Whether any inmate labor was used in this construction I don't know. In any case the establishment of this agency of the film and photography department was to serve the purpose of obtaining pictures and photographic evidence about the development of the entire SS administration. This also included pictures from the offices where this administration was working. However, to reach any connection with inmates from that, I just can't see how this is possible. This photograph and film department was not established, after all, in order to photograph the work done by inmates, but to show the development on the whole of the SS administration.
Q But the concentration camp inmates at work were also photographed, were they not?
A Well, that was done also.
Q Here in the fourth paragraph it mentions as an example that Amt III A with its clinker plants, with its quarries, furnishes a great amount of material for photographic record. Do you know whether or not concentration camp inmates were used in those industries?
A Yes, I knew that.
MR. WALTON: The prosecution now offers for identification Document NO-3697, and asks that it be marked Prosecution's Exhibit 563 and subject to proper objections by counsel for defense reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later time.
Q Now then, the document which you hold in your hand is a file note or a memorandum signed by SS Untersturmfuehrer Grimm of the Reserve and this memorandum shows that the photograph album entitled "Establishing of the Concentration Camp Buchenwald" was turned over to the labor allocation officer by the camp commandant of Buchenwald, Koch, with the request that it be delivered to you. Now when Grimm came to see you, it appears he was not able to deliver this album personally to you because you were at a conference with the Amtschef Oswald Pohl. Does this refresh your memory as to whether or not you have seen a photograph album on a construction of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp?
A. The possibility exists. However, I cannot recall this album anymore. Just what caused Standartenfuehrer Koch to send such an album to me I do not know either.
Q. Then I'll ask you one further question. In this department of archives would such an album be placed for permanent record?
A. Since the establishment of the Concentration Camp Buchenwald actually has nothing to do with the history of the development of the SS administration, I do not believe that this album would have been kept in the archives. However, it is possible that it was.
MR. WALTON: The prosecution at this time offers for identification Document NO-3652. It asks that it be marked Prosecution's Exhibit 564 and subject to proper objection by the counsel for defense reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later time.
Q. Now, Witness, your attention is directed to this document, and by looking over the heading of the document and the end, which occurs on Page 5 of the original, who issued this document?
A. I issued this document.
Q. Now, according to the distribution, would you state, the distribution. 1-B means the plan of distribution to every member of your department?
A. I haven't, quite understood your question.
Q. Did every department or every individual worker in your department receive a copy of these regulations?
A. I assume that every department received a copy.
Q. That is what I am trying to get at. Were enough copies distributed for each worker to receive one of these service regulations?
A. That is possible.
Q. Also Office III of the Budget and Construction Office received a number of copies; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. And the Main Office or the Main Administrative Office received information copies; is that correct?
A. The Chief of the Main Office received one; the Chief of Staff then Offices II and III; then the Operational Main Office; and the Administrative Main Office received one copy each.
Q. Now, this document gives the basic operational procedure and the spheres of work of your department, does it not?
A. Yes.
Q. In the cover letter to this document you offer to discuss with every employee of the office any of their personal worries or needs at any time. This procedure on your part was an effort, was it not, to keep you fully informed at all times as to what work was going on in your department; is that not so?
A. That has nothing to do with the official work of my subordinates. The last sentence was purely a humane matter; and it shows that I would be ready to listen to the personal worries and needs of my employees at any time. I don't that this has anything to do with official matters.
Q. Then your time, in addition to being taken up with official duties, was also available for personal matters of your employees; is that correct?
A. That was just natural for me. It was just natural that I would care and that I would always have an open ear for the personnel worries and needs of my subordinates.
Q. Now, I should like to call your attention to Page 2 of the original copy of Division II which starts off, "The Office-I Budget consists, according to its sphere of work, of the following main departments and independent departments." I particularly call your attention to the following departments which were not a part of the official set-up but were under the control of Office-I, which states that there were four divisions, beginning with the clothing factory of the Waffen SS at Dachau and down to Number 4, the economy inspection for certain named offices. By the date of this document, had the clothing factory of the Waffen SS at Dachau enlarged to include the salvage depots at Ravensbruck and Sachsenhausen?
A. Well, that was a salvage place.
MR. WALTON: Will the interpreter repeat that? I didn't hear that.
THE PRESIDENT: That was a salvage place.
Q. Then it had no connection with the clothing factory at Dachau?
A. Yes, at the time they were subordinated to Dachau.
Q. That's what I asked you to began with. Now, Number 4, what did the Economy Inspection Offices in the East, the Government General, the West, the North, and the South refer to?
A. These Economy Inspection Offices had the same ask as the Main Economic Depots in the Reich. They were the superior agency of the food camps, the food depots in these areas; and when the SS Economic Office was established, they were incorporated into it. In the document which the prosecution has presented, in one of its document books, and which contains the regulations about the establishment of the SS Economists, there is also a paragraph which states that the Economy Inspectorates are to be dissolved and that they should be assigned to the SS Economists. That was the task of the SS Economy Inspection. In the Reich they were called the Main Economic Depots, and in the occupied territories they were called the Economy Inspectorates.
Q. Now, in the occupied territories, were these Inspectorates Depots entitled to receive from other collecting agencies textiles, leather, or such raw materials as would be particularly your sphere?
A. They were agencies which had the task first of all of securing food and of distributing the clothing. Furthermore, they had the task of salvaging the old clothing which was returned by the troops and of sending it back. These were the tasks of the Economy Inspectorates. You can see under Paragraph 4 that Last, Government General, West and North, including the Troop Economy Depots, and their branches come under the jurisdiction of these inspections. That is the last sentence in Paragraph 4 under the listing of the Economy Inspection Offices.
Q. Were these Economy Inspection Offices charged with obtaining and distributing clothing and materials to the concentration camps located in the conquered territories?
A. The Economy Inspections also had the task of furnishing clothing to the troops within the area. This clothing, however, came from the clothing factory of the Waffen SS. I am sure that it equipped the guards of the concentration camps, as was also done in the Reich; and it most probably also fed them.
Q. Did it also take care of distribution of clothing to the concentration camp inmates in conquered territories?
A. It is quite possible because the clothing for the inmates was produced and delivered by the clothing factory. Therefore, the Inspectorates probably also carried out the distribution of this clothing.
Q. Did these Inspectorates also become receiving centers for clothing which was subsequently found to be looted clothing or confiscated clothing?
A. I don't know anything about that.
MR. WALTON: The Prosecution at this time desires to offer for identification Document No. NO-3669, which I ask that it be marked as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 565, subject to the proper objection by the defense to reserve the right of a formal introduction into evidence at a later time.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q Now, witness, at this time you hold some correspondence, concerning the subject of travel orders, and who has the necessary authority to sign them. The significance of this document is whether or not the Inspectorate of the concentration camp maintained administrative authority over your office, or the Labor Allocation Officer, or was he completely under for administrative purposes the office of the Inspectorate of concentration camps?
A Could I please read the document first? I can not say whether or not it is so with this document here; it is a question of permission for duty trips. Whether Gluecks was to give them, or I, or whether the offices of the Inspectorate of concentration camps, or whether the camp commanders would issue it, I don't remember the whole matter, and I can not say anything about it.
Q He states in his letter that duty journeys are to be approved by you, is that right?
A This normally was so, that every member of the Main Office obtained the permission for duty trip from the Main Office, or his deputy, and the Chief of the office.
Q Now, what I am trying to determine is whether or not you maintained supervision and control in matters of administration over your Labor Allocation Officers sent out from Department I/5 to the various concentration camps?
A In explanation I myself said I, of course, did not personally sign the permission for duty trips, but usually the chief of the Main Department would do so. Here I was only to clarify this question fundamentally.
Q I shall rephrase the question. Did your Department I/5 under Burboeck still maintain control and supervision over the representatives of that Department1 1-V who were stationed in the various concentration camps, or were they completely, or more or less completely under the administrative supervision of the Inspectorate for concentration camps?
A So far as I can still recall, these officers were assigned to the concentration camp administration from the economic aspect. However, they received their fundamental orders from the Main Department I/5, that is, the Main Office of Budget and Construction.
Q In the case of a conflict, was it not true that those officers were bound by the orders flowing from your Department I/5 rather than the orders which came from the Inspectorate of the concentration camp?
A Well, I admit that this possibility existed.
Q Then you state, in effect you state that you maintained, or rather your Department I/5 maintained control over the Labor Allocation officers in the concentration camp?
A Yes.
Q Thank you. Is it not true that you worked out the necessary agreement with Gluecks, or the concentration camp Inspectorate, whereby you could retain control over these officers, and delegated this authority for issuing duty travel orders and minor matters to the chief of your section, Burboeck?
A I don't quite understand the question.
MR. WALTON: The Prosecution will withdraw the question and introduce the document first. The Prosecution at this time desires to offer for identification Document NO-3700 and asks that it be marked Prosecution Exhibit 366 and subject to proper objection by the defense reserves the formal introduction into evidence at a later time. Witness, this document has to do with the issuance of a travel order in which, in effect, it says that the Head of Department I/5 has the right to issue travel orders for personnel, does it not?
A This document is not an answer to the question contained in the previous document. This document is an individual permission for an official trip of Grimm to Buchenwald. issued by Burboeck. However, at that time Burboeck already was more or less under the direction of Gluecks.
Q He still signed it as Chief of the Main Department I/5, does he not?
A Well, of course, because he had to do that until the period of time where Himmler approved the official transfer to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps. As I testified that was in September of 1941.
Q This letter I call to your attention is dated 7 June 1941. However, what significance has the phrase that the prison allocation is responsible for the smooth carrying out of the transfer? Can we assume from this document that the prison allocation officer was also in charge of the transfer of concentration camp inmates from one camp to another?
A No, he wasn't responsible for that. The order could only be issued by the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camp. May I continue? The inmate allocation officer was only to convince himself that the special workers needed for this allocation were actually there. With the transport itself and the order for the transport, he had nothing whatsoever to do. That's shown by the fact that this letter refers to the decree of the Inspectorate of the concentration camps.
Q Then you deny that the labor allocation officer had anything to do with the transfer of concentration camp inmates from one camp to another?
A He was connected with it because he was to convince himself that the inmates were actually furnished according to requirements for specialist workers. However, he had nothing to do with the actual execution of the transport.
MR. WALTON: May it please the Tribunal, I have another document here which, according to my time it's two minutes before the end, and there would not be time enough in which to cross examine this witness. It has some ten or twelve questions I want to ask on it.
THE PRESIDENT: Let's not take any chances. We will recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(A recess was taken.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Oswald Pohl, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 20 June 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Robert M. Toms presiding
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
Thee Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II. Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the court.
MR. WALTON: It if please the Tribunal, the Prosecution at this time finds itself considerably embarrassed because at ten minutes past nine o'clock I sent the documents down to the courtroom - They have just arrived, I'm sorry.
THE PRESIDENT: Your embarrassment is relieved.
OSWALD POHL - Resumed
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. WALTON:
Q Yesterday, Witness, did I understand you to say that your department I/5 was some time in September 1940 with the approval of Himmler transferred to the Inspectorate of the concentration camps?
A What I said was that the Main Department I/5 by an agreement between Gluecks and myself, an unofficial agreement, was working with the Inspectorate KL already as from the spring of 1941, whereas the actual permission to do we and the official transfer to the Inspectorate of concentration camps was effected in September 1941.
Q Then it was in the spring of 1941, the unofficial transfer, and the actual official transfer was in September of 1941; is that correct?
A Yes, quite.
Q During the time before even the official or unofficial transfer of the duties of Department I/5, was it necessary for you to call in labor allocation officers from the different concentration camps for instructional purposes?
A The official management of Main Department I/5 was in my hands until it was officially transferred to the Inspectorate of the concentration camps.
It is, of course, quite obvious and entirely possible that at that time I signed orders and issued such instructions as you just named.
Q Then if orders were signed by your officer Burboek, that was done with your consent and with your order probably, was it not?
A I am unable to say today what happened. It is certain that several orders were issued by Burboeck in order to keep things going which I did not know myself; but, or course, Burboeck until he was officially transferred to the Inspectorate was under Office I under my leadership.
Q Where would these instructional meetings of the Labor Allocation Offices take place? Would it be in Berlin or at other points within the Reich?
A I am unable to say this today. The conference might have taken place at Berlin but Burboeck might also have called this conference anywhere else in Germany.
Q Can you recall some of the topics which were discussed at these meetings which you personally attended?
A Whether I attended personally any such conference I do not know today. The topic of the conferences probably was concerned with labor allocation.
Q Do you remember one of these conferences which you were scheduled to attend at Dachau?
A I said just now that I no longer recalled having attended any such conference; but it is possible that I was present at such a conference. I am not certain of it today.
MR. WALTON: The prosecution at this time desires to offer for identification Document NO-3696, and asks that it be marked Prosecution's Exhibit 567, and, subject to proper objection by the defense, reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later time.
Q Witness, the first page of this document is a notice of a meeting of Labor Allocation Officers to be held in April 1941 at Dachau, is it not?
A I am sorry, Mr. Prosecutor, may I just read the document first?
Q I am asking you again, if not, is not the first page of this document a notice sent to the Labor Allocation Officers concerning a meeting of such officials at Dachau on the 22nd and 23rd of April. That is correct, is it not?
A Yes, that means that such a conference has been called together.
Q And that this notice went out from the Main Department I/5, and it is signed by Burboeck. That is true, is it not?
A Yes.
Q Now on the second page there is a program of the meeting of the conference of the Labor Allocation Officers from all of the concentration camps under the jurisdiction of Budget and Building Main Offices to be held on those dates. That is true, is it not?
A Yes.
Q Now your particular attention is called to the program for the last day, where you were scheduled from 1430 hours to 1830 hours together with Hauptsturmfuehrer Burboeck for discussion, and your particular topic is "Basic Explanations." Does this document now in your hands refresh your memory as to that meeting?
A Even with this document I can not recall the conference, but I am quite sure on the basis of the subject of the conference that I addressed the Labor Allocation Officers the second day and gave a speech on my opinion of Labor Allocation. But it also shows that I did not attend the whole of the conference, which my time would not have permitted. Probably on 23 April of the afternoon, I appeared on the 23rd April, gave my speech and then left again.
Q. Then you doubt whether or not that you were at the camp for the tour of inspection of the concentration camp at Dachau?
A Yes, I doubt that.
Q Do you believe at this time that you did not meet your Labor Allocation Officers socially at the concentration camp Casino at 2000 hours that evening?
A I do not doubt it. It is entirely possible that I took part in the dinner.
MR. WALTON: The Prosecution at this time desires to offer for identification Document NO-3556, and asks that it be marked Prosecution's Exhibit No. 568, and subject to proper objection by the defense, reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later time.
DR. HAENSEL: I would like to ask so far as this document is concerned that the Court look at the original. There are entries there in different types of ink, and in different types of handwriting, and one gets a different impression from the original than one does from the copy. There are some later notes made in the document.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, counsel, proceed.
MR. WALTON: Yes, Your Honor.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q Witness, have you had a chance to glance over the copy of that document, which you now have in your hands?
A Yes.
Q Now this is a report which forwards a duplicate demand vouchers to your sub-office I/5 from Buchenwald, and it also sends copies to the Prison Camp Inspectorate; that copy to be transmitted to the subsection I/5B, the Prison Allocation Office at Oranienburg, is that true?
A Yes.
Q Now according to this document, what was the total income received from nine installations for Prison Camp Labor for the month of June in 1941?
A For the month of June there was a total of 23,885 marks and 20 pfennigs.
That total alone shows that allocation of inmates was not a very important one at that time.
Q Now if this type of a report came from Buchenwald, was that the regular procedure for reporting from all concentration camps?
A This report for the month of June has been done in accordance with the order which was submitted yesterday by the Prosecution which was Exhibit No. 555. That order said in detail how these reports are to be made. That this document here merely means that the order has been carried out.
Q However, I would like an answer to the question as to whether or not reports were rendered like this one from all other concentration camps under the Office of Budget and Buildings?
AAs far as these camps had Labor Allocation Officers, yes.
Q Were they not Labor Allocation Officers in all of the Main concentration camps at least?
A We see from the documents that the Labor Allocation Officers were allocated to camps very slowly, so that in the beginning of 1941 there were only three such men in these camps, but I think by the end of 1941 every concentration camp had one Labor Allocation Officer who was stationed there.
Q Now how would the Main Department I/5 render a report to you about the income for Prison Camp Labor from all concentration camps?
A Main Department I/5 has probably made out a monthly list of the total income from Inmate Labor, and probably they submitted it to me.
Q Then once a month you were probably acquainted with the figures of the income from Inmate Labor, were you not?
A Whether I received these reports monthly I do not remember any more, but I assume so.
Q Can you give us an estimate of the approximate total for my month of the average monthly income to the Weffen-SS from Prison Inmate Labor?
A That is entirely impossible to me today.
Q Would you estimate the average monthly income to the Waffen-SS from Prison Inmate Labor?
A I said just now I could not give you an estimate, but I would like to remark that this was not an income of the Waffen-SS, but it was a Reich income.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q However, the Office of Budget and Buildings had the responsibility of transferring these funds to the Reich Treasury, did it not?
AAs Office I was the supreme administrative agency of the Waffen-SS, it was responsible for all income of the Reich; that is to say, to transfer to the Reich Treasury.
Q Were you not interested in how much income the Reich Treasury was gaining through the agencies under the control of the Office of Budget and Buildings?
A No, that sort of income had nothing to do with us and our budget sums, they were not concerned with the total of that income. I said yesterday that between the expenses for the Waffen-SS and the income of the Reich there was no connection at all.
Q And you had no curiosity or no interest in how much income the Reich Treasury received from prison inmate labor, did you?
A The expression curiosity is not a very happy one perhaps. It was, after all, my official task to take care of these things.
DR. HAENSEL: May I take the liberty -- I don't think the translation was correct. It didn't mean curiosity, but interest. The question was, was the Waffen-SS interested in the Reich income, but not in the curiosity.
THE WITNESS: If we are concerned with interest, I must deny that. It did not matter a bit to the Waffen-SS what income the Reich received, but the only man interested in this was the Reich Minister of Finance.
MR. WALTON: The prosecution at this time desires to offer for identification Document NO-3653. It asks that it be marked prosecution exhibit 569 and subject to proper objection by counsel for the defense, reserves the right of its formal introduction into evidence at a later tire.
DR. HAENSEL: May I take the liberty, it would help the defendant if he hears that the signature here on page 2 top, where it says "signed", the signature should be Burboeck.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
MR. WALTON: If it please the Tribunal, that is a misprint or the unfamiliarity of the translator with the signature. The prosecution concedes that it is Burboeck's signature in agreement with the contention of the counsel for the defense. However, I do not intend to put words in the witness's mouth, and if he testifies that it is another signature that testimony will be in the record.
THE PRESIDENT: But what could it be beside Burboeck?
MR. WALTON: My copy reads B-u-r-b-a-c-h.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, we are fighting windmills here. He is designated as the director of Main Department I.
MR. WALTON: That is right, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, it's Burboeck. Nobody thinks it is anybody else.
Q (By Mr. Walton) Witness, will you indicate when you are ready to be questioned on this document?
A Mr. Prosecutor, I don't think it is necessary for me to read the whole document. That will take too long. I saw more or less what this document is about.
Q Very well. Now, this is a correspondence file from Burboeck, as head of your section I/5 on the subject of disposal of the files pertaining to that office. According to the information on its face it was sent from Berlin on the 7th of July of 1941 to the branch offices of the Main Department I/5, the allocation of prisoner labor located at ten main camps.
In the third paragraph of the cover letter from Burboeck he gives the purpose of this action, which is to coordinate the filing system of the branch offices with that of the main department.
Now, do you know up until this time, whether a similar filing system to this was used in Department I/5?
A I do not know it, but I assume so. Of course, the same filing system which was expected of the camps would have been carried out by Court No. II, Case No. 4.the main deportment also.
Q Then, this is in effect a method or a plan by which the filing systems of both the branch offices and the main office will agree in every particular on a simpler filing system, is it not?
A Well, I don't think you can call this filing system a simple one, but otherwise you are correct.
MR. WALTON: I don't know what the translation was, but if I may use an ungrammatical phase, I should like for the witness to get the idea that it was a more simple filing system. I use a comparative degree, not that I want to quibble, but I don't think he understood the translation.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we understand the letter. It is plain on its face.
MR. WALTON: Very good, sir.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) On page 2 of the document which you now hold, is a note for the attention of Grimm, labor allocation officer at Buchenwald, from SS-Untersturmfuehrer Gart showing that the report of the labor activities of the prison inmates of Buchenwald had not reached the appropriate files and another copy was requested.
Now, Grimm, by entries on his copy shows that another report was sent in as promptly as possible, is that true?
A Yes.
Q Let us turn to the enclosure which is the file plan itself, and begins at page 3 of the document.
DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for Mummenthey): May it please the Court, I do not know how far this report submitted just now by the prosecution will be of significance for my client, but I wish to make one point; that the copy which is in the hands of the defense counsel is completely confused. It contains repetitions, and in other cases, things have obviously been left out. I would be grateful to the prosecution if it gave us an orderly and tidy copy of this document. For instance, on page 14 it says the same thing which is said on page 1.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE RESIDENT: Well, Dr. Froeschmann, if the matters contained on either page 14 or page 1 become important to you, we will see that you get an accurate and correct copy. Perhaps you will find that neither page is of any interest to you.
DR. HAENSEL: I believe the copy is all right. These files cannot be understood quite so quickly really. I think the document is self-explanatory.
THE WITNESS: May I say something briefly about this document, Mr. Prosecutor?
MR. WALTON: Yes.
THE WITNESS: All I want to say is this. Having read this document but superficially as far as this filing system is concerned, I am bound to say that this is a classic example of German bureaucracy, and I am quite certain I never saw the whole filing plan because otherwise I would have immediately thrown it into the wastepaper basket. It is so typical for this system that any possible event is already being provided for, and I can say with the utmost certainty that I never saw this filing system before.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I do hope you will not deny us access to the special file about angora rabbits, sunflowers and the fattening of pigs. That we must by all means see.
MR. WALTON: I do not have before me the complete files of Department I/5. Had I those files the prosecution would certainly have had an easier time than it has had for the past 24 hours more or less.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. Walton, why don't you indicate what you attempt to establish by this document? It seems to me that we are wasting a great deal of time on something that isn't of great importance.
MR. WALTON: Sir, my interpretation of this document is that it is a policy of at least Department I/5 of the Main Department of Budget and Construction; that it certainly shows -- even by the witness' statement -- that it shows every contingent possibility. It certainly Court No. II, Case No. 4.shows some actual possibilities of the matters which were handled by Department I/5. It shows so far as the prosecution is concerned, matters which the prosecution believe are necessary and material to the case.