A Yes.
Q In what department of the Ministry ware you working?
A Only in the department for the administration of criminal law. That is department 3 and later it was called Department 4.
Q Do you know Dr. Mettgenberg?
A Yes.
Q In what relationship were you officially to Dr. Mettgenberg in the Ministry?
A Direct official connections I had very few. Herr Mettgenberg was sub-division chief, and I generally did not work in his subdivision, unless it was once in a while as a substitute or in exceptional cases.
Q Who was chief of department 4 during the time when you were working there?
A When I assumed office Ministerialdirector Krohne and some time after Thierack took over the Ministry Krohne was relieved and Vollmer took over his position.
Q That was in the fall of 1942?
A Yes.
Q Will you please tell the Tribunal what basic attitude Herr Vollmer had as department chief, his attitude toward his associates, referents, ministerial counsellors and ministerialdirigenten, that is his entire staff?
A One can put it on a common denominator, that I would almost like to say, Vollmer was hostile toward his department. The department was a nearly united front against Vollmer. He was unpleasant as superior. He was suspicious and was not frank. He played one man out against the other. He did not mind making a bad name for the subdivision chiefs with their referents, and so forth. The enmity was duo to his entire attitude towards his duties. Vollmer was an unscrupulous representative of the prevailing theory of the state, whereas the department on the whole made efforts to maintain the constitutional state as far as it was still possibles.
THE PRESIDENT: May we have that name a little more clearly? I am not sure that I got it.
DR. SCHILF: The division chief's name was Vollmer, V-o-l-l-m-e-r.
BY DR. SCHILF:
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, in this united front, as you called it, against the serve opinion of Dr. Vollmer, was Dr. Mettgenberg also in this united front?
A Herr Mettgenberg, according to his whole attitude and his whole conception of his duties, was a born opponent Vollmer. Mettgenberg was a civil servant of the old school, who always made efforts to offer resistance to this increasingly severe Administration of Justice and with the greatest efforts always again and again, tried to fight off transgressions and interference in the Administration of Justice on the part of the party and the leadership of the State.
Q Herr Dr. Ehrhardt, may I now ask to describe to the Tribunal quite briefly your own activity in Department 4, what tasks you had?
A I was or soon became referent for penal cases concerning foreign exchange because I had special knowledge of economics. Furthermore, I was in charge of the referat for traffic cases, and about 1942, as deputy, I was in charge of a part of the department for non-political death sentences.
Q The department for non-political death sentences was a refarat concerned with clemency questions?
A This concerned only the review of the clemency questions in the death sentences pronounced.
Q Did you know the former Ministerial Councillor Altmeyer?
A Yes. I worked closely together with Altmeyer. The department for non-political death sentences was, so to say, a double department in which Altmeyer had been put in charge of the majority of the cases, and ho also had to work on the general questions and questions of principle.
Q In your capacity as referent for death sentences cases in non-political cases did you have anything to do officially with Dr. Mettgenberg?
Q With Mettgenberg only when, as deputy of the division chief, he was in charge cf the division. In his capacity as sub-division chief he had nothing to do with death sentences, at least not with non-political death sentences.
Q When, as deputy, Dr. Mettgenberg worked on those cases which concerned non-political death sentences, could you observe whether when these cases were reported to the Minister or to the Undersecretary, he had a tendency toward leniency or not?
A Mettgenberg followed a much lenient line than the Ministerial Director, and if one suggested that clemency should be granted one could be sure that Mettgenberg would support this suggestion, and really, in all cases, whereas Vollmer mostly or overwhelmingly used to oppose such suggestions.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Tribunal, I have no further questions to put to the witness, as far as the defendant Dr. Mettgenberg is concerned. However I would like to request the Tribunal to permit me to examine the witness, Dr. Erkard also in my capacity as defense counsel for the defendant Klemm.
BY DR. SCHILF:
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, I can assume that you knew the defendant, whose last position was Under-Sekretary, Klemm, in the Reich Ministry of Justice also?
A Yes.
Q The Prosecution in this case introduced a very extensive document against Klemm. It is Exhibit 252. Exhibit 252 is the so-called lists or calenders of reports. It covers the time cf January, 1944, approximately, until February, 1945. These lists of reports exist almost in their entirety. In these lists cf reports your name appear also. Will you please comment as to whether your name could appear in the rep rt lists of the report made to the Minister or the Under-Secretary?
A Yes, it had to appear.
Q Your name appears also in certain groups within these lists, and that is under the heading - first group - Death Sentence Reports, with the sub-division, General Death Sentences, and the further subdivision, Reporting, Referent Senior Public Prosecutor Dr. Ehrhardt.
You said already that your name appears on those lists and can you state -- I had an opportunity to show these lists to you very briefly--whether your name appears as often as Altmeyer's whose name you mentioned before?
A I believe that my name appears less often them Altmeyer's especially in these cases, because I dealt with as smaller group that Altmeyer.
Q I want to repeat my last question, Dr. Ehrhardt, because it did not come over the system in its entirety; I asked you whether you think that your name appeared with the same frequency as the name of Dr. Altmeyer?
A I believe my name appeared somewhat less frequently.
Q Can you state pertinent reasons for this?
A Yes because Altmeyer had to deal with a larger number of districts than I and the districts themselves were larger, but it could happen once in a while that I did not have to report on any death sentences where as he did have to report on some.
Q Excuse me, Dr. Ehrhardt, these report lists contain a socalled heading in every individual report list, there are either reports to the Minister followed by the date or report to the Undersecretary and again the date; I want to ask you basically how these reports were put together?
A It was as follows, in general the day before the report was given or earlier, the instruction was issued that schedules of reports for that day either for the Minister or Under-Secretary had to be compiled, and in that way the lists were made out with the name of the Minister or the Under-Secretary.
Q Was that only a matter of form or were the lists compilled also according to the subject?
A Well there were compilled according to the subject matter because the list was addressed to the gentlemen who........
THE PRESIDENT: The recording system appears to have broken down for the moment. It is reported it will take about five minutes to repair it. We will take a very brief recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. SCHILF:
Q Witness, we were speaking about the so-called headings of the schedules of reports; may I ask you to speak about that again? You said that the lists were compiled shortly before the dates that the reports were given?
A Yes.
Q Will you please continue.
A The lists were not addressed to a person just by chance, but they were especially addressed to the gentlemen who was to listen to the report.
Q If the headings thus say, "report to the Minister" on that or that date; does that mean that the report was actually made to the minister?
A Basically yes, of course it could happen at the last minute that the minister was unable to be present, then in his place the undersecretary listened to the report, but those were exceptional cases.
Q Do you remember such an exceptional case yourself?
A Yes, not concretely a series of reports but I do recall that it happened that suddenly we were told the minister is not here and the Under-Secretary will listen to the report.
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, you said that the lists were compiled with the name of the person who was to get the report and if the minister suddenly could not appear then the deputy had to listen to the report; did anything change in the contents of the announced reports?
A I do not quite understand that Question, the contents of the reports could not change.
Q I did express myself in a way that was not quite clear, excuse me. I shall have to clarify it concretely by referring to the list and therefore I shall submit the lists to you right away.
(The documents are handed to the witness.)
As I already mentioned before, by way of example, the lists contain certain groups, the groups all bear titles. For example, "General Death Sentences" or "Clear Cases" or "Doubtful Cases.
Q If on a list now doubtful cases were also listed and the minister was not present, what happened to the doubtful cases; were they not reported on at all?
A In that case, as a rule the doubtful cases were postponed.
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, I have to put to you the testimony of the witness Altmeyer before this Tribunal here. Altmeyer was examined on the 15th of July, during the afternoon session, and according to the German transcript. I now quote page 5, 171; that is the German transcript. You already stated that Altmeyer and you had a so-called double capacity, or acted in a double capacity in one department. If I may say so you were the corresponding referent in addition to Altmeyer in non-political cases of death sentences. Thus you can probably judge, independent of the list which we discussed, how often you, possibly together with Altmeyer, reported to the under secretary. Altmeyer stated that he reported to the under secretary once every month.
A I consider that a serious error of memory. The reports which were made to the under secretary in death sentence cases were very infrequent, and I believe that I personally did not report to the under secretary more than four or at the most five times.
Q After you and Altmeyer were both working in that section, perhaps you can judge whether Altmeyer reported more often than you?
A I have already stated that because the referat, the work that Altmeyer dealt with was more extensive, it is probable that he reported more often than I, but so considerable the difference could not have been that Altmeyer reported so much more often to the Under Secretary than I believe I can say about myself.
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, you were also present when Thierack listened to reports?
A Yes.
Q When he received reports?
A Yes.
Q And you were present when the under secretary, that is the defendant Klemm was also attending?
A Yes.
Q You had an opportunity to make observations as to what the relationship between Thierack and Klemm was. I now want to ask you did Thierack during these reports favor Klemm in any way, compared with other gentlemen of the Ministry?
A Not at all. I recall how the late Minister Guertner used to treat his under secretaries when reports were made. I can only say that the manner in which Thierack treated his under secretary frequently lacked dignity.
Q Do you remember any individual cases where you noticed this in particular?
A No. That is a general impression from my memory and I cannot give individual cases or examples at the moment, but in the opinion of all of us, Klemm was considered the young man who worked for the minister; that he had not much to say; and had to do everything the minister told him.
Q The final question, Dr. Ehrhardt. We spoke repeatedly about Altmeyer. I now want to ask you since you worked together with him for a long time, whether it is correct, namely, my information that Altmeyer was characterized in the ministry as a gossiping person?
A That expression is perhaps somewhat strong, but Altmeyer was absolutely inclined to spread rumors and to combine rumors; in addition, he was heavily over-worked, and frequently not quite clear. Well, any way, he had the reputation if one wanted to find out anything new that had happened, then one had to go to Altmeyer and he always knew something about everything that was going on.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you, I have no further questions.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. KUBUSCHOK: (Attorney on behalf of the defendant von Ammon)
Q Witness, according to your statements you were working in Division IV of the Ministry. There you probably -- you certainly also had an opportunity to meet von Ammon, especially also in the field of the clemencyproblem. Can you tell me something about the attitude of von Ammon in clemency cases?
AAn immediate cooperation between von Ammon and myself never took place. Outside of the picture which one forms of a colleague, I can from my official contacts judge von Ammon only from what I heard from his own mouth when he reported to the Minister.
He was in charge of the so-called NN cases and they were treated with a great deal of secrecy; in general importance was attached to not having too many people, too large an audience in the room of the Minister when NN cases were reported on. Occasionally, however. I did hear a few cases, and when I did, I observed that von Ammon reported in a very moderate manner. Especially I noticed that he always expressed a humane regret. He always let it be seen that he had a humane sympathy for these people because from the point of view of their country they had not done anything dishonorable, and the impression that I gained there is absolutely in accordance with the general picture that I had of von Ammon. He had numerous other interests; also artistic interests; he was such a soft person; and that every severity, at least in my opinion, was foreign to him.
DR. KUBUSHOK: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any other direct examination of this witness by any Defense Counsel? Apparently not. You may cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. WOLLEYHAN:
Q Your Honors, after having discussed the matter just now with Dr, Schilf, I find that he has no objection to my offering to the Court the organization book of the NSDAP -- not as evidence, but in a manner comparable to a brief for the information of the Court, on certain matters that were of common knowledge in Germany from 1933 until 1945. There is one page I have marked, which, at the appropriate point during the cross examination, I am sure the Court will know when to look at it.
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, you have stated a short time ago here that you yourself and the defendant Mettgenberg's boss in Department IV, that is Vollmer, as far as subordinates in that department are concerned, which included you and. the defendant Mettgenberg, was a very suspicious character; that there was a good deal of emenity between the subordinates subordinates and Vollmer, and that all of you had a united front against him because of his unscupulous attitude toward Nazi and state policies.
Now, it appears from your testimony, Dr. Ehrhardt, that this Vollmer, much like Thierack, and Freisler, was a very harsh and extreme official. Is this Vollmer dead by any chance?
A I received a message from Berling according to which Vollmer was seriously wounded and supposed to have died as a consequence.
Q I thought so. You further mentioned, Dr. Ehrhardt, that the defendant Mettgenberg was, as you put it, a born opponent of Vollmer's increasingly severe administration of justice. Tell me, were you likewise opposed, as was Mettgenberg, to what you described Vollmer's increasing severe policies?
A Yes.
Q That being so, Dr. Ehrhardt, I am going to read you something from your official personnel file, which I want you to correct me if I misread it. Page, will you please hand this to the witness. Now, Dr. Ehrhardt, please turn to page 69 of that personnel file. There you will find an efficiency rating, and recommendations for promotion written in your behalf on the 8th August, 1943, by your boss, Vollmer. It begins like those: "Chief Public Prosecutor, Dr. Ehrhardt, deals with non-political death penalty cases, currency and traffice penal cases, and economic sabotage cases, and is liaison officer with the SA. In death penalty matters he combines the necessary severity and ruthlessness with humane insight and experiences. His political attitude is positive, corresponding to his activity in the party." Did I read that correctly, Dr. Ehrhardt?
A Yes.
Q Now, tell me, Dr. Ehrhardt, didn't you join the Nazi Party in 1933?
A Yes.
Q Did you become a member of the SA in 1933?
A Yes.
Q On or before 1937 you were promoted to Oberscharfuehrer in the SA?
A I cannot remember any more when I became Oberscharfuehrer. May be -- just a moment -- 1937-- no, I believe, well, in 1937 I came to Berlin. At that time I was still Oberscharfuehrer.
Q In 1942, Dr. Ehrhardt, were you promoted to Obersturmfuehrer in the SA, with the staff of the supreme SA leadership, attached to the adjutant of the chief of staff of the SA?
A Yes.
Q In November 1943 were you promoted to Hauptsturmfuehrer with the staff of the Supreme SA leadership?
A Yes.
Q That's all.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you through with the witness, Dr. Schilf?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. SCHILF:
Q Dr. Ehrhardt, at your present place of residence, Kassel, was the so-called "Denazification Trial" started against you or did you start it?
A It must have been started because I filled out the questionnaire and handed it in. I haven't heard anything about the proceedings.
Q There was no warrant of arrest issued against you in regard to this Denazification proceeding?
A No.
Q Thank you. That is enough. That's sufficient.
Dr. Ehrhardt, another thing: as referant for non-political criminal cases, you are presumably in a position to estimate, to state the approximately number of sentences which were confirmed in 1944 during the course of the year. Are you in a position to do so?
A Yes. That's difficult. I estimate that all the death sentences that wore reported on during the year 1944 were approximately 3,500 and the number of clemency pleas granted may have been about 8 to 10 percent of those; but that is an estimate and I cannot say for certain.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be excused. Have you another witness, Dr. Schilf?
DR. SCHILF: Your Honors, I have no other witness. However, I do have -- in regard to my submission of evidence, I do have to submit my document books some time. Again I have to express my regret that my document books for Dr. Mettgenberg have not been completed. With the reservation that I may submit these document books later, I can therefore conclude my case for Dr. Mattgenberg for the time being.
THE PRESIDENT: You may do so.
DR. SCHILF: Excuse me, your Honor. I believe I didn't understand correctly.
THE PRESIDENT: I said you may do so by which I meant you may rest at this time subject to the right to introduce your document books later.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you very much, your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: The next case is that of Dr. von Ammon.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: With the permission of the Tribunal, I call the defendant von Ammon to the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Kubuschok, I suggest that you cover your preliminary matters this afternoon. Then we will recess before you go into the more serious questions. Cover your preliminary matters.
JUDGE BLAIR: The witness will be sworn, please.
Will you hold up your right hand and be sworn?
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscent, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath).
You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:
Q About your education and training, your professional career, your membership in the Nazi Party, et cetera, you submitted an affidavit which was introduced as Exhibit 55 to the Tribunal. In order to supplement the picture which can be seen from this document, I first want to put a few questions to you regarding your relationship to the NSDAP, Nazi Party. First, how did you become a member of the NSDAP?
A Before 1933 I was not a member of any political party. As a high school student and a university student, I belonged to patriotic youth organizations and Nationalist fraternities. After this time, since about 1924, I was no longer active politically. I participated in elections without being a member of a definite party. Before 1933 I never voted for the National Socialists. The leading men of that party and the policies which they represented were not in accordance with my attitude.
Therefore, the Spring of 1933 I refused to follow the example of numerous colleagues who already at that time had joined the NSDAP.
During the course of 1933, however, within the civil service, those voices became louder who were in favor of joing the NationalSocialist movement. The National Socialist movement without doubt had conquered the State. More and more people emphasized that it was the duty of a civil servant not to stand aside from the National Socialist movement. Whoever did so was characterized as an enemy of the State; and, in the course of personnel measures in my office also -- that was the Bavarian Ministry of Justice -- more and more National Socialist civil services were employed.
Therefore, following the examples of most of my colleagues. I finally gave up most of my resistance and, in September 1933, first became a member of the National Socialist professional organization; that is, the N.S. Lawyers' league; and in December 1933 I became a member of the SA. I became only in 1937 a member of the party itself. This was handled rather automatically at the time the restrictions for admittance into the party was removed and all SA men who were not yet members of the party were requested to try to become members. My Munich SA Sturmfuehrer at that time I was still in the SA in Munich although I had been working in Berlin already for years, requested me in writing to try to become a member of the party. I followed his advice and then, either towards the end of 1937 or the beginning of 1938 -- I don't remember the exact date -- I became a member, or was accepted into the Nazi Party and it became effective retroactively in May 1937.
AAfter you joined the SA and the Party, were you an enthusiastic member of the Nazi Party?
A I too, could not withdraw from the influence of Nazi Proponganda and, therefore, saw many things in a more favorable light than they wore in fact. An enthusiastic National Socialist, however, I was not since from idealogical point of view many things separated me from the Party program.
In the SA, of which I Was a member for more than 11 years, I reached only the very low rank of a Scharfuehrer. That I did not gain a higher rank was due to the fact that I, as far as possible, abstained from service in the SA.
Q On the basis of membership in the SA and your later membership in the Party were you promoted with any favoritism in your official position?
A No. Already before 1933 -- that is, since 1928 I belonged to the Bavarian Ministry of Justice and there, on the basis of the results of my examination and my technical professional qualifications, was promoted according to the principles of the so-called Ministerail career. I passed the Referendar examination in 1925 as well as the Assessor examination in 1928 as the best student of my year. In Bavaria I passed the Referendar examination with "Excellent" and the Assessor examination as "very good." After 1933 I even was put in an unfavorable position to the extent that colleagues who had been in service less long than I but who had party connections were promoted over me, were favored in promotions. I assume that under any other government I could have become Ministiriat Counsellor in 1943, if not before also.
Q Herr von Ammon, how did it come about that you were called to the Reich Ministry of Justice from 1935 to 1944?
A I mentioned that in 1927 I passed my assessor examination. Immediately after passing that examination, I was called to the Reich Ministry of Justice. Already in the Bavarian Ministry of Justice I had since 1934 been in charge of the department for inter-state legal relations, especially for the extradition cases. Therefore, in that special field I gained specialized knowledge and experience and also did some writing in this field.
On the first of January, 1935, the Ministries of Justice of the German Laender were eliminated, dissolved and the questions of inter-state legal relations were from then on uniformly administered in the Reich Ministry of Justice in Berlin. For that reason, I too was transferred to the Reich Ministry of Justice in Berlin in order to work there especially in the field of international legal relations in penal cases.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will recess until Monday morning at the usual hour.
(A recess was taken until 0930 o'clock, Monday, 4 August 1947.)
specialized experiences in the field of international law, legal traffic and international law in penal cases was the important factor. Due to drafting into the Wehrmacht at that time in the Reich Ministry of Justice, in the division for administration of criminal law, only the gentlemen were left who were used to working in the field of international law. They were Mettgenberg and Reissner. These two gentlemen, in June, 1940, were away from Berlin for several weeks. They were in Budapest for negotiations about a German-Hungarian extradiction pact or treaty, so that there was nobody left in Berlin who could carry on current business. The defendant Mettgenberg last week testified that he saw to it that I would again be called to the Reich Ministry of Justice.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: May I suggest a question about the translation. In German, the defendant von Ammon used the word "Zwischenstaatlicherrechtverkehr." Those word is in no way the same as international law. The word means that official interchange in the legal field between two states is dealt with -- it is interstate legal relations. I believe that is what it means. The defendant von Ammon just mentioned that he was in Munich as Oberlandsgerichtsrat, and was working at that time under senate president Dr. Erhardt, who is now Bavarian Minister President Dr. Erhardt gave me an affidavit for the defendant von Ammon. I have made up the document book for von Ammon which is very modest in its extent, because it contains only six affidavits and comprises altogether eleven pages. The affidavit by Minister President Erhardt is also very brief. If the Tribunal will permit me, I would like to read this affidavit now and submit it as an exhibit. The Prosecution has already received my document book in German, and as far as I know, it has no objection to this procedure.
THE PRESIDENT: It's all right.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: The affidavit by the Bavarian Minister President Erhardt is of 21 July, 1947 and reads as follows, with the usual introductory formula. "Former Ministerial Councillor Dr. von Ammon, from about the beginning of 1939 until the beginning of 1940 belonged, as a judge, Oberlandsgerichtsrat, judge of the district court of appeal, to the district Court of Appeal, Munich, and during that period he was assigned to the Fifth Civil Senate, of which I was the presiding judge. None of the then judges of the Fifth Civil Senate were in anyway active in National Socialist ways. Most of them did not even belong to the Party. Herr von Ammon, too, as a judge, did not participate in a National Socialists activity in any way. In the Fifth Civil Senate cases were also dealt with that had a political coloration. Be it that some leaders of the NSDAP or Jews were affected by the decision, Herr von Ammon shared the opinion with all the judges of the senate that political or racial elements should be left out of the consideration entirely in the activity of a judge, and he voted in that sense in absolute agreement with the rest of the judges. During the period when he belonged to the senate, I frequently discussed with him the general political situation under the regime of the nazis, and at that time I clearly and unequivocally expressed my negative attitude. Herr von Ammon during the conversation with me absolutely agreed with my opinion. I knew Herr von Ammon from years before, and from the confidential nature of our conversation I harbored no doubt that the statements he made at that time and the attitude he had toward me was absolutely in accordance with his inner convictions. I considered and I learned to value von Ammon as a very capable judge, who had a great deal of character; his actions and his ideas in his activity as a judge were based upon the principle of justice and humaneness. Personally I could find out that human kindness was especially characteristics of von Ammon, and this can in no way be brought into connection with the idea of brutality."
I submit this affidavit and ask the Tribunal to receive it as Exhibit -- von Ammon No, 1
THE PRESIDENT: May I inquire. The exhibit is received but the copies will be in your document book, will they not?
DR. KUBUSCHOK: All right when the document books are received they will be marked von Ammon Exhibit No. 1, and you can mark the original in the same manner.