This sort of problem was far more delicate in the case of the Poles, whom the Nazis chose to regard as less than human but more than Jewish. Later on in this case, we will, I think, derive some macabre humor from the documentary spectacle which some of these defendants made of themselves in vainly wrestling with the insoluble problem of how to achieve a certain amount of legal order and stability in occupied Poland, without at the same time giving the Poles any true law on which they could rely. In short, the very idea of “law” was inimical to the ideology of the Third Reich, and it is not surprising that its principal authors recognized this fact at a very early date. In 1930, Hitler himself declared with reference to a court decision against certain Nazis-- “We can assure the judges that, if national socialism assumes power, they will be fired without any pension.”[14] Joseph Goebbels expressed the same thought even more bluntly in 1934 after the Nazis were in power-- “We were not legal in order to be legal, but in order to rise to power. We rose to power legally in order to gain the possibility of acting illegally.”[15] Later on in this case, the Tribunal will have offered to it documents which speak at length about the creation of a new, National Socialist system of law. By then, it will be apparent, I believe, that a “National Socialist system of law” is a preposterous contradiction in terms. It never was an objective of the Third Reich to create any system of law. On the contrary, it was its fundamental purpose to tear down every vestige of law in Germany, and to replace it with a mere bureaucracy which would mete out reward and punishment in accordance with the tyrannical ideology and tactical necessities of the dictatorship. The one-time sage of Nazi jurisprudence, the late Dr. Hans Frank, summed this up aptly in 1935 (_NG-777, Pros. Ex. 19_)-- “National socialism is the point of departure, the content, and the goal of the legal policies of the Third Reich.”[16] And the defendant Schlegelberger expressed the same thought in 1936 (_NG-538, Pros. Ex. 21_)-- “Accordingly there can be no doubt that now the moral order and ideology [Weltanschauung], as recognized in the Party program, has to be taken into consideration in the interpretation and application of every norm of the existing law.”[17]