to their respective Hoheitsträger with respect to discipline and policy control and, as I mentioned, likewise such higher staff officers participated in planning and policy and passed those policies down through technical levels or technical channels as opposed to command channels.

“The Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party joined and participated in the Common Plan or Conspiracy” is the next title.

The program of the Nazi Party, proclaimed by Hitler on 24 February 1920, contained the chief elements of the Nazi plan for domination and conquest. I now quote from Document 1708-PS, which is the _Year Book for 1941_, published by the Party, and edited by the late Robert Ley. This book contains the famous 25 points of the Party which I now offer in evidence as Exhibit Number USA-324. Diverting from the text—I don’t intend to quote these 25 Party objectives, but only refer to a few of them, and I quote from Page 1 of the English translation of Document 1708-PS:

Point 1:

“We demand the unification of all Germans in Greater Germany on the basis of the right of self-determination of peoples.”

Point 2 of that program which I quote demanded unilateral abolition of the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain:

“We demand equality of rights for the German people in respect to the other nations; abrogation of the Peace Treaties of Versailles and St. Germain.”

Point 3:

“We demand land and territory (colonies) for the sustenance of our people and colonization by our surplus population.”

Point 4:

“Only a member of the race can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood without consideration of confession. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race.”

Point 6:

“We demand that every public office, of any sort whatsoever, whether in the Reich, the county, or municipality, be filled by citizens only. We combat the corrupting parliamentary regime, office-holding only according to party inclinations without consideration of character or abilities.”

Point 22—this is from Page 2 of the English translation of Document 1708-PS:

“We demand the abolition of the mercenary troops and the formation of a National Army.”

Back to Page 1—another quotation:

“The program is the political foundation of the NSDAP and accordingly the primary political law of the State. . . .

“All legal precepts are to be applied in the spirit of the Party program.

“Since the taking over of power, the Führer has succeeded in the realization of the essential portions of the Party program from the fundamentals to the details.

“The Party program of the NSDAP was proclaimed on 24 February 1920 by Adolf Hitler at the first large Party gathering in Munich and since that day has remained unaltered. The National Socialist philosophy is summarized in 25 points.”

As previously mentioned, the Party program was binding upon the political leaders and they were under duty to support and carry out that program.

The Party manual states, and I quote again from the middle of Page 1 of Document 1893-PS:

“The Commandments of the National Socialists: The Führer is always right. . . . The program be your dogma; it demands your utter devotion to the Movement. . . . Right is what serves the Movement and thus Germany. . . .”

And on Page 2 of the same document another brief quotation:

“The Leadership Corps is responsible for the complete penetration of the German nation with the National Socialist spirit. . . .”

The oath of the political leaders to Hitler has been previously mentioned. In this connection the Party manual provides, and I quote from the second paragraph on Page 3 of the same document:

“The political leader is inseparably tied to the ideology and the organization of the NSDAP. His oath only ends with his death or with his expulsion from the National Socialist community.”

While the leadership principle assured the binding nature of Hitler’s statements, program, and policies upon the entire Party and the Leadership Corps thereof, the leadership principle also established the full responsibility of the individual political leader within the province and jurisdiction of his office or position.

The leadership principle applies not only to Hitler as the supreme leader but also to the political leaders under him and thus permeated the entire Leadership Corps. I quote from the middle of Page 2 of Document 1893-PS:

“The basis of the Party organization is the Führer idea. . . .

“All political leaders stand as appointed by the Führer and are responsible to him. They possess full authority toward the lower echelons. . . .”

The various Hoheitsträger of the Leadership Corps were, in their respective areas, themselves Führer. I quote from the third paragraph of Page 9 of this same document:

“Within their sector of sovereignty, the Hoheitsträger have sovereign political rights. . . . They are responsible for the entire political situation within their sector.”

I again refer to and quote from Document 1814-PS, Exhibit Number USA-328, which is the Party book. It is just a one-sentence quotation, and it states: “The Party is an Order of ‘Führer.’”

The subjugation of the entire membership of the Leadership Corps to the fiat of the leadership principle is clearly shown in the following passage from the Party manual; it is this same document on Page 3:

“A solid anchorage for all the organizations within the Party structure is provided and a firm connection with the sovereign leaders of the NSDAP is created in accordance with the leadership principle.”

Next is the subject, “The Nazi Party, directed by the Leadership Corps, dominated and controlled the German State and Government.”

The trial brief dealing with the criminality of the Reich Cabinet sets forth the evidence as to the identity of various ministers comprising the Cabinet, and I shall not deal with that subject. The presence of the Reichsleiter and other prominent members of the Leadership Corps in the Cabinet facilitated the domination of the Cabinet by the Nazi Party and the Leadership Corps.

And I omit the next paragraph down to the law of July 14, 1933.

A law of 14 July 1933 outlawed and forbade the formation of any political parties other than the Nazi Party and made offenses against this a punishable crime, thereby establishing the one-party state and rendering the Leadership Corps immune from the opposition of organized political groups. I now quote from Document 1388-PS, that being the English translation of the “Law against the Formation of New Political Parties” stated in _Reichsgesetzblatt_, 1933, Part I, Page 479; and I quote the first two articles of this law, which read as follows:

“The National Socialist German Workers’ Party constitutes the only political party in Germany. Whoever undertakes to maintain the organizational structure of another political party or to form a new political party will be punished with penal servitude up to 3 years or with imprisonment of from 6 months to 3 years, if the deed is not subject to a greater penalty according to other regulations.”

I will skip the next paragraph.

I now quote from Document 1398-PS, which is the English translation of “Law to Supplement the Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service,” dated 20 July 1933—1933 _Reichsgesetzblatt_, Part I, Page 518.

On 13 October 1933 “A Law to Guarantee Public Peace” was enacted which provided, _inter alia_, that the death penalty or other severe punishment should be imposed upon any person who “undertakes to kill . . . a member of the SA or the SS, a trustee or agent of the NSDAP . . . out of political motives or on account of their official activity.”

THE PRESIDENT: Where is that you were reading, 1398-PS?

COL. STOREY: Yes, Sir; 1398-PS. I am in error, Sir, it is 1394-PS just previous.

THE PRESIDENT: Which article are you reading?

COL. STOREY: I am afraid I don’t have the reference, but here is the quotation, I think it is on that one page. “A Law to Guarantee Public Peace,” and then it has to do—it is Article 2, I believe—Paragraph 2, Article 1.

I next refer to Document 1395-PS, which is the English translation of the Law on Security and the Unity of Party and State of 1 December 1933, and it was enacted “to secure the unity of Party and state.” This law provided that the Nazi Party was the pillar of the German State and was linked to it indissolubly; it also made the Deputy of the Führer (then Hess) and the Chief of Staff of the SA (then Röhm) members of the Reich Cabinet. I quote:

“After the victory of the National Socialist revolution the National Socialistic German Labor Party is the bearer of the concept of the German State and is inseparably the State. It will be a part of the public law. Its organization will be determined by the Führer. . . .

“The Deputy of the Führer and the Chief of Staff of the SA will become members of the Reich Government in order to insure close co-operation of the offices of the Party and SA with the public authorities.”

This law was a basic measure in enthroning the Leadership Corps in a position of supreme political power in Germany. For it laid down that the Party, directed by the Leadership Corps, was the embodiment of the State and in fact was the State. Moreover, this law made both the Führer’s Deputy and the Chief of Staff of the SA, which was a Party formation subject to the call of the Hoheitsträger, Cabinet members, thus further solidifying the leadership control of the Cabinet. The dominant position of the Leadership Corps is further revealed by the provision that the Reich Chancellor would issue the carrying-out regulations of this law in his capacity as Führer of the Nazi Party. The fact that Hitler, as Führer of the Leadership Corps, could promulgate rules which would have statutory force and be published in the _Reichsgesetzblatt_, the proper compilation for State enactments, is but a further reflection of the reality of the Party’s domination of the German State.

I now refer to Document 2775-PS, which is Exhibit Number USA-330, which is the English translation of certain extracts from Hitler’s speeches to the 1934 and 1935 Party Congress at Nuremberg. I quote from the second extract in Document 2775-PS, which is a declaration by Hitler to the 1934 Party Congress and which reads—just one sentence, “It is not the State which gives orders to us, it is we who give orders to the State.”

Upon the evidence, that categorical statement of the Führer of the Leadership Corps, affirming the dominance of the Party over the State, cannot be refuted.

On the 30th of June 1934 Hitler, as head of the Nazi Party, directed the massacre of hundreds of SA men and other political opponents. Hitler sought to justify these mass murders by declaring to the Reichstag that “at that hour I was responsible for the fate of the German nation and the supreme judge of the German people.” The evidence relating to these events will be presented at a later stage in connection with the case against the SA.

On the 3rd of July 1934 the Cabinet issued a decree describing the murders and the massacre of 30 June 1934, in effect, as legitimate self-defense by the State. By this law the Reich Cabinet moved to make themselves accessories after the fact of these murders. The domination by the Party, however, makes the Cabinet’s characterization of these criminal acts by Hitler and his top Party leaders as state measures consistent with political reality. I refer now to Document 2057-PS, which is the English translation of the “Law Relating to the National Emergency Defense Measures” of 3 July 1934, in the _Reichsgesetzblatt_ of that year, Part I, Page 529, and I quote the single article of that law, which reads as follows—this still has reference to the blood purge:

“The measures taken on 30 June and 1 and 2 July 1934 to counteract attempts at treason and high treason shall be considered as national emergency defense.”

On 12 July 1934 there was enacted a law defining the function of the Academy for German Law. I refer to Document 1391-PS, which is an English translation of the statute of the Academy for German Law, 12 July 1934, 1934 _Reichsgesetzblatt_, Part I, Pages 605 and 606:

“In constant, close connection with the agencies competent for legislation, it”—the academy—“shall further the realization of the National Socialist program in the realm of the law.”

On 30 January 1933, Hitler, the Leader of the Nazi Party and Führer of the Leadership Corps, was appointed Chancellor of the Reich. When President Von Hindenburg died in 1934, the Führer amalgamated into his person the offices of Chancellor and Reich President. I refer to Document 2003-PS, which establishes that fact, and I do not quote. It is _Reichsgesetzblatt_ 1934, Part I, Page 747.

By decree of the 20th of December 1934 Party uniforms and institutions were granted the same protection as those of the State. This law was entitled, “Law Concerning Treacherous Acts against the State and Party and for the Protection of Party Uniforms.” This law imposed heavy penalties upon any person making false statements injuring the welfare or prestige of the Nazi Party or its agencies. It authorized the imprisonment of persons making or circulating malicious or baiting statements against leading personalities of the Nazi Party, and it provided punishment by forced labor for the unauthorized wearing of Party uniforms or symbols. I again refer to Document 1393-PS, not quoting, which is the English translation and gives the authority.

Finally, by the law of 15 September 1934 the swastika flag of the Party was made the official flag of the Reich. I refer to Document 2079-PS, which is the English translation of the Reich Flag Law found in _Reichsgesetzblatt_ 1935, Part I, Page 1145. Just this one sentence—the quotation, “The Reich and national flag is the swastika flag.”

The swastika was the flag and symbol of the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party. By law it was made the flag of the State; a recognition that the Party and its corps of political leaders were the sovereign powers in Germany.

On 23 April 1936 a law was enacted granting amnesty for crimes which the offender had committed “in his eagerness to fight for the National Socialist ideals.” I cite Document 1386-PS, which is the English translation of the “Law Concerning Amnesty,” _Reichsgesetzblatt_ 1936,