Warning: include(breadcrumbs.htm): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/hhpcom/public/nca/nca-v06/3392-PS.php on line 15
Warning: include(): Failed opening 'breadcrumbs.htm' for inclusion (include_path='.:/opt/sp/php7.4/lib/php') in /srv/users/serverpilot/apps/hhpcom/public/nca/nca-v06/3392-PS.php on line 15
Translation of document 3392-PS
[Letter from Seyss-Inquart to Keppler] Dr.S/K 3 Sept 1937 Require! My Dear Mr. Keppler! It is appropriate in my opinion that you, my dear Mr. Keppler, should remain well informed about details arising from between the action taken by me and the Teinfaltstrasse. In this respect I am keeping the result of the discussion at Mondsee in mind, and I am taking the thoughts of your last communication to heart. I therefore do not take any stand in regard to these individual incidents and above all I avoid any one reaction, insofar as I do not request Dr. Jury to initiate a corresponding clarification. I take it upon myself to transmit the edition of the “Austrian Observer” [Oesterreichischen Beobachters] of August as an enclosure, and draw your attention to the leading article “Here and There” whose contents probably are intended to be only personal and not objective, anymore. I refer to the communication-Hitler “Mein Kampf” permitted!--and believe that I will not have to add anything here, since you are acquainted with the individual incidents which have occurred on the Saturday in question. Finally I turn back to the report “Law for the Protection of Order” [Ordnungsschutzgesetz]. In this case the matter stands as follows. Minister Glaise has attempted to incorporate the emergency decrees [Not verordnungen] into a useful system ever since the first moment of his taking office, and to decrease them to a reasonable extent. When he came with his suggestion, Neustaedter-Stuermer, the comrade-in-arms of the Teinfaltstrasse, had a draft prepared by the Chief Management [Generaldirektion], which can only be considered as an aggravation of the conditions at that time, and which in the meantime has been over-come by the Law for the “Protection of Order” [Ordnungsschutzgesetz]. Minister Glaise, then had in turn, a counter-draft prepared by Dr. Mannlicher. In view of the resistance on the part of the Chief Management [Generaldirektion], the chances of the latter’s success were little. In early April, when the Federal Chancellor [Bundeskanzler] was negotiating with me about the Bureau [Referat], I on my part made the condition that the draft by Mannlicher was to become the basis of the innovation. The negotiations took place on this basis. When finally nothing came of the Bureau [Referat] and the exchange of ministers took place, the Chief Management [Generaldirektion] again introduced its own suggestion, which did not contain anything new except the lessening of the extent of punishment and the introduction of the right of appeal. Dr. Mannlicher was full of despair because of the continuation of this action. In a renewed conference with the Federal Chancellor [Bundeskanzler] I insisted that the proposition by Mannlicher be accepted finally as the sole basis of the innovation, and that the latter be drawn to a close. Further negotiations on this basis led to an agreement between Minister Glaise, [and] Dr. Skubl under consultation of Dr. Mannlicher. After that I talked to the latter, who remarked that it would be [Page 111] practical to add some further additions to the draft, which however, in view of the final conversation was considered hopeless by him. I now addressed a communication to the Federal Chancellor [Bundeskanzler], requesting that four (4) more additions to the draft which had already been discussed and in particular concerning the possibilities of appeal and complaints to the Federal Court [Bundesgericht] in cases of detention over a period of 3 months, the preservation of the secrecy of letters under normal conditions [Ordnungszustand], the rescission of the same under more acute conditions only in the course of criminal-procedure, ect. The Federal Chancellor [Bunderkanzler] took up this suggestion, read my letter in the Council of Ministers [Ministerrat] and these additions were incorporated into the “Law for the Protection of Order” [Ordnungsschutzgesetz]. After the Welser incidents on the occasion of the conference at St. Gilgen, influences which called for the postponement of the publication of the “Law for the Protection of Order” until autumn, were predominant and the chancellor promised me to announce the law on approximately the 20 August 1937. And this actually happened. My cooperation in the re-admittance of the book "Mein Kampf” and in the legislation of the “Law for the Protection of Order” is known to the Teinfaltstrasse: even though not in all its details. I cannot suppose that a responsibility for the incorrect contents of the “Observer” [Beobachter] should be refuted since in this case it would already have to deal with the defects of character mentioned by you. In the meantime an order has been transmitted to Ing. Reinthaller to the effect, that the latter was not to call any meetings of the peasant- leaders without agreement of the political leadership and without consulting the same, and furthermore that the economic machine which is at the peasantry’s disposal, wand which in this case only deals with privately-owned economic institutions, as for example sales stores, ect., was to route its correspondence through official channels, only, in this case by way of the Bureau of the political organization or the Teinfaltstrasse. My stand in this matter is clear. In the sense of keeping the action separate, orders are out of question in order to avoid self-reproach of having played two sides. I favor “sounding out” the situation [Fuehlungnahme] in order to remove misunderstandings if possible, and have recommended corresponding agreement on point 1 with Ing. Reinthaller. However, it is in no way possible to invite officials of the political leadership to [Page 112] these conferences. That would be equal to the end of all these actions. The request to route all correspondence of privately-owned economic institutions through the required channels is essentially and politically impossible. This matter happens to be somewhat urgent. Leaflets are being circulated here with a strong stand against Ing. Reinthaller. I therefore ask you, my dear Mr. Keppler, for your point of view, and that, perhaps, in the nature of a telegram to Ing. Reinthaller, in which you acknowledge these statements and give expression to your consent. One party-exclusion, which has already taken place is to be followed by others, whereby, in my opinion a separation line will be drawn with just that result, which causes the most worry to the Teinfaltstrasse. In this connection I want to touch on the question of the “Vienna Latest News” [Wiener Neuesten Nachrichten]. I am not certain if the order in the last “Austrian Observer” [Oesterreichischen Beobachter] will have the intended success, but I understand that the paper’s situation is extraordinarily difficult. It seems to have run out of money. Instead the commissioner and an acting Editor-in-chief are still there. At the time I have discussed in detail the question of the “Vienna Latest News” [Wiener Neuesten Nachrichten] in a conversation with Secretary of State [Staatsekretaer] Zernatte and found him willing in principle to join this paper to my action. It would now be necessary to receive corresponding information from the source acquainted with the financial condition [Ossa]. I suggest that the man considered for this be designated to me, as well as the possibilities of a discussion and I shall see to it that a corresponding trusted person will appear at these talks. I request that the before-mentioned be acknowledged, and sign, remaining respectively, with the German salute, obediently, P.S. Just now Ing. Reinthaller has informed me of orders and directives, which have just reached him. The bearer of this will take it upon himself to transmit them orally. In view of these circumstances the continuation of the action appears hardly possible, without leading to very severe conflicts. I can take the responsibility for these only if the line discusses at Salzburg and Mondsee is clear and safe-guarded. I therefore leave it to your consideration, if the moment of your personal intervention has not arrived. D.O. Mr. Wilhelm Keppler, Esq. Berlin W. 8 Behrenstrasse Nr 39 a.