BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q Would you please recall the order you had by Pohl according to which you were not to talk with Himmler directly?
A There was an order that all correspondence to Himmler could only be signed by Pohl, and that conferences with Himmler only were to be conducted by Pohl.
Q Did you in your testimony a while ago say that you must have been disappointed in your confidence to these leaders which you have talked about.
A Well, I think that all of us are of that opinion that we have been deserted and disappointed; and that responsibility which I charge myself with is the guilt that from the beginning I joined these men in loyalty -- that is the guilt which I reproach myself with.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me suggest to you that your mistake was not in joining the men in the first place when you had no reason to suspect their bad motives, but in putting yourself where you could not separate from them in relinquishing all control over your leaders, so that when they started to be criminals you had no means of repudiating them.
A If Your Honor please, during my activity with the SS I did not gain an impression that these men were criminals; I did not come to that conviction. This conviction I only had after the war -- at least fully.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, this is a very psychological comment which hasn't anything to do with the task that confronts us.
DR. HAENSEL: I think, Your Honors, that we have reached a point where I will have to continue my final speech, that is the explanation of these problems. Therefore, I can terminate now the direct examination of Georg Loerner, if you may only permit me to give you one short quotation. It is from Augustinus, and there is a beautiful sentence there. It is not quite easy to understand, but that is just a charm of the quotation, and I translate it literally from the Latin. It says: That Augustinus because of this reason is going away because it is wrong in a way. Georg Loerner has stated his case as he sees it, and he said what he said in a way of truth, that is in his way true, and that after all the only truth does not exist, the truth is only away.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS: Dr. Haensel, in your examination of the defendant Georg Loerner you asked the witness a question as to the character of Globocnik, who was the man responsible for what took place in Lublin, and he started to answer that question, and he got this far. He said: That he was a very ambitious man -- and that is the place you either intentionally, or unintentionally, cut him off and he didn't go any further. Now, we would like to hear exactly what he thinks of the character of this man, and we are not accusing you of not letting him have his full sway, but inadvertently possibly you didn't let him finish his answer. We sometimes among ourselves on the bench prefer to distinguish counsel not from the blood but from ability and appearance, and we do that affectionately; and we would appreciate it if counsel would permit him to finish the answer. Will you now give us your estimation of this man Globocnik?
A. Globocnik was an Austrian. As Frank has already stated before he had formerly been Gauleiter of Vienna. Then suddenly he became an active member of the Waffen-SS as a simple SS-man, private, and quite as suddenly he appeared as SS and police leader at Lublin. How these ways of Globocnik were directed and by whom, I don't know. Anyhow, from the moment when he turned up in lublin as SS and police leader, he was a real favorite of Himmler with whom he always had conferences directly concerning his tasks. It was difficult to negotiate with Globocnik because he promised everything and kept nothing.
Therefore, I always was in favor of having as little as possible to do with Globocnik because it was very hard to work with this man, and above all, we had the experience that he brought everything to the Reichsfuehrer in a distorted manner. The Reichsfuehrer favored him a lot. He even gave him the assignment to extend the SS and police bases in the East and that was a direct insult to Pohl who, after all, had the task of all the constructions.
I, at that time assumed, when I heard of the Action Reinhardt, that this Reinhardt action was this action of extending the SS and police bases in the East. He also had the assignment of the colonization of this whole area. I don't know what tasks he had besides that. He was very ambitious and one might even say he was deceitful. I, and all of us, wanted to have as little as possible to do with Globocnik. That is all I can say on Globocnik.
Q. Well, you did not consider him a man of good character and reputation, did you?
A. Oh, no.
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q. Witness, on this same subject of Globocnik, in your affidavit you stated that Himmler informed you that you would be able to obtain large quantities of raw materials through Globocnik. Knowing, as you did at the time, the character that Globocnik was, did no doubts arise my direct examination I have already testified that we assumed that these materials in which partly foreign currency was found, came from the resettlement action of the Jews and that here, seized surplus clothing was concerned, and that in this clothing such matters had been hidden, such currencies.
Q. If you had meant that from this quoted sentence, it would appear to me that it would not be necessary to say "it is obvious that one thought" because that would not be an illegal origin of the property. This phrase suggests that you had misgivings in your mind as to the correctness of the seizure of the property, but since you weren't officially notified, you could lull your conscience into repose by saying, "Well, they haven't told me officially and therefore it may not be true."
A. Your Honor, I think that in this affidavit one cannot weigh every word so carefully because after all, this is not testimony but only excerpts from a testimony taken at random from a longer one. Therefore, the connection within the testimony should be known first in order to weigh the single word, the individual word here, with special care.
DR. HAENSEL: If your Honor please, if we speak of foreign currency, may I point out what has not been brought to light in the previous examination as yet? Here is the question.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q. Do you remember the German foreign currency regulations?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know that nobody in Germany or nobody in the territories under Germany was allowed to have foreign currency in his possession?
A. Yes, I know.
Q. Did you hear that -- I don't know whether you heard or not -but did you hear that now here, no German is allowed to have American Military Money; for instance, we, the lawyers, we can't have any dollars?
A. Yes, that I heard too.
Q. Was it the same at that time in Germany with foreign currency? Was one supposed to turn them in to the Reichsbank?
A. There were very severe regulations that all kinds of foreign currency had to be turned in to the bank, or rather, to the Reichsbank and there were severe punishments for illegal possession of such foreign currency.
Q. Therefore, all possession of this foreign currency was illegal?
A. It was illegal and punishable.
Q. If, therefore, a dollar was found in clothing, that dollar then, according to German law, didn't belong to the owner, did it, but rather to the German Reichsbank?
A. Yes, to the German Reichsbank.
DR. HAENSEL: No further questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take our recess before the cross examination.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess for fifteen minutes.
(Recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. SCHMIDT: (For Defendant Joseph Vogt):
Q Witness, in your direct examination through a concrete example you have explained to us how in the books and in the accounts the procedure was followed in the case when the administration of a concentration camp tried to procure clothing, for the inmates of a camp. Have I understood you correctly to say that the listing in the books and the payment in such a case was not carried out by the office treasury of the concentration camp concerned, but that it was listed in the treasury of the clothing plant at Dachau?
A I stated that the clothing was procured by the clothing plant and it was paid by them. The concentration camps did not have anything to do with the payment, and therefore no bills could be listed in the accounts of the concentration camps.
Q Witness, do you know who carried out an auditing of the bills in the clothing plant at Dachau?
AAs far as I can recollect the auditing court did this work itself. For this purpose the auditing court had its own expert.
Q Do you mean to say with that preliminary auditing of the bills through the Office A-IV of the WVHA was not carried out at the clothing plant of the Waffen-SS at Dachau?
A It could not be carried out at all by the preliminary auditing agency because that agency did not have any experts at all on that field, that is, as far as I know. The examination and the auditing was only carried out by the auditing court.
Q. Witness, you had the supervision over the troop economic stores. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Were Post Exchanges connected with the Troop Economic Stores, where also members of the WVHA were able to have exchange privileges and could meet the demands, that is to say, could make purchases there whenever they were on an official trip abroad?
A. It was not so generally applied as you have stated; not every member of the WVHA could make his purchases at every Post Exchange. However, I had given the permission that in the Post Exchanges in Holland for example the members of the WVHA could buy Post Exchange goods as far as this was needed for their personal use.
Q. Did these Post Exchanges buy their requirements from the socalled black market abroad?
A. No, that is hot correct; they brought their goods on the normal market through allotments which they received by the competent office.
Q. The Prosecution has put in the cross-examination, - to the defendant Josef Vogt in the witness stand on the basis of an affidavit of the former SS judge Dr. Morgen, that Vogt had been active on the black market abroad by making large purchases there and that he had personally enriched himself. Do you know anything at all about that, witness?
A. I do not know whether Vogt personally enriched himself. I only know that Vogt came to see me on one occasion. I believe it was shortly before Christmas 1943 and at that time I gave him the permission that for the female employees in his office he could buy several things at The Hague because at that time he had to make an official trip to The Hague in Holland. I gave him that permission, I do not know any other further details about the matter.
DR. SCHMIDT: I have no further questions.
BY DR. PRIBILLA: (Attorney for Tschentscher)
Q. Witness, you were the superior of the defendant Tschentscher?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you still remember when Tschentscher entered your office?
A. That was approximately in October 1943.
Q. Did Tschentscher come from the Front at that time?
A. Tschentscher came from an SS Division where he had been an administrative official.
Q. What special task did you, as a superior of Tschentscher, give Tschentscher within your office, and what tasks did he have to carry out?
A. Tschentscher became chief of office B-I, food. I believe in my direct examination I have already discussed the task of that office in detail. It was the task of this office to furnish food for the units of the Waffen-SS and the police which was located in barracks, at home and in the Front areas.
Q. That is sufficient for me. Later on you have appointed Tschentscher as your deputy. I would like you to clarify here what fields were concerned in that matter and how this deputizing was handled in practice.
A. Tschentscher became my deputy as chief of Amtsgruppe B. I believe in the course of the trial very much has already been said about the deputizing matters in the WVHA. In the case of Tschentscher it was not different; the deputizing was only a formal matter because the regulations was that every chief had to have a deputy. As far as the factual work was concerned I did not include Tschentscher in that factual work of the office of the Amtsgruppe. He, therefore, was only my formal deputy.
Q. May I ask once more conceretly, was it during the short period of time when Tschentscher stayed in the WVHA, - it was a relative short period of time from the end of 1943 to the beginning of 1945, that Tschentscher mostly did his work in the field of food or what it that he had a right to make decisions also in the billeting and clothing matters in particular because he had been appointed your deputy?
A. Tschentscher only had to deal with the field of Clothing.
Q. Is it clothing?
A. I beg your pardon, I made a mistake. I mean the field of food. He did not have a right to assist in making decisions in other fields for Amtsgruppe B. When I took a trip when I took a furlough in 1944 the other office chiefs had to decide independently, that is to say in important matters they had to second the decision of the chief of the main office; that was Pohl.
Q. Did you inform Tschentscher about the happenings which have been discussed here? I am referring in particular to the Action Reinhardt or the action G.
A. No, I did not inform him at all.
Q. Why did you fail to inform Tschentscher about these things? Were the actions already completed at that time?
A. First of all the whole matter, the utilization of the textiles which has just been described here, was almost completed in 1944 and secondly, this was a secret matter and only those persons who would have been informed of it would have to work in the matter. Furthermore, I did not charge Tschentscher with matters of food and raw materials. There was no reason for me to tell him about it therefore.
Q. How was it in matters pertaining to Group W. Did you ever concern Tschentscher with that?
A. As chief of Amtsgruppe B I did not have to deal with matters dealing with W, but as deputy chief W. Tschentscher had nothing whatsoever to do with this matter. There was no reason for me to tell Tschentscher anything about these things.
DR. PRIBILLA: Thank you witness; I have no further questions.
BY DR. KLINERT: (Attorney for defendant Volk)
Q. Witness, I only want to ask you one single question. Can you tell me who was commissioned for the purchase of real estate for the economic enterprises?
A. I can recall that a civilian employee by the name of Kuehler was entrusted with this task. He carried out this task as a special assignment for the WVHA.
DR. KLINERT: Very well, I do not have any further questions.
BY DR. MAYER (Attorney for the defendant Max Kiefer)
Q. Witness, in Amtsgruppe B you had to take care of food and clothing. Now, I want to ask you , did you ever negotiate with the defendant Max Kiefer as chief of Amt C-II, or with his office C-II, in order to buy food or clothing or erect buildings?
A. No, that was not necessary because in the course of the war such constructions were neither planned nor carried out. When we established troop economic depots then we erected them in buildings or by erecting barracks, and no special planning was necessary. This construction was carried out by the local construction authorities.
DR. MAYER: Thank you; I have no further questions.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN: (Attorney for the defendant Mummenthey)
Q. Witness, you were Pohl's deputy. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. In that capacity you in a certain way were the second man on the staff and you will be able to give us information about the organization of the WVHA. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Could you perhaps finally explain to us what the designation Office group W means? I must admit that in the course of this trial which has gone on for mouths I have not as yet gained any clarity about that. Why was this institution provided with the designation Amtsgruppe W?
A Dr. Freoschmann, I must tell you that I myself am not quite clear about that. I have already said in my direct examination that the Amtsgruppe W was a special group, and that I myself do not know exactly why this organization was chosen in that form. Independent firms from the commercial point of view were subordinated in some ways to a military administration. I do not know the exact reasons for this procedure. Is that sufficient to you?
Q Well, your information was rather negative. I believed that you, as a deputy of Pohl, could give us some more information about that matter. Does the designation Amtsgruppe W have anything to do with the person of Pohl who came originally from an administrative agency in the navy? Let me put the question in this manner. From conversations with Pohl did you ever gain the impression that his allegedly economic way of timing was only a military way of thinking; and that therefore, he transferred concepts which were usually used in military service, and he tried to transfer these concepts to the economic field. Did you ever gain that impression?
A It is clear that Pohl had been in military service 25 or 30 years and had a purely military way of thinking in the organization. In order to gain a complete picture of this Main Office -- in any case the economic concepts were, of course, included in the military organization. But I cannot say exactly whether his way of thinking was economic or military.
Q Witness, do you know that some of the office chiefs objected strongly to the maintenance of this term?
A I know that with the office chiefs there was an opposition against the entire form; however, I also know that they were not successful in that.
Q What is the reason for the manner of thought in the individual office chiefs so that they could not gain the exact ideas of the individual activities?
A Do you mean by them, the office chiefs, or myself?
Q The office chiefs.
A I have already stated that these offices represented an emergency suiting which did not fit anywhere.
Q May I say that neither the deputy of Pohl, nor the individual office chiefs knew what the designation of these offices meant, and that consequently one cannot blame the defense counsel although he has been active in this SS trial, he is still unable to form a clear picture about these matters.
A I would like to suggest to you that you should not have asked me, but you should have asked the chief.
Q I asked the chief, and the chief was unable to give me any positive answer. Thank you, I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other cross examination by defense counsel? Apparently there is none. Mr. Robbins, you may cross examine. Mr, Peter Walton is cross examining for the prosecution.
MR. WALTON: May it please the Tribunal, there should be some word of explanation as regards the cross examination, at least, insofar as the first phase is concerned. The cross examination in this first phase will be on certain documents which has come to the attention of the prosecution since this case had been proceeding for some little time. This is the reason that these documents were not regularly included in the document books. I may state in my place that some were brought to the attention of the prosecution as late as a very few days ago. However, it is with apology that I shall have to warn the Tribunal that the prosecution can only proceed as fast as the witness conforms himself of the contents of documents submitted to him, and as fast as the Court can peruse the documents which is put before them, or the copy of the document which is put before them then in the witness's hand. There can be no help for this. I make my apologies for the seemingly inordinate length of time for the first phase of the cross examination will take.
EXAMINATION BY MR. WALTON:
Q Witness, I believe you testified on direct examination that you became a member of the NSDAP in November 1931, is that correct?
A In the first of November, 1934, I became a member of the NSDAP.
Q 1934 or 1931?
A 1931.
Q 1931. Do you recall the number, the party number which you got?
A I can't remember it anymore by heart.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry, Your Honor, this apparently doesn't come through clearly to me.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q Does the number 676772 sound familiar to you?
A 676772, yes, that was correct.
Q Then that was your party number?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Also in your direct examination, I believe you stated that you became a member of the SS in November 1932?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Do you remember your SS number?
A Yes, it was 37719.
Q Now, witness, I ask you that your becoming a member of the NSDAP, whether or not that was a voluntary act on your part?
A I have already stated in my direct examination that I entered the NSDAP voluntarily and I also entered the SS voluntarily.
Q Your rank upon entering the SS in November 1932 was what?
A I was a plain SS-man.
Q And your rank in the year 1943 had become what?
A In 1943, on the 9th of November 1943, I was appointed SSgruppenfuehrer.
Q Was a part of your title Lt. General of the Waffen-SS?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Will you tell us once again the first year you became associated with the co-defendant Oswald Pohl?
AAt the time I was in Readministrative Office of the Waffen-SS. On the first of February, 1934, Oswald Pohl took over its direction. In that year, in the administrative office of the SS, I was in charge of the clothing department, which, in 1935, became a Main Department, and had as its designation V-III.
Q: Your Honor, I should like to discuss for a moment, in connection with the Administrative Office of the SS, the sectional break-down of that office. May it please the Tribunal, the document which I desire to talk about at this time can be found on Page 1 of Document Book 22 and is Document NO-1574. Witness, do you have that document before you now?
A: Yes, I have.
Q: Directing your attention to the Document NO-1574, what function did you have in the administrative plan which is shown in this document?
A: I was chief of the Main Department V-III, which is located on the second page of this document under Paragraph 4.
Q: Are you acquainted with the duties of any other department or the responsibilities of any other department as shown on this organizational plan?
A: Only in very large outlines. I cannot give you any information about the details.
Q: Then in Section V, were there any other departments not shown at this time?
A: I cannot recall that at the moment.
Q: Is it not true that under the auditing office there was included the SS Main Office, concerning some economic enterprises run by the SS?
A: About all the tasks I cannot, unfortunately, give you any information whatsoever. I did not know anything about that at the time, and I still don't know anything about it today.
Q: Will you state whether or not a representative of the Security Service of the RSHA, or the office which at that time took the place of the RSHA, was included in this organizational plan?
A: I cannot say that. On the organizational chart it is only stated SD-Main Office and Race and Resettlement Main Office. However, I don't know exactly why these offices were mentioned there and that their tasks were.
Q: During the year 1935 where was your organization located, that is the head office, or the headquarters?
Q: Are you referring to the SS-Main Office, or the Administrative Office of the SS.
Q: Administrative Office of the SS.
A: The Administrative Office was located at Munich.
Q: And you have stated that Main Department V-III, as shown on this organizational plan, was under your supervision and control, is that not right?
A: Yes, the Main Department V-III was under my control.
Q: And this department supplied clothing and leather goods for the Allgemeine-SS troop, did it not?
A: In the translation I understood clothing and leather. That is not correct. I gave them clothing and equipment.
Q: Very well. Did you supply clothing and equipment to the Special Duty Troops?
A: We procured clothing and equipment for the SS-Special Task Troops, the SS-Verfuegungsgruppen.
Q: Did you supply clothing and equipment for the Death Head Units?
A: Not in 1935, only from 1936 on.
Q: At this time in 1935 did you provide clothing and equipment for the concentration camp guard personnel?
A: I cannot recall any more whether in 1935 we already furnished these goods. It is impossible for me to state that today with certainty. I only know that with the introduction of the Reich budget for the Death Head units and the concentration camps in 1936, that from that time on we also furnished the clothing for these institutions and organizations.
Q: Then I will ask you, Witness, during the period 1935 to 1938, did your organization supply the clothing for the concentration-camp inmates?
A: Yes, as far as I can recall from 1936 on.
Q: Where, with realtion to distance, was the administration office located as regards the concentration camp at Dachau?
A: I have not quite understood the translation. Will you please repeat the question?
Q: Was the Main Administrative Office of the SS, that office which is shown in the second part of the chart which is now before you, located at, in or near the concentration camp at Dachau?
A: I still don't quite understand the question. However, I must say that the Administrative Office of the SS was located in Munich, and there was also the Main Department V for "Victor" III. The Main Department V-III, however, had a clothing plant at Dachau.
Q: Then some of the offices, or some of the sections which composed the Main Department V-III were located in the concentration camp at Dachau, is that not so?
A: They were not located directly in the concentration camp, but they were within the area of the concentration camp, and only the clothing depot because for this we did not have any space in the administrative building at Munich. No other offices of V-III were located at Dachau.
Q: In your official capacity state whether or not it became necessary for you to make trips to the clothing factory at Dachau?
A: Naturally I had to visit the clothing depot at Dachau.
Q: During this time were you able to observe the industries which were maintained by the concentration-camp Dachau as separate from the clothing factory located there?
A: At this time no clothing plant at all was located at Dachau. I don't know what plants you are referring to. Could you perhaps explain that to me somewhat more in detail?
Q: You have stated that the clothing factory which was directly under Main Department V-III or the equipment store which was also at Dachau was visited by you from time to time on official business, isn't that true?
A: There was a clothing depot, but a clothing plant at that time did not yet exist at Dachau.
Q: Now, on your official trips to the clothing depot or clothing store located at Dachau, did you or did you not inspect other tasks being performed by the inmates of the Dachau concentration camp?
A: No, I did not, because the clothing depot was located directly at the entrance so that I did not have to pass any other enterprises or any other institutions there. It is possible that perhaps I visited the carpenter shop on one occasion, but I am unable to say it precisely any more today. In any case I had nothing to do with the other enterprises which were located there.
Q: I am not charging you with having any supervision or responsibility for other enterprises. I am trying to establish the fact as to whether or not you saw the concentration-camp inmates engaged in such tasks as the repair of shoes, the manufacture of garden tools, the manufacture of furniture for the camp itself, or any industries which would naturally grow up in and around an installation of this size. I will ask again, on your trips to Dachau, what activities, if any, did you see the inmates engaged in?
A: Mr. Prosecutor, all this has happened almost fourteen years ago, or twelve years. I cannot say any more here under oath what prisoners or what inmates I saw and what I saw them doing, their work. It is impossible for me to say that.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Very well. How long did the organizational plan which you have before you remain more or less correct for the Administrative Main Office of the SS?
A I assume until 1939. Of course, some organizational changes may have occurred during this time. However, I cannot recall any of them.
Q In May of 1936 the Administrative Main Office moved from Munich to Berlin, did it not?
A No, in Berlin the two main offices which I have mentioned here were reorganized. They were two main offices; Budget and Construction, and Administration and Economics. This re-organization took place on the 1st of April, 1939. On the 1st of May, 1939, I was transferred to Berlin.
Q Then the Administrative Main Office and other SS Administrative offices became the Main Office for Budget and Construction approximately at the time it moved to Berlin, did it not?
A Yes, I have already stated on the 1st of April the organization Budget and Construction was established.
Q I submit to you Prosecution Exhibit No. 33, which is Document NO-620 and which is in Document Book II on page 53.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document?
MR. WALTON: The document, Sir, is NO-620.
THE PRESIDENT: A chart?
MR. WALTON: A chart, yes.
Q I will ask you whether or not as regards Amt I of the Main Office for Budget and Construction, as shown on the document now before you, NO-620, Prosecution Exhibit 33, -- is that chart more or less correct organizational picture of your office?
A I do not have an organizational chart, but I have only the compilation here. In this compilation this office is likewise listed and it corresponds to the organization at that time, after the Spring of 1940.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Were there any appreciably different organizational plans prior to the date you mentioned in 1940? I have reference to the time from 1939 until the date you mentioned, the Spring of 1940? Was there any appreciable difference?
A I have already stated in the course of my direct examination that the Main Departments I/5 and I/6, as far as I can recall, were only established in the Spring of 1940. Therefore, if in 1939 an organizational chart already existed, then these two main departments should not be included in it.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. Walton, practically every question, or a good many of the questions which you have put have resulted in the witness stating that he testified to this in his direct examination, which is practically true.
MR. WALTON: Yes, sir.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Now, why do we go over this same ground, unless you are leading up to something which is not obvious to the Tribunal?
MR. WALTON: In my offer of proof, Sir, I think it will become apparent as time goes on that the witness either has failed to testify to certain material facts concerning this organizational plan either by inadvertance or some loss of memory.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Why not direct his attention particularly to what you feel he has failed to testify instead of having him repeat what we have already heard.
MR. WALTON: Very good, sir. I shall leave that matter at this particular time to return to it at a more opportune moment. Prosecution at this time offers for identification Document NO-3666and asks that it be marked Prosecution Exhibit No. 555 and subject to proper objection by defense, reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later date. I think the court at this time has before it the English translation of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.