Do you expect those to be ready today? No? Not these?
MR. ROBBINS: I think they will be ready, at least some of them today, and I hope all of them by tomorrow. I think they are probably rebuttal documents, and I design simply to rebut the defense, and I don't know how long this can go on, whether the defense is entitled to rebut the rebuttal, and we can rebut their rebuttal?
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, you will have to admit that a good deal of your rebuttal could have been properly introduced in your main case. Now, as to the witness Otto, it is only by kind imagination that we called it rebuttal.
MR. ROBBINS: They will be ready to answer Your Honor's questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Some of them today?
MR. ROBBINS: I believe so.
THE PRESIDENT: I am concerned with filling up the day.
MR. ROBBINS: Well, a great number of the defense document books that are ready.
THE PRESIDENT: If we run out of witnesses, the defense will be prepared to offer some documents?
MR. ROBBINS: Before the Doctor arrives, and while he is arriving, I should like to raise the question of the admissibility of his testimony, or of the relevancy here. I understand that the defense counsel intend to conduct an insanity hearing here in court of the witness Otto. Now, that is a very complicated and delicate question. I understand that the Doctor who is being called from Haar-Eggelfing has never treated Otto, is that right? He has?
(Discussion ensued between Mr. Robbins and defense attorney.)
MR. ROBBINS : Then I withdraw my statement. I would like to say to the Court, however, that the witness Otto has been for several days under the close and almost constant examination of the Prison Psychiatrist, and he is now in the general hospital in Nurnberg under the observation of two distinguished Psychiatrists.
They have the complete files from Haar-Eggelfing, and, they are making a very thorough examination as to his purported insanity. The Prison Psychiatrist, I understand, is an officer of the Court, and he will be prepared, I believe, tomorrow to give a complete report to the Tribunal on the witness' state of mind.
THE TRIBUNAL: Herr von Stakelberg, I have in mind that the defendants, Fanslau and Tschentscher will undoubtedly take the stand on their own behalf, again. That can be done today. In fact, it can be done immediately, if agreeable.
The Tribunal itself wishes to recall the defendant Oswald Pohl to answer a number of questions. We will do that first.
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Dr. Stakelberg, for the defendant Fanslau. Your Honor, the witness, Dr. Steigele has just now arrived. However, I must refute one statement which I have made just now. Dr. Steigele actually did not himself treat and observe the witness Otto. The Doctor who treated him at the time has left the Institution, and he is now engaged in private practice. Dr. Steigele only knows the general case history.
(Discussion between Mr. Robbins and Dr. Stakelberg ensued off the record).
MR. ROBBINS: Apparently, the Doctor whom the defense proposes to call knows nothing about the witness Otto, except what he has seen in the files, and he has not treated nor observed the witness Otto. Now all these files are presently in the hands of the Prison Psychiatrist, at his request, and it seems to me that the best evidence would be to let the Prison Psychiatrist examine the files, and examine Otto and make his report. I think the testimony of this Doctor would be of very little value, since he does not know the case himself. This is a very complicated issue.
THE TRIBUNAL: Well, could he not testify as an expert from the records, the official records of the hospital without having examined the patient in person?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, I think he probably could. However, it is going to be repetitious, I take it, of what the Prison Psychiatrist will testify to.
THE TRIBUNAL: If two Psychiatrists agree, I shall be very much surprised, Now I see no objection to this Doctor testifying to a professional conclusion from official hospital records. I think that is competent evidence within the field of opinion proof. The Court will take into consideration the fact that he has not treated nor examined the patient in determining the weight of the testimony. All right, take the defendant Oswald Pohl to the witness stand, Mr. Marshal.
DR. PRIBILLA: Dr. Pribilla for the defendant Tschentscher. Your Honor, within the last week my physical condition was very bad, and Dr. Krauss represented me here. So far as the preparation of rebuttal evidence of Tschentscher is concerned, we have not completed it as yet. I had difficulty in locating the witnesses, and I would prefer if I could call my witnesses and Tschentscher to the witness stand only after Dr. von Stakelberg has presented his evidence on behalf of the defendant Fanslau.
THE TRIBUNAL: There is no objection to that, Dr. Pribilla, provided there is no delay between witnesses. If you will be ready to go ahead as soon as Dr. von Stakelberg has finished. That will be all right.
The defendant Oswald Pohl is recalled as a witness by the Tribunal. OSWALD POHL, a defendant, recalled to the stand, and testified as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: I would like to remind you that you are still under oath.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
Q Now will you please answer my questions directly and briefly, and please do not say, "As I testified on direct examination." I know what you testified to, but just answer these particular questions right to the point, if you please?
A Yes.
Q Who appointed the concentration camp commanders?
A Himmler.
Q Who appointed the concentration camp Administrative Officers?
A I did.
Q Who nominated, or suggested the names of the concentration camp commanders to Himmler?
A The Inspector of the concentration camp. In one case I did.
Q When you were in Auschwitz did you see the extermination chambers, or the crematorium?
A I saw them from a distance.
Q How close were you?
A Several hundred meters. That was on the way to the agriculture plant. I don't know how close this way passed by these installations.
Q Were you ever standing within twenty-five meters of the crematorium?
A No.
Q How long were you in the concentration camp at Auschwitz on this visit?
A Generally arrived there in the morning on an early train from Berlin, and, then I stayed there throughout the day, and I either left again in the evening, or I left on the following morning.
Q You were there about a day?
A Yes.
Q Who appointed Gluecks?
A Himmler did.
Q. Did you nominate him, or suggest him?
A He was there already when I came to this organization in 1942. So far as I know Gluecks had already been with the organization since 1937, or '38.
Q I understand he was there before WVHA?
A Yes.
Q. Well, did you suggest his appointment in the first place back in 1934, or '36, whenever it was?
A No, I had nothing whatsoever to do with it.
Q Who appointed Liebehenschel?
A He was also there when I came to this organization in 1942.
Q Did you have anything to do with his selection?
A No.
Q Who appointed Pook?
A I have seen Pook here for the first time. I don't know how he came to that organization. Since he was a dentist apparently this was done by order of the Reich Physician-SS, who assigned the medical personnel in its entirety.
Q You had nothing to do with his selection by the Medical Office?
A No.
A How Sommer came to Office Group D I don't know. I can't recall that this matter passed through my hands. Apparently this was some sort of reassignment, but I don't know how it was carried out.
Q Did you ask for his reassignment to WVHA?
A I personally did not.
Q Did you appoint or dismiss the AMT chiefs?
A Yes.
Q So that you could either have removed or transferred them as you thought best?
A Yes.
Q Did you hire or dismiss the company managers in the DWB industries?
A Yes.
Q Were the W industries SS industries?
A No.
Q Did you have Rudolf Hoess transferred in December 1943, from Auschwitz. I think, to Chief of AMT D_I?
A Yes.
Q When you asked to have him transferred to your department you knew that he had been for a long timecamp commander at Auschwitz?
A Yes.
Q Did you know anything more about him?
A I knew at the time that he was assigned to carry out the extermination program.
Q And in spite of that you wanted him to work for you?
A His reassignment took place by order of Himmler. I only was active in carrying it out. After all he remained within the Inspectorate, or Office Group D.
Q Did you ask for his transfer?
A Himmler arranged it and Himmler ordered it.
Q Well, did he order it at your request?
A. We discussed the matter.
Q And you both agreed on the transfer of Hoess to AMT D_I?
A Yes.
Q In the organization chart which you signed, Exhibit 36, you refer to Hohberg as Chief of Staff W.
A I can't understand the question, your Honor.
Q You recall the organization chart which you prepared and signed?
A Yes.
Q At the bottom of it you designate Hohberg as Chief of Staff W?
A Yes.
Q Was he Chief of Staff W?
A I cannot answer this question with yes or no.
Q You don't have to. Answer it in your own way.
A I cannot recall that I appointed Hohberg to be Chief of Staff W.
Q Do you not recall signing an order calling him Chief of Staff W?
A That is possible.
Q Did Hohberg ask you to revoke that order, to cancel it?
A I can't recall that.
Q Did you ever cancel it?
A I can't recall it, your Honor.
Q Do you recall Hohberg protesting that he couldn't keep his status as an independent auditor and at the same time be Chief of Staff W?
A I can recall that at the time, after the denunciation of an unknown person to the professional chamber to which Hohberg belonged-
Q That is the Accountants' Institute, wasn't it?
A Yes, and that I wrote to this institute that Hohberg was not working as an auditor in the WVHA, I wrote this letter that he was an auditor in the WVHA, at the request of Hohberg because he only wanted to have the position of an auditor.
Q So that in effect you established him as an independent auditor rather than as the Chief of Staff W?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Well, did Hohberg continue to act as Chief of Staff W even after you had written this letter?
A Well, this question is again connected with the other question, what was the position of this Chief of Staff W at all. I have never recognized such a position as existing.
Q Will, anyway, did Hohberg continue to perform the same duties before you wrote the letter and after you wrote the letter?
A His activity extended to all duties which had to be assigned to an independent auditor, and he also would generally consult me in general economic questions, as it was specified in his contract.
Q Well, whatever title you gave him, his duties were the same all the time he was with you?
A I haven't quite understood the translation.
(The question was again translated by the interpreter.)
A Yes.
Q You said that you knew that Rudolf Hoess was in charge of the extermination program at Auschwitz?
A Yes.
Q Did you yourself see Jews being loaded into lorries or trucks in Berlin for the purpose of resettlement?
A No.
Q Did you observe the crowds in the street that collected upon the removal of Jews?
A My agency was located at Lichterfelde. That was rather far outside of Berlin, and there I did not make any observations of that kind. Your Honor, are you now referring to 1938, or are you referring to the entire time?
Q The entire time where the program was to remove the Jews from Germany and resettle them.
A No, I never saw anything of the sort.
Q Did you appoint Hohberg to the Board of Directors of the Eastern German Furniture Company?
A There was no such board of directors. The Board of Directors of the East German Furniture Company? No such thing existed.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Construction Company
THE PRESIDENT: No it is a furniture company.
Q (By the President) Well, all right then, I will ask you about the East German Construction Company, if you insist.
A Yes, the title is not quite correct, your Honor. I still don't know what you are referring to. Are you referring to the Osti?
Q No, no.
A Then there was only the Eastern German Construction Material Company, G.m.b.H.
Q That is right.
A The Eastern German Construction Material Company, G.m.b.H.
Q Did you appoint Hohberg to the Board of Directors of that company?
A Yes.
Q Did you revoke his appointment, that is remove him when he asked you to?
A Yes.
Q Were you a director of the Cooperative Home Building Society in 1938 and '39?
A Yes, I believe I was a partner in the company. However, I can't tell you exactly, your Honor.
Q Did that company or society use concentration-camp labor?
A I don't think so.
Q Was this a W industry?
A Yes. It was not an SS industry, but it was an enterprise which was to build homes for the military and civilian members of the WVHA. It was also an agency of the Reich so to say which was under my supervision.
Q Are you sure whether prison labor, inmates, were used in that industry?
A I can't tell you that.
Q I refer you to Document No. NO-2153, Exhibit 307. Do you have your documents here?
A I don't have any documents here.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any German document book here with Exhibit 307 in it?
MR. ROBBINS: I think there are some in court.
Q (By the President) Exhibit 307, Document NO-2153.
A I have found it, yes.
Q Do you see the two paragraphs marked 1 and 2?
A Yes.
Q And does your name appear at the bottom of the paper together with Mueckel and Schaefer?
A Yes.
Q Will you read those two paragraphs to yourself, please, and see whether they refer to the use of inmate labor?
A Yes, that is correct. I can recall it now. This was the construction of settlement buildings at Dachau, and here inmates of the concentration camp Dachau were used.
Q What buildings were they building, what were they erecting?
A They were erecting apartment houses.
Q For the use of the garrison, the officers at Dachau?
A Yes, for soldiers and civilian employees of the garrison.
Q It was a housing program?
A Correct, your Honor.
Q And the work was done by the inmates of the concentration camp?
A Yes.
Q Was that the large row of two-story houses on the left as you go into Dachau?
A When you go into Dachau, these buildings are on the right side. The large number of buildings on the left side had already been erected before that.
Q These are on the right side?
A These on the right. I There were approximately 10 houses altogether.
Q After you took command of WVHA in 1942 did you approve, or at least keep the Amtschefs that were in the organization before that?
A These were my former collaborators. The change in designations in the WVHA did not carry with it any direct changes in the positions held by various personnel. There was just a change in the designations. My collaborators remained the same.
Q A change in name?
A The firm just changed its name.
Q Did you issue an order forbidding the employment of clergymen in concentration camps on clerical work, that is book work?
A I haven't quite understood your question, your Honor.
Q Did you issue an order which stated that ministers, clergymen, should not be employed in clerical work, that is paper work, in concentration camps?
A I believe so, yes.
Q Why?
A In this question Himmler interferred to a considerable extent. As far as I can recall it was to be prevented because we were dealing with intellectuals here, but thats the secrecy regulations of the matters which passed through these offices would be endangered. This order came from Himmler that they were only to be used in the herbs garden. They were to be used as gardeners.
Q Well, there were other intellectuals who were not ministers, were there not?
A Yes, but that was just one big uniform group here.
Q What do you mean by an intellectual, a man who can read and write?
A No, a person who by virtue of his professional training and his mental capacity is especially capable.
Q Capable of what, thinking for himself?
A No, but he can easily recognize whatever passes through his hands, and he can evaluate and use these matters.
Q And you didn't want any smart men around, any intelligent men around, for fear they would find out what was going on?
A In the offices, in the enterprises, we had s-called clerks. These were simple people, for this work no special qualifications were needed. I did not initiate this matter at all anyway.
Q You implemented it; you carried the order on from Himmler, if that is where it came from.
A Yes. I did that.
Q Were prisoners of war used as laborers in armament plants?
A Not with my knowledge.
Q Will you turn to Document NO-1215, Exhibit 328 - 1215?
A Yes, I have found it.
Q This is a letter from Krammler to you, is it not?
A Yes.
Q Will you look at the paragraph No. 2?
A Yes, I have read it.
Q Does that say that concentration-camp inmates were employed in armament industries?
A Yes.
Q Well, I asked you whether inmates were used in the armament industries, and you said no.
A You asked me before whether prisoners of war were used, your Honor.
Q You are right. There were prisoners of war in the concentration camps?
A Yes, I only heard that here later on.
Q You didn't know that the Russian and Polish prisoners of war were kept in concentration camps?
A In the material which was available to me only inmates were mentioned.
Q And you never knew that that included prisoners of war?
A I can't recall today that I realized that clearly at the time.
Q Well, that is not a very positive answer. Can you say whether or not you knew that prisoners of war from the east were kept in concentration camps?
A I can't answer that question with yes or no, your Honor, because I can't recall the matter precisely.
Q Who was the SS-Economic Administrator?
A Well, I don't quite understand your title. The Chief of the Administration of the SS, that was I. Are you referring to the title?
Q I don't understand it either. I find that title in the translation, and I didn't know whom it referred to.
MR. ROBBINS: SS-Wirtschafter.
A The term is SS-Wirtschafter, the SS-Economic Expert. Who was that? There were several of them. There were several economic experts in the occupied territories. As far as I can recall at the end there were three. There was an SS-Economic Expert Eastland, as SS--Eccnomic Expert in the Government General, and in the end of the SS-Economic Expert in Hungary, I cannot recall any additional ones.
Q (By the President) Well, in September, 1942, Hohberg's title was changed to Economic Inspector, was it not?
A That is something quite different.
Q Oh, yes, I know.
A That has nothing to do with the SS economic experts.
Q That is right.
A That was my attempt that through an inspector I would have a man who would carry out the trips which I was unable to carry out myself so that I would be informed about whatever happened in the enterprises. But Hohberg... ....
Q And be informed promptly?
A Yes, quite right.
Q I know the Economic Inspector has nothing to do with the Economic Administrator.
A No.
A. Now, you have Book 12 in your hand?
A. Yes.
Q. Look at Exhibit 340, three-four-zero and three-four-one.
A. Yes, I found it.
A. Did you receive this letter from Mueller, Exhibit 340?
A. Yes.
A. What about three-four-one? Which is a letter from Himmler, Document NO-2031.
A. Yes.
Q. The question is, did you receive that?
A. I assume that, Your Honor.
A. Well, I assume that if Himmler wrote a letter to you that your got it.
A. Exactly.
Q. Now, the next document, NO-1523, from Himmler to you-
A. Will you give me the document number once more, please.
A. One-five-two-three.
A. Yes.
A. You did receive that?
A. No; this is a letter of the Office Group D, Gluecks, to the Camp Commanders.
Q. No; you have the wrong document then.
A. One-five-two-three....
A. Well, there are several documents. One-five-two-three is a letter of 31 December, 1942, from Himmler to you.
A. Yes, I have it.
A. Did you receive that letter?
A. Yes, I must assume that I did receive the letter.
A. Well, I must assume that any letter that you got from Himmler, you read them; you didn't throw them in the waste basket.
A. Your Honor, in my activity in my office I must have received millions of letters, and it is quite impossible for a human being to state here that I did receive this letter.
Q. Oh, I am just talking about letters from Himmler///
A. Well, in general I would read all letters which came from Himmler. However, it is quite possible that I did not read one or the other letter. From the date here I could say exactly that during that time I was on leave for nine or ten days because early in December I married, and in January I was visiting a friend whom I also stayed with, and that letter comes from that time. However, that does not matter. In general, of course, if I am to say under oath that I received a certain letter, then of course it is very difficult for me, if it is not a letter which has a specific intent. I must say here that I must assume that I did receive the letter at the time.
Q. All right, that is satisfactory. Was OSTI a DWB enterprise?
A. I didn't understand your question, Your Honor. (Question repeated to witness) The OSTI also was an enterprise of the Reich.
Q. Well, was it a DWB enterprise?
A. Under my supervision, yes.
Q. Do you recall when Mummenthey reported to you the abuses that he had observed in the transportation of prisoners, carrying stones around in a circle, and other cruelties?
A. Mummenthey very frequently has reported to me about his observations. Whether, in this specific case, he saw me, I don't know, but I assume so.
Q. Well, do you remember Mummenthey talking to you about the cruelties to prisoners, and protesting about it?
A. Yes, I can recall that.
Q. What did you do about it?
A. I would take the necessary steps in every case. I investigated the matter and then I took the necessary steps for those things would be discontinued.
Q. Well, did you call on Gluecks for a report, or Eicke?
A. In general, I would discuss the matter with Gluecks, and in cases which seemed to be specifically unusual to me I would also make some surprise checks. However, since I had so much work to do I was only able to do that in a few exceptional cases.
A. When you made the surprise checks what did you find?
A. I cannot recall any individual cases any more today.
Q. In general, did you find that prisoners were being abused?
A. Yes when I came there, of course, I was unable to make any observations because no matter how I camouflaged myself, whenever I arrived at the place then everybody in the place knew that I was before the gates, and that was sufficient to remove all traces of misdeeds before I got there. It was extremely difficult for me to personally catch the culprits. I tried it several times, but in general I did not succeed in finding them.
Q. Oh, I dare say that is true; that happens all over the world-in wartime and out of wartime. What did Gluecks and Eicke tell you when you asked them about abuse of prisoners?
A. Without being able to recall any specific cases, in general. I would discuss the matters with him and then I would tell him what action he was to take; he was to carry out an investigation and a punishment of the guilty persons, and, in special cases, the perpetrators of the deeds were to be transferred, and whatever other action could be taken.
Q. And that was done on your order to Gluecks or Eicke?
A. Not to Eicke. Eicke was not there any more. This-
Q. Well, I mean, Eicke was there first. He was there before?
A. No, Eicke was completely independent--he even had a higher rank than I.
A. All right.
A. I never had anything to do with Eicke because when, in 1942, I joined this organization, then Eicke had already been away from that organization for two years.
Q. I understand that--well, all right. Let us say Gluecks and Liebehenschel?
A. Only Gluecks.
A. All right. You gave orders to Gluecks to find out whether there had been abuses of prisoners, and to take stops to punish anyone who was guilty?
A. Yes, the incidents which were reported to me were discussed by me with Gluecks, and then I ordered what steps he was to take.
A. So, in this respect, Gluecks was subject to your orders? He took orders from you?
A. Yes; naturally.
A. Well, Gluecks was the head of Amtsgruppe D?
A. By order or Himmler, he was subordinated to me, with his staff.
A. Well, hasn't it been your contention all along that you had little or no control over Antsgruppe D because they got their orders direct from Himmler?
A. No, I didn't claim that in that form. At the time I stated that Office Group D was subordinated in a dual sense; it received its orders from me with regard to the labor allocation, and it also received its orders from Himmler, and it would also received its orders from the RSHA.
A. Well, Amtsgruppe D was the old Concentration Camp Inspectorate just transferred to the WVHA?
A. That is quite correct. Until 1942 it was an independent agency which every few years changed its subordination.
First of all, it was completely independent under Eicko; then it was transferred to the Operational Main Office, and finally, in 1942, it was transferred to us. It was a uniform organization.
Q. What do you mean by that: a uniform organization?
A. Its incorporation into any Main Office was as simple as a transfer.
It was actually not a part of the other Main Offices.