Your Honor, I only wanted to explain the activity of the Defendant Fanslau in the Administrative Office of the SS with this document introduced now, namely, in 1938, and I would like to correct with this the testimony as given by the Witness Carl, who at the time stated in his organizational chart that the Main Department V-I administered concentration camps and Death Head Units. From the affidavit as given by Moser for the Defendant Frank, and which was introduced as Defense Exhibit Frank No. 17, it can be seen that the economic administration of the Death Head Units and the concentration camps when Kaindl left was transferred to the inspectorate of the Concentration Camps and that was, at the latest in 1937, and from this, it can also be seen that the economic administration of the General SS was dealt with independently, so that the Defendant Fanslau only had to take care of the economic administration of the SS-Verfuegungstruppe in the Main Office of the SS.
This document is introduced as Defense Exhibit Fanslau No. 24, and I have now finished the introduction of my documents.
DR. HAENSEL (Attorney for the Defendant Georg Loerner): Document Book No. II and one supplement for Georg Loerner. I have already introduced Document No. 1. I would appreciate it if Your Honors would permit me to supplement the introduction of documents with Document Book No. II. The document begins with Document Georg Loerner No. 18. I took the liberty of numbering those documents according to their sequence as they appear, and I shall read then and introduce them as they are in the document book, namely, Document No. 18 will become Exhibit 16, which also begins with 16 and continues currently, Documents 18, 19, 20, 21 will become therefore Exhibits 16, 17, 18 and 19. They are affidavits concerning the character of Georg Loerner, as a supplement to what has been introduced so far.
Document Georg Loerner No. 22, Exhibit No. 20, is an affidavit by Opperbeck and it deals with Pohl's ordinance, according to which Loerner was appointed his deputy and he had to report to the office chiefs and it also confirms that the ordinance was cancelled a short while after that.
The next document, namely Document 23, will become Exhibit 21. It is a document by Riecke, which is very interesting in this case. Riecke was State Secretary of the Reich Food Ministry and he was the chief expert for the allocation of food. He is in Nuremberg now. In the course of his activities in the Reich Food Ministry he had to fix the food rations for the concentration camps.
The next document, which is Document No. 25, which will become Defense Exhibit No. 22, is an affidavit of Dr. Kurt Schmidt-Klevenow and it shows that Loerner was nothing but a formal representative in Pohl's office. Schmidt-Klevenow can tell us best about it from his activity as one of Pohl's judges.
The next document, namely, Document No. 26, Exhibit 23, is a decree which is important for the position of the State Police and it is an important supplement to the material introduced by my colleagues at the same time. It shows the committment and the release of the inmates as being the job of the State Police. Nobody else had any choice in that.
The next document, which is Document 27, will become Defense Exhibit 24, it is a copy of a statement, by Wisliceny, who was one of Eichmann's collaborators concerning the rigorous secrecy which had to be observed.
The next document, Exhibit 25, which is Document 28, is a correspondence between Himmler and Lammers. It contains important figures about the personnel strength in the concentration camps and also about the percentage of criminals and those who were in security confinement. It also contains information about their release on Himmler's birthday.
The next document, No. 29, which is Exhibit No. 26, is an affidavit by Wilhelm Burger. It deals with the question of how far Loerner tried to get clothing for the inmates and, particularly, it also deals with the report which went through Pohl to Himmler, where it is pointed out that there is a lack in the stocks of clothing.
The next document, which is Document No. 30, Exhibit 27, is an excerpt from the IMT Verdict regarding the subject of Sauckel. It shows that Sauckel early in the Spring of 1942 received the assignment to take over the labor allocation and that Loerner received that job a long time after Department I/5 took it over.
Document No. 31, which is Exhibit 28, is an affidavit by Phillip Grimm. Grimm was one of the people of Department I/5, and I shall come back to that when I make my final plea.
Document No. 32 will become Exhibit 29. It is an affidavit by Fritz Lechler. Lechler according to the organizational chart was Chief of Department B-II. I asked him here about the clothing and also about the handling of the goods in connection with that and he gives quite a lengthy statement here. I believe it was only due to the fact that he was ill that he is not sitting here in the defendants dock.
Document 34 will become Exhibit 30. It is an affidavit by Andreas Weggel. Statistically it shows that in order to equip one single division with clothing and equipment 91 or 92 railroad carriages were necessary. I shall come back to that figure later on in order to show how a figure of several hundred railroad carriages worked in Department B-II when one division alone needed 92 carriages.
Document No. 35, which will become Defense Exhibit 31, is an affidavit by Dr. Hermann Karoli, which shows that the deputizing position of Loerner was nothing but a formal one in the economic field.
Document No. 36 will become Exhibit 32. It is an affidavit by Franz Josef Pister concerning the supplementary food and it also interpolates into the Tschentscher case and deals with his problems.
Document No. 37 will become Exhibit 33. It is an affidavit by Otto Barnewald and it also deals with clothing questions and it throws a certain light on that matter. I shall come back to that in my final briefs.
The following two affidavits, namely, Document 38, as Exhibit 34 and Document 39, as Exhibit 35, are excerpts from the SS Rules of Conduct and also Excerpts from the Mittelbrische Zeitung, Regensburger Umschau. They are documents which I am introducing here in order to orient the Tribunal on things to which I will come back in my final pleas, and I shall use them in my arguments.
The last document 40 is an affidavit by Gerhard Hoffmann. This will become Exhibit 36.
It is an affidavit which also shows that Loerner only played a formal part in the establishment of Department V.
I have thus finished the introduction of documents.
DR. KURAUSS. Dr. Krauss for Tschentscher.
Document Book No. III, Tschentscher.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Did you say that was No. III?
DR. KRAUSS: Yes, indeed, Your honor, it is No. III.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I have No. II.
DR. KRAUSS: No. II only contained two documents which referred to food experiments and which were not introduced. Document Book No. III contains four documents which a would like to introduce now.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: I only have No. II for Tschentscher and do not have No. III.
DR. KRAUSS: Then I would appreciate it if this Tribunal would rule what I should do now. The documents have been turned in to the Translation Department a long time ago, and I am at aloss. Your Honor, possibly I could simply limit myself to telling you what all those documents contain and then I could see to it that the Tribunal gets those documents as soon as possible, as soon as they are translated.
THE PRESIDENT: You have introduced No. I?
DR. KRAUSS: Would you repeat, Your Honor, please?
THE PRESIDENT: You have introduced the documents in Book I?
DR. KRAUSS: Your Honor, Document Book No. I has been introduced a long time ago. Document Book No. II contains two documents which deal with alleged food experiments. Those two documents will not be introduced because the Tribunal declared that it did not want to hear any rebuttal evidence on those matters.
Document Book No.III which I would like to introduce now contains four documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead with the documents in Book No. III.
DR. KRAUSS: Dr. Krauss for the Defendant Tschentscher.
Your Honors, with the permission of this Tribunal I would like to introduce four documents which are contained in Document Book No. III, Tschentscher.
They deal with the charges which were raised during the last few days of this trial against the Defendant Tschentscher as a soldier. These four affidavits will be used in order to rebut Saur's testimony, and they will also support the testimony given by the witnesses, Schaefer, Mueller and Staminger. The first of these four documents is Tschentscher Document No. 21 which will become Exhibit No. 19. That is an affidavit by Otto Kleber. Kleber was a driver with the Witness Schaefer who was examined here. He witnessed the entire advance with the supply battalion and he states that the incidents as reported by the witness Saur and seen by the Witness Saur never did occur.
The second document is an affidavit by Anton Kleyen. This is Tschentscher Document No. 22, and it will become Tschentscher Exhibit No. 20. The witness was a meat examiner with the butchers company of the supply battalion. I would like to draw the Tribunal's attention first of all to the testimony that the food office of the supply battalion, contrary to the testimony given by the Witness Saur at the time was not in Zhitomir, but, as the Defendant Tschentscher stated over and over again, billeted outside of this town. He furthermore states that the alleged shooting of six Jews by Suert apparently did not take place because he, as a member of the butcher's company, according to the circumstances, would have had to know about it.
The third document, Document Tschentscher No. 23, will become Tschentscher Exhibit 21. It is an affidavit by Willibald Jackl who, from the month of February, 1941, until the end of the war, was also a member of the butchers' company, as a chief butcher. He also confirms that he never heard of anything to the effect that Suert in Zhitomir had killed six Jews. I would like to draw the Tribunal's attention, however, to the following fact, namely, that that witness also personally knew the SS-man Kirsch who has been mentioned here several times. The witness confirms that Kirsch, had he received the alleged order by Tschentscher to shoot a Jew, would have told him about it or sure, particularly on the basis of their personal friendship, and that therefore he believes that this testimony by Saur is a confirmation of his own, namely Saur's.The last of the documents which is Tschentscher's No. 24 and which will become Tschentscher's Exhibit No. 22 is an affidavit by Reinhold Schlenkrich.
This man, Schlenkrich, was working with the Army Post Office. He was assigned to the Viking Division, together with the Army Post Office, and he was not an SS member himself. He participated in the advance together with the Viking Division. At all times he was quite close to Tschentscher or in his immediate vicinity, and he testifies that he knew nothing of all the incidents alleged here, that he hadn't seen anything of them nor had he heard anything of them. However, he states that he would have undoubtedly known about those things had they really occurred.
This, Your Honor, concludes my introduction of documents for the Defendant Tschentscher.
DR. VON STEIN: Dr. von Stein for Eirenschmalz/.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Dr. Von Stein, you have one more book, No. II?
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, I already introduced one book here, and today I have Document Book No. III, and I also have Document Book III which contains two documents, and an additional supplement with one document. So far I have only received the translations for Document Books I and II. I have already introduced Document Book No. I. I have No. III here with me, but I don't know whether the translation is ready.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: We have No. I. That is all we have.
DR. VON STEIN: However, I only want to introduce two documents only from Document Book No. III. I could give one of the German copies to the interpreters. Maybe it would help some. Now, I should like to read from Document Book No. II for Eirenschmalz. It contains Documents 21 to 26. They are numbered currently and they shall receive the same exhibit numbers, namely 21 to 26.
Document No. 21 is a document by Oswald Pohl. Oswald Pohl in this document talks about Eirenschmalz's activity in the Administrative Office of the SS, and it also contains something about Karl's testimony. Document No. 22 is an affidavit by Bernhard Kuiper who from 1934 to 1937 was a construction engineer in the concentration camps of Esterwegen and Sachsenhausen. He states that he was subordinated to Gruppenfuehrer Eicke and he said that he received his instructions from Piefke from the Ministry of the Interior. During all that time he had no official contact whatsoever with Eirenschmalz. Riedel was his successor. He was also appointed by Eicke. However, he never heard that Eirenschmalz ever had anything to do with construction matters in the concentration camps.
Document No. 23 is a document by Otto Bestle, an affidavit namely, which I drew up with the Prosecution's permission. Bestle, as a result of NO-4008, Exhibit No. 573, gave an affidavit which the Prosecution introduced here. He corrected that affidavit and he is stating here that in the construction balance which he has referred to concerning '38 and '39 it is nothing but a collective balance. With regard to construction balances concerning the concentration camp Dachau, he said that they were not contained in that total balance.
This balance has already been audited in 1940 by the Auditing Court. As there were certain discrepancies Eirenschmalz was directed by the Court of Audits to investigate the statements as given by Bestle. In the affidavit introduced by the Prosecution concerning construction maintenance and corrected in the affidavit now, he is describing the construction work there and the activities of C-VI. Bestle knows from his own knowledge about the garrison administration at Ravensbrueck, that no material allocations were neccesary, and particularly that no material was furnished by Office C-VI.
Concerning the camp wall and the sewer system as contained in the first affidavit issued by Bestle he corrected it again to the effect that those maintenance constructions were constructed by the Construction Inspectorate without the activity of Office C-VI. Furthermore, Bestle is testifying about the fact that certain appropriations for funds for construction maintenance were no longer necessary during the war.
Document No. 24 is an affidavit by Hellmut Kiener. He states there that Eirenschmalz in the Administrative Office of the SS did not deal with concentration camp T.V. tasks. He only dealt with construction tasks of the SS-Verfuegungstruppe. He can tell us about the fact that the man incharge of the Construction Expert Office was Riedel who was in charge of the T.V. and concentration-camp matters, and he was subordinated to the Concentration-Camp Inspectorate.
Document No. 25 is another affidavit by Hellmut Kiener and it deals with the organizational charts of the Administrative Office of the SS for 1936 to 1938. This was introduced by the Prosecution as Exhibit No. 637.
Document No. 26 is an affidavit by Hans Eichele. Eichele states in that document that Eirenschmalz in 1942 tried to have a concentrationcamp inmate, Schnabel, released and employed as a second works manager of the long distance heating system until the end of the war.
In document Book No. III, we only have two documents. I assume that the Tribunal does not have that document book, Therefore, I shall give a brief description of the contents of the documents.
Document No. 27 is an additional affidavit by Bestle. Bestle in the spring of 1938 was the collaborator in the Administrative Office of the SS in Department V-5/C. Together with Pohl, like the Witness, Karl, he went on the trip to Flossenbuerg. He states that Eirenschmalz in Flossenbuerg had nothing to do with the construction projects there. Riedel was the man in charge of the T.V. in the concentration-camp construction matters. These were never subordinated to Eirenschmalz T.V. stands for Death Head units. Eirenschmalz was simply an expert for construction matters concerning the Verfuegungstruppe.
The following document, namely Document No. 28, is an affidavit by one of Eirenschmalz's collaborators who from the beginning of February, 1942, until the end of the war, was employed in Office C-VI/3 as an auditor. This witness was granted me by the Tribunal. He appeared in Nuernberg but he had some trouble with his lungs and therefore he had to submit himself to operations. That was the reason why I was not in a position to bring this witness before this Tribunal. For this reason I had an affidavit written concerning all those questions. And I would appreciate it if the Tribunal would permit me to read this affidavit. I have a translation here which I can give to the interpreter, and I would appreciate it if you would permit me to do so. After the usual introduction the document begins as follows: "On the loth of February, 1942, I was assigned to the WVHA by special orders and I stayed there until the end of the war with a short interruption from the 19th of May, 1944, until the 12th of January, 1933, due to a T.B. infection which I acquired and which I am suffering from today. My military rank was that of an SS-Sturmann. During the entire period of time while I was working for WVHA I was in office C-VI/3 as an auditor. I happened to have the necessary expert background for that job. My civilian profession is that of a civilian construction engineer. Based on my own observations in the WVHA I can therefore make the following actual statements.
"First of all, Office C-VI consisted of three main departments of which main department C-VI/3 was the largest one and dealt with most of the work. This can already be seen from the personnel strength there. The main departments C-VI/1 and C-VI/2 in the beginning consisted of approximately six persons as their total personnel strength. This personnel strength dimished in the course of time and towards the end of 1944 and early in '45 both departments were absolutely extinct. The main department C-VI/3 first had six collaborators and then the total number became twenty. The man in charge of the main department C-VI/3 from the beginning of the spring of 1933 was diplom engineer, Klischinsky. Von Klischinsky was a very good expert and he dealt with this main department absolutely independently. Dr. Kammler also liked him much more than Eirenschmalz and he esteemed him more highly. Von Klischinsky in 1944 was taken over by Kammler by special order. Since that time no other main department chief was appointed. The field of task for the main department C-VI/3 exclusively dealt with the preliminaries of the construction balances for the contruction projects financed by Reich funds. That is the reason why the preliminarily checked balances had to be turned over to the auditing court of the German Reich for a final checking.
"The amount of work was very great so that by and by with the permission of the auditing court only spot checks were made for preliminary checking. At the utmost ten percent of the vouchers were checked. Sometimes there was a backlog of years of vouchers which had to be checked. For instance I can remember that the balances of the barracks at Fulda, which were established in '35 and '36 were only checked towards the end of '43 and '44, that they were only shown then. I can tell you with definite knowledge that in the construction balances no balances were contained concerning construction maintenance because Office A-IV alone was competent for that matter.
Also according to the best of my knowledge and belief and after thought it over for a long time, I can state with certainty that during all those years of the existence of Office C-VI/3, that is to say from February 1942 until the end of the war, at no time was any voucher or bill introduced concerning P.W. camps, concentration camps, particularly in connection with gas chambers and crematories. In this connection I would also like to state that the establishment of gas chambers and crematories only became to me after the collapse of the German Reich through the press.
"The fact was known to me that concentration camps existed at several spots in Germany. Eirenschmalz also must have noticed it.
"Now, because no vouchers came to Office C-VI/3 from those organizations and no balances either, that was the reason why in February or early in March 1945 he sent auditors to Ravensbrueck in order to carry out certain investigations and to find out where the balances were. The auditors, however, never returned. It also occurred once in a while that certain packages sent through the mails were lost in the last few months. No one could say where. The loss of packages remained. Maybe this contributed to the fact that Eirenschmalz wanted to know where those vouchers and balances were by sending those auditors there.
"No. 2. The checking of the construction balances only referred to the funds spent by the construction agencies according to certain budget regulations which existed at the times, by virtue decrees for that year issued by the auditing court of the German Reich.
"From the vouchers submitted it could not be seen what the personnel strength of the workers was and particularly whether inmates were used in the individual construction places. I would like to add at this point that the construction of barracks, which constituted the largest part of the vouchers introduced, was carried out by civilian construction firms. All vouchers concerning the construction work carried out by the special staff of Kammler were not audited by our Main Department. Our Main Department was not competent for that type of work.
"Number 3. As far as the other offices of Amtsgruppe C are concerned, there were no official connections with them. Office C/6 was neither informed of construction preparations nor of construction projects. This was not the task of Office C/6 as an auditing department anyway. The Main Department C/6/3 also sent their mail directly to the construction inspectorates and construction groups without interpolating Office C/5 in any way.
"Number 4. The relationship between Dr. Ing. Kamler and Eirenschmalz was as bad as can be imagined. I do not know that Eirenschmalz in the first half of the year 1943 was appointed Kammler's deputy. During that time, that is, in March 1943, great damage was caused by an air raid. The entire Amtsgruppe was working with clearing the debris for weeks. I also know that Eirenschmalz from the month of May 1943 until January 1944 due to ill health had been transferred to a hospital. His deputy. I never at any time not on a single occasion, actually heard that Eirenschmalz ever became Kammler's deputy in reality. I think it impossible that Kammler would have let Eirenschmalz deputize for him in any matter even if it was seemingly unimportant because Kammler was absolutely ambitions. He was also academically-minded. He insisted on taking care of that himself. Even deputizing jobs which were not of great importance, as, for instance, signing unimportant letters, were never carried out by Eirenschmalz.
"Number 5. As far as Eirenschmalz's office C/6 is concerned, I can only say that office was without any importance. If that office had beep dissolved, it would not have influenced the organization of Amtsgruppe C in any way. I assume that Office C/6 was particularly prepared by Kammler for plans for the coming post-war period. Kammler apparently intended to take over the construction himself; and he had in advance already planned certain reconstruction projects. Eirenschmalz remained chief of this superfluous office because another job could not been found for him which was more fitting to his rank as Standartenfuehrer and which he could have taken care of. Unfortunately, there was no such job available. It is absolutely wrong to believe that Eirenschmalz was a great construction expert who was an expert indeed in the construction projects of the SS. During the period of time as of 1942 while I was under Eirenschmalz's supervision, Eirenschmalz never did any work as a construction expert. I also never heard from the closer circle of collaborators concerning the time prior to that that Eirenschmalz at any time planned any large construction projects and carried them out. I was in close contact with his close circle of collaborators.
"Number 6. From a humane point of view, I can only say the very best for Eirenschmalz. Eirenschmalz is not one of those people who believed in a certain kind of extravagant life and who acted like wild men. On the contrary, he was a very modest man; and he lived a retired life. He avoided Kammler, and during his time off he devoted himself to his family and to horseback riding, which he loved. Eirenschmalz was a very just and mild superior, who was willing immediately to help when someone was in a predicament. I believe that Eirenschmalz is an absolutely nice and kind-hearted human being; and I don't believe that he could have known of the commission of crimes let alone that he at any time participated in such things. The fact that Eirenschmalz didn't know anything about it I personally believe is due to the fact that in 1945 I was in charge of the secret file registration office of that Main Office.
In this filing office there was not one single letter which could not have been shown to the public after the end of the war, that is, today.
"In this connection I should again like to stress to point that not one single information reached us, even in the secret matter concerning gas chambers and crematories, assignment of labor of the inmates, or other criminal measures. The documents and files of Office C/6 were placed in a freight train before the end of the war. However, they did not arrive at their place of destination. I know that for certain due to the fact that I also packed part of my belongings with the documents, and they also were lost."
Then you have the certificates and so forth. Then I also have a supplement to Book Number III. It's a short document, an affidavit by one Hugo Fischer. Hugo Fischer was working for the propaganda department of the NSDAP. This document in particular contains certain statements concerning the prerequisites for the issuance of the blood order. I took up this affidavit here only because from the fact that Eirenschmalz was awarded the blood order, the Prosecution deducted that Eirenschmalz in the early years of the SS or of the NSDAP dealt with political matters. In this affidavit, which will be introduced as Document Number 29, it can also Be seen that this blood order was nothing but a small souvenir for the 9th of November 1923 and that the issuance of such a blood order was not based on any political activity but that this was absolutely sufficient for having the person in question here on the 8th of November 1923 participate in the gathering which took place in Munich in the Feldherrnhalle. All he had to do was just stand there. He did not even have to participate in the manifestation. That's all that can be seen from this document. This concludes my introduction of evidence for Eirenschmalz.
THE PRESIDENT: We've made pretty good progress today in getting documents in. We'll continue tomorrow morning as long as it may be necessary. I hope that it will move as well and as swiftly tomorrow and that by tomorrow noon we may see the last of the documents to be introduced.
We'll come in at 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning instead of 9:30.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 16 September 1947 at 0900 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Oswald Pohl, et, al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 16 September 1947 9930-1630, Justice Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal No. II.
Military Tribunal No. 2 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the Court.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Dr. Belzer, what do you have left now?
DR. BELZER: (Attorney for the defendant Sommer) With the Tribunal's permission I would like to submit Supplement III, and Supplement IV to the Sommer Document Book.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: I have Supplement III, but do not have IV.
DR. BELZER: I have several copies with me here, which I could give the court. Supplement IV is only one document.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Could I get one of III, please?
DR. BELZER: I beg to submit six affidavits contained in Supplements III and IV. They are all interrelated and related to the affidavit submitted by the prosecution as Exhibit 621 in Document Book XXIV, an a affidavit by Sanner. With one exception, they all deal with that affidavit Gerhard Maurer, Chief of Office D-II says that it is impossible for Sanner to have read letters signed, "Karl Sommer" where special treatment for concentration camp inmates was mentioned, because Office D-II had nothing to do with special treatment. Special treatment described by Sanner in his affidavit was never made known to Office-D-II. Maurer on one occasion heard of the existence of a punitive company and, thereupon, at once saw Gluecks and achieved that this punitive company was dissolved.
In the next document, Sommer No. 43, which is Exhibit No. 40, Hans Moser says he was the successor of Maurer as Chief of D-II in the middle of January, 1945. Before that he only deputized while Maurer had been ordered to go somewhere else and he points out that this deputizing for Maurer need not have had occurred at all, if the Defendant Sommer had been Deputy Office Chief of D-II, as the Prosecution alleged, Maurer was absent for only a few weeks anyway.
Sommer, he says, only had a position of an office clerk, but never that of an office chief, D-II had never dealt with any cases of special treatment, and it was therefore impossible that Sanner had read letters where Sommer ordered special treatment.
In the document, which is Sommer No. 44 and which I offer as Exhibit 41, Hermann Pister, the last commandant of Buchenwald confirms that Office D-II on no occasion was concerned with special treatment. Pister also says that the RSHA was the only department which could order special treatment. I would draw attention, in this connection, to Prosecution Exhibit 141 in Document Book V, in which Pister speaks about the question of competence when special treatment was ordered. The affidavit now submitted by me is a supplement and will coincide with what Sanner has said.
Sommer Document No. 45 I offer as Exhibit 42. This is an affidavit by Phillipp Grimm. He was up to the 30th of November, 1942, the labor allocation leader in Sachsenhausen, and he was labor allocation leader in Sachsenhausen until August 31, 1943, and from 1 September 1943 until 1944, he was in Office D-II. He also confirms that Office D-II. had nothing to do with special treatment and that any such order could only come from the RSHA. Grimm also says that throughout the time when he was labor allocation leader he never say any letter from Office D-II signed Karl Sommer.
Document Sommer No. 46, which I offer as Exhibit 43, is an affidavit by Albert Schwarz. He was the labor allocation leader of Buchenwald from 1 November 1942 to 11 April 1945 and he says also that Office D-II on no occasion was concerned with special treatment.
In the Supplement IV I submit Sommer Document 47 which will be Exhibit No. 44, another affidavit by Gerhard Maurer. I asked for this affidavit after the Witness Sanner was cross-examined here about the assertion of Sanner that he had read letters where Sommer named inmates and ordered that these inmates must not be transferred to another concentration camp. Maurer says about that it was possible that in some cases, in two or three cases, Office D-II, by a teletype letter, asked for skilled workers from all concentration camps and that then, if these applications were not referred to again, the camp in question was told that these inmates would not be transferred. It was possible that in one or two cases Sanner saw such letters from Office D-II, but in that case, they were not signed by Sommer. At the most they were signed by Office Group Chief Gluecks.
This brings me to the end of my presentation of documents.
DR. RATZ (ATTORNEY FOR THE DEFENDANT DR. HERMANN POOK):
If the Tribunal please, I believe that my Document Book II has not yet reached the court in English. I have secured a few copies and I would like to submit the English translation now.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Do you have two document books left to present?
DR. RATZ: Yes, and then I have also Document Book III, which has been translated and is in the hands of the Tribunal.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Do you have an extra copy in English of III, Document Book III?
DR. RATZ: Yes.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: One.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I should like No. III, because I do not have it.