The Memoirs of Ernst Röhm

Ernst Röhm

• Publisher: Frontline Books
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN: 9781848325999
• eBook ISBN: 9781783032501
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Military Biographies
• Index: History

The Nazi Party leader behind Hitler's violent rise to power offers a candid chronicle of his life and the early days of National Socialism in Germany.
 
Ernst Röhm was one of the key architects behind the rise of the Nazi Party. From 1919 until 1923, following the defeat of Germany in the First World War, Röhm served in the Freikorps and then National Socialist German Workers' Party—the Nazi Party. He served as the party's patron, promoter, and watchdog. With Adolf Hitler, Röhm cofounded the SA, the thuggish workforce behind Nazi political activity. Many believe that Hitler's rise to power would not have happened without Röhm's organizational skill, authority, and influence.
 
Though Röhm took part in the Beer Hall Putsch in 1923, he became disillusioned with the Nazi Party and resigned in 1925. Röhm wrote his memoirs in 1928—entitled A Traitor's Story—the year he both resumed working for the Nazis and left to serve in the Bolivian army. In his candid recounting of his experiences, he wrote "Hitler and I were linked by ties of sincere friendship." Little did Röhm know that their "friendship" would end with Hitler ordering his execution during the Night of the Long Knives.

Chapter One

In the Time of the Revolutionary Councils

On 2 January 1919 I took up duty as brigade major to 11th Infantry Brigade in my old garrison town of Ingolstadt. My commander, General Sämmer, had led 10th Bavarian Reserve Infantry Regiment for much of the war, had endured the Revolution with honour, and was not in the least disposed to forgive anything in that direction. Acting officer Preusser was 11th Brigade clerk. I saw that he did not feel particularly happy about his job. Because I was anxious at that time to handle all matters personally, there was little left over for him to do. He could see as I did that stupid and incompetent blatherers and bawlers were in decisive positions throwing their weight around and so when he made it known that he could have led the brigade himself, I did not take his opinion the wrong way.

We had our soldiers’ soviet, or council, of course. It consisted of three on the whole quite reasonable individuals. One of them, an NCO who had returned from the field with his regiment, even made some really worthwhile changes. From the outset, however, I was strongly opposed to the encroachment of the soldiers’ councils. Army High Command, which since Ludendorff’s departure lacked inner strength and had not been well advised by co-opted officers, had crippled the Army by admitting soldiers’ councils into its infrastructure. Workers’ and soldiers’ councils after the Russian – Jewish model had been set up under the flag of the ‘Revolution’ both in Germany proper and the Etappe – the area between the German border and the front. In itself this was not particularly significant for they could have been wiped out by the returning Army. What I have never been able to understand, much less approve, was the decision of the supreme commander of the army in the field to allow the setting up of soldiers’ councils at the front itself, thus legitimizing them for the first time. It pulled the rug from under all those who had remained true to the colours – about 75 per cent of those at the front. One can only speculate on how things might have developed without this inglorious surrender to the Red mob.

‘Level-headed’ people will undoubtedly praise this measure even now, just as the Reds still thank them for it today [1928], for it made possible their domination and mastery, and consolidated it. The soldiers’ councils elected by the troops in the field were often made up of brave men. As these men returned from the front, however, rabble-rousers soon weeded them out from the councils in Germany. The soldiers’ councils of front troops mostly found the business no fun and they were therefore happy to leave affairs in the hands of the homeland councils. A proof that the soviet councils in Germany were not chosen by the soldiers but simply imposed was demonstrated by the preponderance of their membership being those whose social feelings for the troops had worn thin, or who were even known for their mistreatment of subordinates. Also astonishing was the number of officers who discovered that their hearts were Red after 18 November 1918. My mention of the name Deimling in this regard will probably be sufficient.

After the councils went too far, a general regulation was issued by the minister for military affairs, Rosshaupter, and the provincial state soldiers’ council leader, Sauber, for the autonomous state of Bavaria. This ‘interim decree’ dated 13 December 1918, which was drafted by Lieutenant Colonel Schemmel if I am rightly informed, laid down with ministerial exactitude all the councils’ tasks, rights, dues payable, membership and election procedures. Even though many soldiers’ councils ignored this decree, on the whole it was very useful. In any case I welcomed it as practical and advisable, and am grateful to its author for making it possible for me to combat the soldiers’ councils with their own weapons, so to speak. And in Ingolstadt there was plenty of opportunity to take them on.

This was not needed, however, with the soldiers’ council of 11th Brigade headquarters which limited itself to reading through the various edicts and counter-signing them, and in no way interfered with our military duties. For their special area of expertise I appointed them to investigate and resolve complaints by NCOs and men. They would spend long hours pondering in the main office before usually asking for my advice. When the knock came at my door I knew in advance that I would have to take the bull by the horns. I was quite happy to do so, because in these matters I was a friend of good order and discipline.

In general nobody liked coming to my office. One day a member of the garrison soldiers’ council complained to Acting officer Preusser about me. I was a provocateur at Ingolstadt. When I went riding I wore trousers with the General Staff red stripe. I even had the effrontery to put on the blue greatcoat and wear the black – white – red cockade on my cap. All of this had been done away with, etc., etc. Preusser told him calmly that I was in my office and he should go in and argue it out with me himself. The Herr Councillor preferred not to do that and withdrew.

Privately I had great sympathy with the garrison soldiers’ council. It was a community of all shades of Red and even redder fighters for the Homeland, and the most radical of them were the dearest to me. Without question this soldiers’ council was the bearer of arms in Ingolstadt. The town had a citadel commander, but so harmonious was his relationship with them that it was rare for them to do anything which did not meet with his approval. It may well be that many ‘peace-loving’ circles considered this a great service, for what the general wanted was what he achieved: Ingolstadt was spared major disturbances. Precisely for that reason, however, the revolution not only succeeded, but it still exists today and has been consolidated because those in responsible positions and with power went along with the revolutionaries and made their reign easy ‘in the interests of the cause of peace’ and ‘to avoid something worse’.

In this generalization I accuse the general as a type and not as a person. No one can deny that he will point to the higher-ups and dignitaries whose applause he milked in cold print. I do not envy him his recognition. Obviously it is another question whether the conduct of this senior officer improved or harmed the standing of the German officer as a whole. I have my own view, based on a string of occurrences, of which I cite one.

Before the elections in January 1919 there was a demonstration, ‘for peace and order’ naturally, but which was really a propaganda piece glorifying the Revolution. The procession followed the red flag. The assembly formed up behind Spreti, an aristocrat, and with the city commandant at its head marched through the city. The commandant had ordered all officers to take part, but none did. With some young officers I looked on in shame from the windows of our old officers’ mess building, and watched with disgust the passing general who, never having seen a shot fired in anger, had accepted from HM the Kaiser the Iron Cross Second Class.

As much as the general socialized almost on a friendly basis with the soldiers’ councils, and forgot the gulf between officers and men, he made an exception in his own case, where he stood on his rights to have his own high rank recognized. These circles rejected his conduct almost unanimously and openly.

Unfortunately the sense of unity amongst officers, and particularly those of the Reserve, was not so pronounced that they felt able to close ranks. I remain convinced today, considering how things were in Ingolstadt – and in other places outside Munich it will have been the same – that had the officers got together as an armed company they could have taken the city back. The support for it was available aplenty: in Ingolstadt there were many fine young men, and amongst the NCOs and common soldiers were enough loyal and right-thinking men. The chairmen of the Ingolstadt Officers’ Union, Lieutenants Lehmann and Beckert from Nuremberg, were without doubt able men, all for having a go, but the majority of the others were tired out and apathetic. I tried various ideas with some friends, especially Captain Regler, 13th Infantry Regiment, and Captain Schreyer and Lieutenant Bergen of my own regiment, but we achieved nothing.

I shared a very comfortable bachelor apartment with Captain Regler. With reference to the political situation our landlady considered it her proletarian duty to fleece us for as much rent as she thought we would tolerate, but that aside we spent many happy hours there. In the evenings many regimental comrades would call by. Facing our flat was the fine property owned by Major Hans Georg Hofmann. How he had managed to escape from British captivity was not known. Scarcely had he set foot back in Ingolstadt than he threw himself into political activity. He spoke at all election meetings, including those of the Socialists, described his experiences in captivity and called upon everybody to think and act only in the interests of the Fatherland. Naturally at the Officers’ Union he advocated the most active course. I still recall his comment following an officers’ meeting on how to destroy the councils: ‘We shall plaster the streets with the heads of these people.’ A few months later the Spartacists of Hamburg had the misfortune to know this unfriendly gentleman at closer quarters.

In February 1919 I authored various fly-bills including this one:

‘Quousque tandem Catilina?’ (How Much Longer?)

If any nation state at all had war guilt – I am of the opinion that war had to come, rather as a cleansing storm follows oppressive sultriness – only the most thorough examination and comparison of all state archives by experts, which will reserved for a later, more impartial epoch, will give us the clue. Pulling a few files out of context can at best provide a false and distorted picture. Everybody knows that, except Herr Kurt Eisner, Minister-President of Bavaria.

It is a peculiarity of Germany that its politicians dirty their own nest. Eisner, a foreigner, reserved to himself the right to proclaim and admit before the world Germany’s alleged war guilt. His unfounded allegation was denounced immediately by official and non-official sources, but the enemy seized upon it, and now the entire German people has to suffer heavier punishment and atonement as a result. Moreover, this ‘idealist in ruler’s garb’ expected the sugar loaf of forgiving goodwill instead of a good whipping!

Though Germany succumbed against a world of enemies after many years of war, she did not lose her honour. It was her misfortune to place in office leaders who betrayed her by their contempt for her. What the hero of the Revolution can seldom do from the moment he seizes power is leap from revolutionary to statesman. Since Eisner triumphed with the ‘Revolution’, he has not ceased fighting against, and tearing down, the old order, striking out around himself, as it were. He has remained a revolutionary; he has built nothing as statesman, achieved nothing, and for that reason his fate is sealed. He may hold out a few more days, but his fall is unavoidable.

At that time I was much encouraged by the courageous writings of Wulle, the editor of the Deutsche Zeitung. In February 1919 in Germany it was not easy to be a Nationalist. Of the Bavarian newspapers, only the Bayerischer Kurier had a manly approach. Later I forgave it much because of its boldness in that difficult time. In the end it went down once its vituperative attacks on anything völkisch¹ became more unbridled.

The first edition of Rote Hand, published by a lawyer called Kohl, caused a sensation by the sarcastic manner in which the farce of the so-called Revolution and its leaders was exposed.

One day Eisner honoured Ingolstadt with his presence and in the pioneers’ barracks launched into a provocative speech against military officers. Enraged, I proceeded in uniform, riding whip in hand, to the garrison soldiers’ council, the lions’ den. I demanded that it protect officers against these slanders by Eisner. The room in which the soldiers’ councils ‘governed’ was crammed with Red soldiers. At once one of them took my side, loudly supported by the others, saying ‘Look, he is right, one can see that he was at the front. I won’t stand for it.’ I had got my point across. The soldiers’ council decided to send a deputation to Minister Rosshaupter in Munich next day to express their disapproval at Eisner’s utterances. So far as I know they kept their promise.

A moving memorial ceremony was the funeral service held in the cathedral for the queen. All officers of the 10th König Infantry Regiment present in the district attended in full uniform and steel helmet, as did very many other NCOs and men and a large proportion of the Ingolstadt population. The many uniforms on the street provided Ingolstadt with a memory of tranquil years prewar. We noticed with special pride their visible sorrow at the loss of the queen, a demonstration of their true attachment to the royal house. The commandant did not make an appearance.

My duties offered little of interest. I proposed to the high command that a large number of superfluous officers of the reserve, who were doing little to speak of, should be released. Most were very opposed to this. Some of them had settled in Ingolstadt with their families, did nothing all day and thought quite rightly that they would never again have it so good. One such lieutenant I remembered from September 1914. Instead of advancing with my company, he had advanced sideways into thick woodland and had to be winkled out at pistol point. In mid-September 1914 on the long and tiring march to Metz I found him riding in the baggage waggon. Soon after that he became an ornament of the occupation army. He found a post with the reserve battalion as clerk of the military court and he was naturally soon irreplaceable and unavailable for the front, and he retained that office until February 1919. I located him and served him his discharge papers, which he received in a state of shock, and then complained at once to the soldiers’ council.

The soldiers’ council brought me the complaint, and I passed it up the chain of command to my commander General Sämmer, and seldom have I ever heard such an outburst against a fellow officer before he was thrown out the door. The decision was roundly applauded by the soldiers’ council, which objected to officers using their services to complain against other officers.

The relationship with the citadel headquarters was deteriorating. The commandant and the garrison soldiers’ council had begun to interfere in affairs which were not their business, even giving orders to the regiments. Brigade would have none of it and returned all such orders to sender. Complaints about this to the high command received no sympathy on the basis of the adage ‘birds of a feather flock together’. Then something happened to break the tension.

The minister for military affairs issued an edict enabling the creation of a people’s militia. I saw in this a possibility of bettering our situation, in particular obtaining more suitable men and ridding ourselves of useless elements. Accordingly I seized upon this edict and set up recruiting offices at 10th and 13th Infantry Regiments, and drafted appeals to former members of the two regiments to apply. There was a good response and the soldiers’ councils of veterans liked the idea.

Suddenly the garrison soviet saw the danger, and at the instigation of the commandant the whole business was blocked. This interference was so outrageous that I convinced General Sämmer to discontinue cooperation with the Red headquarters. He also resigned command of the brigade, while the commanders of 10th and 13th Infantry Regiments refused to replace him and also resigned.

On 21 February 1919 I issued a notice to the troop units and offices subordinate to the brigade, and the Inspectorate of Military Prisons, resigning my position at brigade and giving pointed reasons why. I advised the regiments to make an immediate report to the high command, sending copies of my order to the citadel headquarters, and the minister for military affairs, requesting instructions.

My announcement came as a bombshell. The same day the Nuremberg soldiers’ council arrived and, assisted by some of the garrison soviet, demanded that I retract it. I declined, pointing out that I had the right to issue such an order under the current regulations, and there then ensued a long political argument which touched upon every subject under the sun. These men were not just old warhorses, but had training in propaganda. I won them over by declaring myself to be a loyal soldier of the king and suggesting that they would have little respect for me if, as an officer of the king’s regiment, I denied it.

The result was an invitation to accompany them to Munich in their lorry, since I insisted that Minister Rosshaupter should make the decision personally. I declined their offer with thanks but agreed to meet at eleven next day in the minister’s ante-chamber.

I left for Munich next morning looking forward to the prospect of more debate. The train was halted near Dachau and everybody had to get out; the service to Munich had been suspended. The Jew Eisner had been shot dead by Graf Arco. Since it was worth the effort I walked from the outskirts to the Munich city centre. When I got to the ministry building I found that all officers were being denied entry.

Being unable to meet with my friends from the Ingolstadt and Nuremberg soldiers’ councils, I went instead to the flat of the senior civil servant at the ministry, General von Köberle. After explaining why I had come, I advised him that, because of the developments in Munich, I could not now accept the decision of the minister. He suggested I should resume my duties and seek an immediate reconciliation with the citadel headquarters. He could offer no other advice. Next I took the opportunity to call on Major General Otto von Lossow, chairman of the Economic Union of German Officers. A short time previously he had issued a circular proposing an officers’ strike and was clearly a man prepared to back up his ideas with action. The impression I received at our first meeting confirmed for me his reputation, and I left his flat strengthened in my resolve.

The events of 21 February had left their traces at Ingolstadt. The garrison soviet called a protest meeting in the great hall of the officers’ club where the commandant gave loud voice to his outrage at the ‘cowardly murder’ of Eisner. A group of officers, for whom this was the last straw, amongst them Major von Löffelholz, who had argued with the commandant even before the meeting, walked out of the hall in indignation and understandably parted company with ‘this army’.

Despite the lack of success of my ploy I was in no mood to give in. I discussed the situation at Ingolstadt with General Sämmer. The brigade was being run by the clerk, and on 1 March 1919 I returned as brigade major despite the objections of the citadel headquarters and the garrison soviet. On 5 March 1919 General Sämmer took over the brigade again.

March passed quietly. The military companies in place at Ingolstadt were ably led (Captains Regler and Besch, Lieutenant Bergen, 2nd Lieutenant Österreicher) and useful to a certain extent but there was much they could not do and nothing out of the ordinary was to be expected of them. Accordingly I began to think of a change of location. I contacted an office in North Germany which had been re...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Illustrations
• Note on the Translation
• Introduction
• Foreword
• Chapter One - In the Time of the Revolutionary Councils
• Chapter Two - Ohrdruf
• Chapter Three - Chief of Staff to the Munich City Commandant
• Chapter Four - Soldier and Politician
• Chapter Five - Schützenbrigade Epp
• Chapter Six - The Kapp Coup and the Revolt in the Ruhr
• Chapter Seven - The German Workers’ Party and Work in Pro-Fatherland Units
• Chapter Eight - General von Epp’s Helpers
• Chapter Nine - At General Staff, 7th Division: The Invasion of the Ruhr
• Chapter Ten - The Policy Committee of the Pro-Fatherland Fighting Group
• Chapter Eleven - May 1st, 1923
• Chapter Twelve - The German Fighting Federation
• Chapter Thirteen - Reichskriegsflagge
• Chapter Fourteen - Signs of a Storm
• Chapter Fifteen - November 8th and 9th, 1923
• Chapter Sixteen - Stadelheim
• Chapter Seventeen - Reflections in Prison
• Chapter Eighteen - Accused Before the People’s Court
• Chapter Nineteen - Reichstag Deputy: The Frontbann
• Afterword
• Index