Adolf Hitler was put on trial for his role in the Munich Putsch. It gave him a platform from which he could deliver his message and have it widely reported. His use of the courtroom is quite fascinating. Given license to extol his views, he did so eloquently and as a result, gained much media attention. The hype surrounding Hitler’s trial was short-lived. He was sentenced to serve a prison sentence and the media soon moved on to other pressing matters.
Quote from Hitler’s rhetoric in his trial for his role in the Munich Putsch
Mr Public Prosecutor! You emphasize in the indictment that we had to wait with clenched teeth until the seed ripened. Well, we did wait and when the man came, we cried: ‘The seed is ripe, the hour has come.’ Only then, after long hesitation, did I put myself forward. I demanded for myself the leadership in the political struggle; and secondly, I demanded that the leadership of the organization for which we all longed and for which you inwardly long just as much should go to the hero who, in the eyes of the whole of German youth, is called to it. The witness Seisser declared cynically that we had to have Ludendorff so that the Reichswehr would not shoot. Is that a crime? Was it treason that I said to Lossow, ‘The way you are beginning it must come to a conflict; as I see it, there need be no conflict’? [ . . . ]
What did we want on the evening of 8 November? All these gentlemen wanted a Directory in the Reich. If one has striven for something in the Reich, one cannot condemn it in Bavaria. The Directory already existed in Bavaria, it consisted of Messrs Kahr, Lossow and Seisser. We no longer knew anything of a legal government, we only feared that there might be scruples over the final decision.
I am no monarchist, but ultimately a Republican. Pöhner is a monarchist, Ludendorff is devoted to the House of Hohenzollern [Prussia-Germany]. Despite our different attitudes we all stood together. The fate of Germany does not lie in the choice between a Republic or a Monarchy, but in the content of the Republic and the Monarchy. What I am contending against is not the form of a state as such, but its ignominious content. We wanted to create in Germany the precondition which alone will make it possible for the iron grip of our enemies to be removed from us. We wanted to create order in the state, throw out the drones, take up the fight against international stock exchange slavery, against our whole economy being cornered by trusts, against the politicizing of the trade unions, and above all, for the highest honorable duty which we, as Germans, know should be once more introduced—the duty of bearing arms, military service. And now I ask you: Is what we wanted high treason? [ . . . ]
Now people say: But His Excellency von Kahr, von Lossow and von Seisser did not want the events of the evening of 8 November. The bill of indictment says that we pushed these gentlemen into an embarrassing situation. But it was through these gentlemen that we ourselves had got into an embarrassing situation; they had pushed us into it. Herr von Kahr should have said honorably: Herr Hitler, we understand something different by a coup d’état, we mean something different by a march on Berlin. He had a duty to say to us: In what we are doing here we mean something different from what you think. He did not say that, and the consequences should be borne solely by these three gentlemen. [ . . . ]
Source of original German text: Der Hitler-Prozeß vor dem Volksgericht in München. Part Two. Munich, 1924
Related Links
Source Material for Classroom Use – see all of our Source Banks here – Germany 1919-39 Source Material
Sources: The Weimar Republic 1918–29 – Sources: Hitler’s rise to power, 1919–33 – Sources: Nazi control and dictatorship, 1933–39 – Sources: Life in Nazi Germany, 1933–39
[products tag=”germany 1919-39″]
Weimar and Nazi Germany – Rise of the Nazi Party – Appeasement: Source Material – Source Analysis Lesson: Nazi Methods of Control – Revision Guide, Weimar and Nazi Germany