A. Which one is that? Which one is the one you mean?
(Mr. Rapp walks to the witness stand and points out to the witness the entry in question.)
Q. Did you make that entry in your own handwriting?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Is the whole diary in your own handwriting, Witness?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. And you identify it to be your own personal diary? Is that correct?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Will you now turn to the next page appearing behind the 12th of August 1944, which has been narked by me with an "X"? Do you find that?
A. Yes, I have it.
Q. Will you now read this entry in the German language aloud until you come to the next "X" on the following page? I think it starts: "Es gab einen vorzueglichen Mokka der irrsinning stark war."
A. I'm afraid I can't read it because I haven't my glasses here.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Proceed.
MR. RAPP: Is it agreeable to the Tribunal, in view of the fact that the witness doesn't have his spectacles here, that his Defense Counsel shall read this part for him?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: You can read it yourself, can't you? Can't you read it?
MR. RAPP: Very well. (Retrieves the copy from the witness.)
I am referring to the entry under the 12th of August.
(Reading in German.)
"We had excellent Mokka coffee which was awfully strong. And there was a very pleasant and unrestrained conversation. Besides me, General Hoelter, Lt. Col. Uebelhack, Colonel Dirmeyer, as well as Reinold, were also present. Of course, ideological problems were also discussed where the Austrian "R" behaved as a wild enemy of the clergy, for whom he had a deadly hatred, whereby Hoelter assisted him. I stressed other problems and held a different opinion which I supported with statements of the Fuehrer, quoted in "Mein Kampf." On the whole "R" is no imposing personality, which could be compared to Dietl, made in one caste, or could be compared to Model who is the personified dynamics. He is no organ entirely at all a synthesis composed of diplomatic cunning and soldiership. Much is pose and make-believe. One might almost consider it showing off. A personality one could just as little imagine without a mirror as without a propaganda chief, out without doubt he is clever and energetic and possesses sure instincts."
Q. Will you tell us who the "Ostmaerkler R" is?
A. That's quite Obvious.
Q. Just a minute, Witness. Will you please tell me who the "Ostmaerkler R" is? That's all I asked you right now.
A. You know whom I meant.
Q. Are you refusing to give me this answer, Witness, despite the fact that you know it?
A. No.
Q. Then, give it.
A. It is General Rendulic.
Q. I have no further questions, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: Frankly I didn't get the gist of it. You kept reading it, and the Interpreter was interpreting, and it was just a jumble so far as I'm concerned.
We couldn't hear the Interpreter and the reading at the same time.
MR. RAPP: Do you suggest that we re-do the interpretation, Your Honor?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: If you'd have the Tribunal know what it's about, we would.
(Mr. Rapp takes the document in question to the court German-English interpreter)
THE COURT GERMAN-ENGLISH INTERPRETER: Do you want the English text read again, Your Honor--the English version?
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: I wouldn't be particularly interested in the German.
THE COURT GERMAN-ENGLISH INTERPRETER: The English translation of this reads: "We had excellent Mokka coffee which was awfully strong. And there was a very pleasant and unrestrained conversation. Besides me, General Hoelter, Lt. Col. Uebelhack, Col. Dirmeyer, as well as Reinold, were also present. Of course, ideological problems were also discussed whereby the Ostmaerkler "R" behaved as a wild enemy of the clergy, for whom he had a deadly hatred, whereby Hoelter assisted him. I stressed other problems and held a different opinion which I supported with statements of the Fuehrer which he quoted in "Mein Kampf." On the whole "R" is no imposing personality, which could be compared to Dietl, who is made in one caste, or could be compared to Model, who is personified dynamics. He is no organic entirely at all but a synthesis composed of a diplomatic cunning and soldiership. Much is pose and makebelieve. One might almost call it showing off, a personality one cannot imagine without a mirror nor without a propaganda chief.
But without doubt he is clever and energetic and possesses sure instincts."
PRESIDING JUDGE BURKE: The German word that was used there in your translation, what does that mean?
THE COURT GERMAN-ENGLISH INTERPRETER: The word "Ostmark" means "Eastern province," and I believe was applied to Austria in the German designation. Austria was called "Ostmark," and "Ostmaerkler" is an inhabitant of the "Ostmark."
DR. FRITSCH: May I, first of all, ask to be shown this photostat for a short period? (Mr. Rapp hands the document to Dr. Fritsch.)
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. General, you stated that this is your handwriting?
A. Yes.
Q. May I, first of all, ask you whether these are official diary entries, or, if not, of what nature are these diary entries?
A. These are very personal notes which were meant purely for my own use and which were never supposed to find their way into publicity.
Q. Did you give this diary to the Prosecution?
A. No, this diary was taken from me by a British officer after the capitulation. It was taken out of my luggage.
Q. Was the 12th of August the day on which, for the first time, you reported to General Rendulic?
A. Yes, that was the day. On the 12th of August I say General Rendulic for the first time, and, therefore, I could not possibly have had a correct impression of his personality. That I changed my impression of General Rendulic later on considerably cannot by any meany be doubted.
Q. Did you know General Rendulic from any other connections from a former period?
A. No, I had never seen him before. I had never seen General Rendulic.
Q. Did you previously discuss with anybody else the personality of General Rendulic?
A. No.
Q. When, on the 12th of August, did you arrive in Rovanjemmi?
A. I arrived in the evening of the 11th of August, or it might have been the 12th. I don't know. In any case I arrived in Rovanjemmi and met General Rendulic at dinner, and after dinner we all sat together, out I still believe that it was the day before the 12th of August.
Q. For how long did you all stay together?
A. We all had dinner that lasted maybe half an hour or threequarters of an hour, and then we adjourned to his apartment. That might have taken another three to four hours.
Q. How do you explain the discrepancy between your statement --when you were interrogated on the third of September, which interrogation was mentioned to you by Mr. Rapp and where you said that ideological questions were never discussed--and this diary entry.
A. I had explicitly pointed out to Mr. Rapp before I was interrogated that a long period had elapsed and that in many things I would not be sure of my memory. Then Mr. Kaufmann said to me that those things which he wanted to know from me would refer to imnressions which were unforgettable to anybody and that was quite correct where military Operations were concerned but I really don't remember this particular incident because, after all, it is not such a very impressive fact that we discussed over an after dinner cup of coffee matters which included ideological factors.
Q. General, there can be no doubt, can there, that these notes which you laid down in your diary were of derogatory type?
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. Did you feel that you were, after you had for two or three hours talked to the man, in a position to give such an opinion?
A. I would have never voiced such an opinion to anybody else but if I write down my own impressions which I made, that was certainly meant just for my own personal use, and therefore they were made under the impression which I gained through the conversation.
Q. General, I am not at the moment interested in the purpose of the diary entry. I am mainly concerned with the fact whether or not you at a later time still maintained that opinion.
Q. As I have already said, at that time I couldn't even know the General properly and what I wrote down under this first impression wasn't even correct, and in essential points my own opinion changed in the course of our collaboration.
Q. Did you only have mocca to drink on that evening?
A. I believe yes, but I am afraid I can't answer that one.
Q. But I would still like to know. After all, it is not all that far back.
A. I am fairly sure that in a house which was run as General Rendulic's house was run there would be something else to drink as well.
Q. General, I would really be very pleased if you could strain your memory a little. After all, you don't have to be ashamed of anything.
A. No, but after all I am under oath here and all I can say is I don't quite know what we had to drink that evening but I am fairly sure we had alcoholic drinks too.
Q. And then the conversation went a little far afield, did it? I beg your pardon, General, you reported there you were invited for dinner. Then you talked for three hours or so, as you said, and apparently you were in very good company. That is, you had a lively conversation. And then you said when you started your diary entry you had mocca to drink. Now my question is very simple and it is the following was it only mocca you had to drink or were there alcoholic drinks too at your disposal in that house?
A. Yes, there were other drinks too.
Q. And if you try to call these things back to memory on the basis of those diary notes, do you now believe that this conversation might have been under the influence of this little festivity which you had there?
A. Oh yes, that is quite sure. Certainly it did.
Q. At a later date, General, did you again meet General Rendulic?
A. On two occasions.
Q. On these two occasions was there any talk about highly po litical matters as they are called here?
A. Not to the best of my recollection.
Q. In the interrogation, by the prosecution, you talked about this discussion - whether one or the other great power would not continue to fight. You called this subject a highly political one. Was that quite unusual that one discussed these things at the time?
A. No, by no means.
Q. And if I may now refer back to the ideological side of the conversation, now you have had a little time to think back about these things. What was actually discussed?
A. You mean ideologically?
Q. No, I mean when you reported at the beginning of August, 1944, ideologically.
A. If my recollection is correct, I had touched upon the question that according to the party program, religious freedom was somehow absolutely secured. And in connection with this problem somebody else must have had a contrasting opinion. I remember that now by looking at that diary entry.
Q. I am not quite clear what you mean. Do you mean that General Rendulic said that the party program wasn't quite so secure in all its fundamentals?
A. He said that it was out of date.
Q. What you mean is that the party didn't feel itself bound to these principles?
A. Yes, it must have been a remark of that sort.
Q. That would have been a remark against the party, wouldn't it?
A. I believe that we talked about a change which had taken place in the party program which was much debated at the time. After all, it is quite certain that in the party program religious freedom was assured but in many respects this point of the party program had not been properly carried out in actual practice, but I am very sorry I don't really know any details.
Q General, I don't want any details, All I want to know is what was the direction, the tendency, of General Rendulic's remark? I would like to put the question a little more precisely. Did he, for instance, state that it was unfortunate-
MR. RAPP. Your Honor, I think defense counsel is somewhat leading his own witness. I object to that.
THE PRESIDENT: Overruled.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. Did General Rendulic state that it was unfortunate that the party had changed its direction where the party program concerning the religious freedom was concerned? That is one possibility, or did he welcome this point of view of the party?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Fritsch, you can ask him what he said, I think that would get to the actual facts.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, I tried that but the witness says that he cannot remember the exact words and now I would like to at least ascertain the tendency of this conversation.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if he doesn't know, he is not able to state, is he?
DR. FRITSCH: May I put the question again please, a little differently?
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q Witness, can you remember the tenor of this conversation? What I mean is what was the point of view which General Rendulic maintained? Was he on the side of religion or was he on the other side?
A. He was on the side of the restriction of political influence of church agencies.
Q And you, in your diary, used a little stronger expression, didn't you?
A. Undoubtedly, at first under the impression of this first meeting, I wrote down this prejudiced opinion.
Q. And just about when did your point of view change?
A. It changed through the close contact which I had in my work with General Rendulic.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, I have no further questions to put.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further examination?
MR. RAPP: I only have one point, your Honor, and I would ask if we could have the recess now that I could check this particular one point.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, we will recess at this time.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
DR. FRITSCH: I have no further questions, Your Honor.
MR. RAPP: I also have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Carter, do you have any questions?
JUDGE CARTER: No.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Burke:
BY JUDGE BURKE:
Q. What has been the period of your military service?
A. 33 years.
Q. Do you usually feel yourself equipped to write a character sketch the first evening you meet an individual?
A. No, I have already stressed that I cannot be responsible for what I wrote down this evening, probably also under other influences, and I must repeat again that they were then most secret inner thoughts which certainly I never meant to be available to anybody else.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. When were you brought here to Nurnberg the first time?
A. On the 23 August this year.
Q. And at whose request and demand, if you know?
A. I don't know.
Q. Had you been interrogated at that time or been communicated with by the defense?
A. No.
Q. At the time that you were interrogated had you been at that time communicated with by the defense or the defense counsel?
A. No.
Q. Do you know how the defendant got hold you you or made any inquiries as to your whereabouts or as to what you might know about the case?
A. I don't quite understand the question. Would you repeat it?
Q. Do you know how Dr. Fritsch or the defendant knew you might be in a position to testify about this case?
A. No, I don't know anything about that at all.
Q. When did they first communicate with you?
A. When I came back from Neustadt, and that was around about the 11 of September, the 11th or 12th of September.
Q. Did Dr. Fritsch write you or did he come to the camp?
A. No. I only found that out when we came back from Neustadt and General Hoelter told me that Dr. Fritsch placed some importance upon me, and as far as I know Mr. Kaufmann also made some indication that it was possible that the defense might call me as a witness.
Q. You mean Mr. Kaufmann of the prosecution staff?
A. Yes.
Q. He said that the defense might be interested in having you called as a witness--I mean, that was the report that came to you?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he make that statement to you when you were interrogated or was that the report that came to you?
A. I heard about that indirectly.
Q. Now, when you were brought here to Nurnberg what date was that and in what manner were you brought here?
A. On the 22nd August I was flown from London to Frankfurt, because I had been requested by the Historical Division in order to take part in the historical work in Neustadt, and when I arrived in Frankfurt on the 22nd August I was told on the airfield that I was coming to Nurnberg, I didn't know the reason, and I was interrogated for the first time on the Thursday following. I think that was about September 3.
Q. And were you taken to the Nurnberg prison and kept there during the time that you were here in Nurnberg?
A. Yes, with the exception of a five days interruption, which I spent in Neustadt, I spent the whole time in the Courthouse jail.
Q. Were you here twice for two different interrogations?
A. No, only one interrogation. The first interrogation was from the 1st to the 3rd of September, and then nothing else from the prosecution, only discussions with Dr. Fritsch.
Q. When were these discussions with Dr. Fritsch?
A. Mainly during the course of the last 14 days.
Q. Now, when you were interrogated by the prosecution where were you taken?
A. Over here in a room on the first floor.
Q. Do you know what the name of the room is, or what kind of a room it is?
A. When you come up the stairs it is left, the first door off the large corridor in the first floor.
Q. Do you know the number of the room?
A. No, but perhaps Mr. Hofmann knows the number.
Q. How large a room is it?
A. About as big as from this wall behind you as far as me, and then square.
Q. Were you told when you made that statement that what you said then might be used against you?
A. No.
Q. Did you have any counsel or have an opportunity to call any counsel at that time?
A. No.
Q. Did you ask for the privilege of calling a counsel?
A. No.
Q. Who was in the room at the time of your interrogation?
A. Mr. Kaufmann and his secretary, and during the first interrogation also the Norwegian Lt. Col. Follestad.
Q. And how long did this interrogation last?
A. It lasted one whole morning, two hours.
Q. And did it continue in the afternoon?
A. No, it was continued two days later, two or three days later.
There was an interruption.
Q. And who was present at that time for the second interrogation?
A. The same people, Mr. Kaufmann from the prosecution and his secretary.
Q. Did I understand you to say in your direct examination or in cross-examination, or sometime during the examination, that Mr. Rapp was present, or am I mistaken in that?
A. No, it could only be a slip of the tongue by me, but Mr. Rapp was never present. I made a mistake once and I meant Mr. Kaufmann.
Q. On this second period of interrogation how long were you in this inquisitorial room?
A. Two to two and a half hours again,--two hours.
Q. Were you furnished a copy of what was taken down at that time and of the statements that were made?
A. I merely read them through and signed them.
Q. And did they furnish you with a copy of the proceedings that were held there?
A. No, I did not get a copy.
Q. Did you ask for a copy?
A. I did not know that one could ask for one.
Q. This was on the 22nd of August, is that correct, or the 3rd of September?
A. What do you mean, when I signed it?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, that was on the 3rd or 5th of September. The last interrogation was on the 3rd of September, and the signing, if I am not very much mistaken, on the 5th September.
Q. You signed it on the 5th?
A. Yes.
Q. At that time did you know that there had been an application made by this defense counsel that you be called here as a defense witness?
A. No, I didn't know at that time.
Q. Are you under indictment at this time?
A. No.
Q. Is there any charge pending against you of a preliminary nature?
A. No.
Q. Do you know of any reason why you were investigated and interrogated?
A. I assume because it could be seen from the court files that I knew about the events in Northern Norway and Finnland, and therefore could give important information about it.
Q. You were not called as a witness for the prosecution after they had interrogated you?
A. No, I heard after I had been interrogated that the prosecution authorities placed no value at all upon my testimony.
Q. But they preserved it and used it in this cross-examination?
A. Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all. The witness may be excused.
(Witness excused)
DR. FRITSCH: With the permission of the Tribunal I now submit my document book II.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Fritsch, I think we should wait until these documents are obtained from our respective offices, if you will, please?
JUDGE CARTER: Mr. Rapp?
MR RAPP: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE CARTER: Was this interrogation of the General made by the prosecution after he had been called as a witness for the defense?
MR RAPP: Of course not, Your Honor.
JUDGE CARTER: The dates are so close it looks like it might have been.
I thought I might ask if that was possible.
MR. RAPP: I was afraid that the Tribunal might gain that impression. The witness was obtained by us with the thought in mind of using him as a prosecution witness against the defendant Rendulic. Upon examination and interrogation at that time we decided he would be of no use in direct examination. The witness was then in Nurnberg, and discharged to go back to Neustadt or to the British P.W. Camp. During that time the defense, as usual and quite correctly, got information that this particular man was here and asked us whether or not we made any further claim, and we then disavowed at that time any further claim and turned him over lock stock and barrel to the defense for whatever use they might see fit, and from that date on we have never talked to the witness again.
JUDGE CARTER: Very well.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has the document book, Dr. Fritsch, so if you care to proceed you may do so.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, the first document is the photostat copy of this map of Norway. In the meantime I have obtained the maps which are missing from your Honors books and I would like to submit than to you now.
This is Rendulic Document II, No. 100. I give this map Exhibit No. 44.
The next document is Rendulic Document II, No. 40, and this I offer as Rendulic Exhibit 45. This is an affidavit by the former Colonel Kurt Herrmann. I would like to direct the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that in the prosecution documents the evacuation report of this Colonel Herrmann is contained. Herrmann was the leader of the evacuation staff in Northern Norway. Herrmann states in the document, to be offered by me, the following, and I read from the third paragraph:
"Formerly I was Army Adjutant to General Dietl until June 1944. From that date onwards I was the Commander of the 310th Grendadier Regiment within the XXXVIth Corps of the 163rd Infantry Division. This Regiment was stationed in Lapland (Finland) eastwards of Ivaloim, the so called Lutto sector, when I received the order to report to the Army Command regarding the taking over of the evacation Staff. This report was received at the Senior Quartermaster of the 20th Mountain Army Command approx, during the last days of October or during the first days of November, and a few days later at the Chief of Staff, Brigadier-General (Generalmajor) HOELTER. The ordered issued by the Supreme Command of the Wehrmacht, as previously mentioned, had, in the meantime, been passed on to the different units and the Evacuation Staff under my Command was to see to it that these orders were properly carried out. Brigadier-General HOELTER as well as the Senior Quartermaster pointed out to me that it was of particular importance that the Wehrmacht assisted the civilian population to the greatest extent.
The topic of these conversations centered around this assistance.
"The question, whether the destructions and evacuations were a military necessity, was, at the time of the order, to be answered in the affirmative. In the sector of my own regiment eastwards of Ivalo I reckoned with very strong following-up movements by the Russians and Finns, the latter now being Russia's allies. The winter, combined with the condition of the soil, was no protection against the attacking power of the Russians. This protection would only then come into effect, when owing to the season, the enemy had no possibility to entrench himself, when any kind of space was essential. In addition I had to take into consideration the evacuation and the assistance guaranteed by the Wehrmacht, as I knew that the Norwegians were fleeing from the Russians and, as this was unorganized, great dangers were involved. In fact according to my report 6000 Norwegians had fled, when the fighting got near the Norwegian border."
The affiant then continues:
"General DIETL had informed me, and I expect that the Army Command knew of it, that Russia has put forward claims regarding Northern Norway, Northern Finland and possibly North Sweden. Because of this fact, the impression that Russia now wanted to occupy this territory was strengthened. From this viewpoint the possible destruction of Hammerfest would have a special significance as it would have been easy for the Russian Naval Forces as well as for the British to establish a base in Hammerfest for operations in Northern Norway.
"The evacuation was carried out through the section commanders, in fact through the Division Commanders and so-called Sub-section Commanders such as local Commanders etc. I, with my staff, which consisted of Lieutenant HAGMEISTER, MEIER zu Rahden and two clerks received all reports and it was my task to see to it that the Wehrmacht procured the necessary transportation, food supplies and other auxiliaries for the evacuation.
In addition the Staff consisted of SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer NEUMANN, who was a representative of the Reich Commissioner and who was not subordinate to me. To NEUMANN I conveyed for instance, the requirements for transportation space, meaning shipping space, insofar as it did not concern Warships or shipments handled by the Navy. NEUMANN and the Reich Commissioner were of the opinion that the evacuation of the civilian population were their concern and jealously guarded their rights. I, in the capacity of chief of the evacuation staff, only had to see to it that the civilian population was provided with the necessary auxiliaries. I was not in a position to issue direct orders. I could, however, in case of emergency, issue orders, via the Army, to the Section - and Sub-section Commanders. Regarding the Navy there was no such possibility as the Navy was, in no way, subordinated to the Army. In this respect I had no occasion ever to approach the Army or the Command of the Navy, because my wishes which I expressed regarding civil treatment of the civilian population by the section commanders and their sub-sections, were complied with.
"I can assert that everything was done to help the civilian population and recall an instance where the occupants of an old-age institution could not be evacuated immediately as planned, because the heated ambulance craft, requisitioned for this purpose, had not arrived in time and had to be waited for. I am able to recall another instance: It had come to my knowledge that some Norwegian women on board a transport vessel which was to dock in Alta, were pregnant. As this steamer was scheduled to arrive at night, I did everything in order to have these women moved to a field hospital and finally succeeded, after having 1st Lieutenant (Medical Corps) Dr. GABBLER awakened, who, in turn, procured ambulances in order to collect these women off the boat, also, apart from this, all possible measures were taken, at the expense of the orderly retreat of the Wehrmacht, in order to assist the population in transporation matters.
