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 27 May 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Robert M. Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The 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.
OSWALD POHL - Resumed CROSS-EXAMINATION
DR. SEIDL (For Defendant Oswald Pohl): Your Honor, last Friday, shortly before the recess of this Tribunal, the Prosecution made the request that the Tribunal make a decision to the effect that the Defendant Oswald Pohl is no longer permitted to speak with other defense counsel or defendants. Thereupon, as usual, I applied, I requested the officer of the jail downstairs that the Defendant Oswald Pohl be presented before me on Friday, and I asked him that he be shown to me on Saturday morning. In both cases the Defendant Oswald Pohl was not brought to me, and I want this Tribunal to take knowledge of this fact, namely, that between the Prosecution and the defense there are apparently certain discrepancies as far as interpreting certain decisions of the court are concerned. According to my experience so far, the internal security only does not present the witness in such cases when the Prosecution gives them a certain order to that effect.
MR. ROBBINS: I assure Dr. Seidl that his failure to speak to the defendant was not the work of the Prosecution at all. It does not hinge upon the interpretation which the Prosecution gave to the Tribunal's decision. I understood the Tribunal's decision to be that defense counsel, all defense counsel, could speak to the defendant, and we had nothing to do with that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I had no idea who it was that prevented you from talking to your client, Dr. Seidl. It wasn't the Tribunal and it wasn't the Prosecution. Who prevented you?
DR. SEIDL: The Tribunal, as I said before, did not grant the Prosecution's motion. In other words, it was this Tribunal's idea that I was not to be prevented to speak to this defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct.
DR. SEIDL: In spite of that fact, however, I did not have the possibility to see the defendant on Friday or on Saturday, to speak to him, although he was on the list of those defendants who had to be brought to me after that application.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that. I am trying to find out who prevented you from seeing your client. Who was it?
DR. SEIDL: Up to this present moment I could not find out, but according to my experience so far, it always happened in such manner that the prison administration of its own accord is not interested not to bring a defendant to me, and that this would only be done in such cases when there is a certain order to that effect by one of the competent authorities here.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal certainly did not expect this to happen, did not anticipate it, and it is not in accordance with the Tribunal's order. The motion of the Prosecution to prevent your seeing the defendant was denied, and I see no reason for this action having been taken. However, there is nothing I can do about it except from now on, except in the future. The Tribunal will see to it that you have access to your client and other counsel have access to the witness for the purpose of interviewing him.
MR. ROBBINS: Before beginning cross-examination of the witness, I should like to state for the record that the Prosecution has prepared a second clean-up memorandum of document books I through XX. There were certain discrepancies between our notes and the notes of the Secretary General which occurred from the first clean-up memorandum of the 12th of May, 1947.
I have checked all those discrepancies with the Secretary-General, and I think this new memorandum, which will replace the first one, will set the record straight. This is dated 19 May, 1947, and I should like to have permission to have it included in the record and extended in the record.
THE PRESIDENT: Such permission will be granted.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBINS:
Q. Witness, you understand that you are under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
A. Yes.
Q. From listening to your testimony during the last six days, in Court, I feel that an impression may have possibly arisen, no doubt inadvertently on your part, that you had nothing to do with concentration camps before 1942. In order to clear up this point I should like to go back to some of the earlier documents. Will you turn to Document No. NO-019A, in Book No. II, which is before you, Exhibit No. 24, on page 43 of the German, and page 32 in the English Document Books. This is a letter from Himmler to Hildebrandt, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you tell us what position Hildebrandt occupied on the date that this letter was written? It is 15 December 1939.
A. Hildebrandt was Higher SS and Police Leader of West Prussia. In other words, up there in the Stutthof area, Oberabschnitt Weichsel I think the name was.
Q. Will you turn to the last paragraph in that letter beginning with "Concentration camps may be established only with my approval," and read the remainder of that paragraph?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Will you read it aloud, please?
A. "Concentration camps may be established only with my approval", Himmler says. "Concentration camps existing at present are placed by me, with immediate effect, under the inspectorate of concentration camps in charge of which is at present SS Oberfuehrer Gluecks. The supervision of the economic matters of these institutions and their application to work is the responsibility of SS Gruppenfuehrer Pohl."
During the direct examination I have already drawn your attention to the fact that this decree of Himmler's, based on the fact that around the same time, or it might have been a little bit earlier, perhaps, I'll really say in 1938, the Economical enterprises, which at the time only existed in Dachau were subordinated to me. that is he reason why this decree originated. In other words, in the concentration camps which already existed there were workshops which exceeded their production and I had to administer that surplus production. At the time when they changed in character, the workshops in the camps, I only had something to do with them sofar as Inmates were concerned. I had no other connection with the camps then. My tasks were limited to only those things, namely, that these economical enterprises were to be taken care of in a commercial way, and to see to it that the necessary number of inmates sofar as they were being used could be used in the workshops, and actually were used, I mean, in the labor assignments, as it was decreed later on, that is, after 1942. They only intended to take care of these economical enterprises in the camp.
Q. When were you first given authority over the SS Industries in the concentration camps?
A. That was at that particular moment, of the establishment of the DEST, which was established in 1938 -- 1938 or '39, and then the DAW, which was the continuation of the Economic Enterprise in 1939. Both of them were incorporated into each other early in 1940 in the DWB, the German Economic Enterprises.
Q. Those industries used concentration camp inmates, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. As a matter of fact, didn't your authority over the enterprises and workshops in concentration camps go back farther than 1938 -- earlier than 1938?
A. Well, the Economic Enterprises were subordinated as far as they were workshops, were subordinated to the camp commandant. I did state before that the workshops were first of all subordinated to the camp commandant, and after 1938, they were transformed into the Economic Enterprises sofar as I can recall, that was only the case in Dachau at first, and from that moment on they were under my authority.
Q. Do you wish to state that before 1938, or prior to 1938 you had no contact with the concentration camps whatever?
A. Prior to 1938, in a supervisory capacity, no. All that I can remember is that when they became economic enterprises they were subordinated to me, and I believe that was in 1938.
Q. Let's go back a little earlier and see if we can refresh your recollection, and see if we can get a clearer picture of the earlier administrative organization of the SS. You joined the SS in February 1934, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Immediately upon joining the SS, you were made Chief of the Administrative Office of the SS, or Verwaltungsamt-SS, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. This was an Amt or Office within the SS Hauptamt, or the SS-Main Office, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. The SS-Hauptamt, or Main Office is sometimes called the SS-Central Office, is that correct?
A. No, it was never called that way. The SS-Main Office, Hauptamt, was the oldest office in the Reichs Fuehrung-SS had a different name.
Q. Then the SS-Hauptamt was called the SS-Main Office, is that right?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. That was the main office under Himmler in which your Verwaltungsamt, or the administrative office was a part, is that correct?
A. Yes, the Administrative office-SS was an Amt in the SS Main Office.
Q. From February 1934 you were Chief of this Verwaltungsamt?
A. Yes, that is correct?
Q. I will ask you to describe this Verwaltungsamt, the organization of its office, and its different sub-offices or divisions, and the Verwaltungsamt, and the functions and duties of each of these sofar as you can remember. This is of the date of 1934 or '35.
A. The Verwaltungsamt-SS was separated into the Main Departments and departments. The main departments were the Treasury, the Personnel, and then perhaps the auditing offices. I don't know what further departments existed, but at that time it was a small office, and sofar as I remember the size of the space used, it was not too large. In 1935 when the first political units, the later verfuegungstgruppe, were set up, the new tasks instituted expansion of that particular office. There was also a separation between the departments, according to Party and Reich tasks. In other words, sofar as tasks were concerned, the Allgemeine-SS and the SS-Verfuegungsgruppe of the Reich, they were just a few and were rather small during the first few years, and it did not have too much of an extension of the office as a result.
Q. This was the organization which later became the Main Office, and still later became the WVHA, is that correct?
A. Yes, in other words, its Administrative Office shows assignment as an Amt in the SS-Main Office, after February 1939, after that it became the Hauptamt, and Budget and Buildings and Construction of the Main Office Administration and Economics, respectively. The fact that two Main Offices existed was to be shown by that; the separation only was caused by the fact, or due to the financing, which varied. The Office under Construction took care of the Reich means.
Q. We will come to that a little later. Right now we are speaking of the period of 1934 and '35. About how many employees were working in the Administrative Office SS when you became chief in 1934?
A. In 1934, I would say approximately 100 to 150 employees --but I couldn't tell for sure. I can only guess at it according to the office space used in that building. There could not have been more than a hundred to a hundred and fifty.
Q. I am going to show you a letter which you wrote on the first of October 1935, and see if that will help you refresh your recollection. See, if from that, you can give us a more complete description of the of the Verwaltungsamt as of that date.
In paragraph 1 it states that you are administrative chief of the SS. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. And then it says that this office embraces the following sections to be ranked as Main departments:
A. Well, you have to differentiate here between the agency or office of the administrative Office of the SS or chief central pay office administrator. That was my personal position with Himmler. And second the Administrative Office SS which I have mentioned: Administrative Chief of the SS. It dealt with budget measures and similar questions which, in other words, were beyond the competency of the SS Main Office. The dealing with those matters themselves also took place within the framework of the administrative office SS. In other words, it was something like a special emphasis laid on my personal assignment which I had with Himmler. The Administrative Office-SS in the SS Main Office is described here as I have stated it to be. In other words, the Judiciary Office, which is the Main Office V-I, Budget, the Main Office V-2, Accounting, No. 4, Main Section V-3, Clothing & Equipment, and 5, Main Department, Quarters, V-4 -
Q. Just a moment.
DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for the defendants Volk and Bobermin):
Your Honors, I have to raise an objection about the introduction of this document; namely, due to the following reasons: because not only it concerns the defendant Pohl but also all the other defendants. The Defense Counsel have no copy of this document although it has been ordered that they be notified twenty-four hours in advance and receive this. I have just received a copy of this document right now. And under those circumstances we cannot possibly examine the documents in advance.
THE PRESIDENT: The Prosecution is not offering this as an exhibit. It is submitted to the witness for the purpose of refreshing his recollection. Under those circumstances you are not entitled to have it twentyfour hours ahead of time.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Referring to paragraph 1, sub-paragraph I, SS-Central Payment Office; do you recall who was the chief of that office as of this date, October '35?
A. Well, this administrative office of the SS was incorporated into the administrative Office SS. in other words, it was not an authority in itself, and the Central Pay Office, which is mentioned here, ran parallel with the SS Main Treasury.
Q. Perhaps you didn't understand the question. Who was in charge of the SS Central Payment Office? Who was your deputy in charge of that office? Was it not the defendant Frank?
A. No, at that time I believe it was Sturmbannfuehrer Faist. Frank, as far as I can remember, did not work with the Pay Office. Frank was an expert in budget matters.
Q. Did you state that Frank was never in charge of the SS Central Payment Office?
A. I don't think so. Maybe that Frank was in charge of the Pay Office.
Q. Well, will you refer to paragraph 2, Roman II, sub-paragraph 2: Main Department V-i, Budget? Was Frank in charge of this office as of the date 1935?
A. Well, I couldn't tell you for sure. Frank was an expert for budget matters. However, if he already was in charge of that department in 1935, I would not know for sure.
Q. Well, if he wasn't in 1935 he was at last by '36, was he not?
A. Yes, as far as budget matters were concerned. Of the special group task, Frank was active. That is correct.
Q. Referring to sub-paragraph 5, under Roman I, the Auditing Office. Who was in charge of this?
A. I no longer recall that -- who was in charge in 1934 or '35.
Q. There are three sub-paragraphs under the Auditing Office: SSMain Office including economic enterprises -- Were there economic enterprises under your office as of that date: 1935?
A. Yes. Well, I think that they were economic enterprises. I cannot recall that in 1935 we already had those economic enterprises.
Q. What does this mean, if it doesn't mean that they were economic enterprises in 1935?
A. Whether they were the bakery and butchery in Dachau, I no longer recall. As far as economic enterprises were concerned, we did not have at the time in 1935. It is possible, that ---
Q. Just a moment. You told us that you didn't have anything to do with workshops and enterprises in concentration camps before 1938. Now, I am just asking you to reconcile that statement with subparagraph C of your letter written in 1935. Sub-paragraph C, I would point out, concerns auditing for SS troops for special tasks: administrative office, concentration camps. Apparently you did have something to do with concentration camps as early as '35.
A. Well, this can only be then ---- There must have been a separation. Number 1 in the economic enterprises which had grown from the workshops. And then it is also possible that the bakery and butchery were under my supervision also prior to that time. However, it is not possible for me to differentiate between the two today because the economic enterprises which, in 1938 or 1939, were transformed into DAW no longer comprised the food enterprises.
The butchery and bakery were part of that enterprise in Dachau. It is quite possible that they were part of the SS Main Office or Administrative Office ever since the beginning.
Q. Well, it is not only possible -- it is highly probable from this document.
A. Well, I couldn't tell you for sure. I no longer remember the details.
Q. Will you turn to sub-paragraph 5, at the end of the letter? This concerns construction, does it not? Main Department V-4 in your office Verwaltungsamt?
A. Do you mean Roman numeral II-5, Roman numeral II-5?
Q. Yes.
A. Department V-4 C? Yes, that concerns the building matters of the administrate
Q. What sort of building and construction did this office carry on?
A. In the years of 1934 and 1935 it concerned the constructing of quarters of the political task units in Munich. Later on that Department V-4-C took care of the liaison between the units of the Special Tasks Group and the Reich Construction Administration building.
Q. It later became V-5, did it not? It remained Department V-5 after April 1936?
A. V-5?
Q. The Main department in charge of construction in the Verwaltungsamt?
A. I don't quite understand that. What do you mean by V-5?
Q. V-4-C, which was the building construction office, later became a main department V-5 in April 1936, the main department under the Verwaltungsamt?
A. A main office under the administrative office--there was no such thing. Neither was there a department V-5 as far as I can recall, at least, this main department V-4-C which is under V-5 here.
Q. Excuse me, perhaps the translation isn't coming through correctly. Did not V-4-C become a department corresponding to the other V departments, V-1, V-2, V-3, and V-4? Was there not later added a V-5?
A. I can no longer recall that for sure.
Q. Who was in charge of V-4-C building construction in 1935 and 1936? That was the defendant Eirenschmalz, was it not?
A. I think so. Yes, I believe that that was Eirenschmalz.
Q. Did this organization carry on all of the construction for the SS.
A. No, this department V-4-C was only in charge of building the quarters of the political task units. At that time there were two schools in Munich; and furthermore they had to take care of the liaison between the units of the Special Tasks Group and of the Reich Construc tion Administration as far as their buildings needs were concerned because all new constructions at the time when Kammler came in were being taken care of by the Reich construction Department in the Ministry of the Interior Office, were planned and carried out there.
In those years in the Administrative Office SS no construction projects were planned or carried out because we did not have the authority to do so. We did not have the permission to carry out construction work. In other words, with reference to all the projects of the Special Tasks Group, as far as building of their quarters was concerned, we had to submit it to the Reich Construction Dept. of the Reich Ministry of the Interior; and that is where they were planned and carried out by giving the orders to private enterprises.
Q. Did this section have anything to do with the construction of concentration camps on that date?
A. No, that department had nothing to do with the construction of concentration camps at the time. Those jobs were carried out by a construction department which Eicke set up himself and which was immediately subordinated to him and directly handled by him.
Q. Was this division or section given any notice whatever about the construction of concentration camps?
A. That department V-4-C, no. The construction department with Eicke was absolutely separated from this department V-4-C. They had nothing to do with each other; and the construction department with Eicke worked independently. It was not subordinated to me either.
Q. You wish to state that your building and construction office in the Verwaltungsamt up until the year 1938 had nothing whatever to do with the construction of concentration camps?
A. The concentration camps up to 1938 or even 1939 were being taken care of by the Construction Department Eicke.
Q. This organization, the Verwaltungsamt, in 1939 was reorganized, was it not, or in 1938?
A. In February 1939.
Q. It became the Main Office under Himmler for Budget and Construction and for Administration and Economy; is that correct?
A. It became Main Office Budget and Construction or then Main Office Administration and Economy.
Q. That organization in February 1942 was reorganized and became the WVHA? Is that correct?
A. Yes, I believe it was in January, January 1942.
Q. I should like to direct your attention for a moment to the duties of some of the chiefs of the individual offices under your Amtsgruppe. I should like first to refer to your testimony of last Friday, I believe it was. You were asked by the counsel for Georg Loerner:
"Q. Witness, I shall now turn to a few questions which deal with the clothing industry. Did Georg Loerner in his ministerial instance have anything to do with the clothing of inmates in concentration camps?
"A. The Administration of the concentration camps were competent for that.
"Q. And in a supervisory instance?
"A. In the supervisory instance the Amt D-4 was competent.
"Q. Was Georg Loerner responsible for the supply of food to the concentration camps and for the distribution of food rations to the individual inmates? Did he have anything to do in a supervisory capacity?
"A. No.
In this connection I should like to hand you Document NO-2616.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this a new document, Mr. Robbins?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes.
Q. Would you turn to Paragraph 8 of this affidavit? First I should like to ask you, is this an affidavit which was signed by you?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Will you turn to paragraph 8 of the affidavit? Will you read that aloud, please?
A. "It was part of Loerner's tasks to carry out the supply for the inmates of the concentration camps with clothes."
Q. Excuse me, my copy of the affidavit reads as follows:
"It was the responsibility of Loerner to assure the provision of clothing and nourishment to concentration camp inmates."
Will you refer to paragraph 7 of the affidavit?
"As Chief of Amtsgruppe B of the WVHA Georg Loerner was responsible for providing clothing, food, and accommodations to all units of the Waffen SS and when necessary to the General SS. He was also in charge of the Paris contract allocation office from which he procured a portion of such supplies."
Now, the Amtsgruppe A was under your supervision, was it not?
A. Amtsgruppe A was under the supervision of Obergruppenfuehrer Frank.
Q. Is it true as you have stated in this affidavit that it was the responsibility of Amtsgruppe B, which was under the defendant Georg Loerner, to assure the provision of clothing to concentration camp inmates?
A. Yes, in the ministerial instance, that is ....
Q. Georg Loerner and Amtsgruppe B were under your supervision as Chief of the WVHA, were they not?
A. That is correct, yes.
Q. I should like to read to you from a sworn interrogation of yourself which was conducted on 7 June 1946:
"Q. Other matters of feeding and clothing SS units were the responsibility of Loerner, were they not?
"A. Yes, that is true.
"Q. Yes. In fact, Loerner has stated, and I read from an affidavit of Georg Loerner of 7 December 1945, paragraph 10:
'Section B of the WVHA, of which I was the head, was among other things charged with the feeding of all Waffen SS except the front line units.
Providing of the entire Waffen SS and the concentration camp inmates with clothing was one of my duties.' Is this correctly stated?
"A. Yes, that is true. That describes correctly the duties of Loerncr. He was in charge of clothing, feeding and housing the SS and concentration camp inmates."
Is that a correct interpretation of your interrogation of that date?
A. Yes. However, it is not quite correct the way it is put. Loerner had nothing to do with feeding the inmates. If I said that he had something to do with the supply of clothes I meant by that the ministerial activity; in other words, as far as clothing was concerned the securing of the raw material contingents which were necessary for those clothes; and I meant that it had to be given out by the Reich Economy Ministry, and activity for which subordinated agencies could not be used. These were to be taken care of by the Central Office. The administration of the clothes which were created this way and their issue to the inmates were the activity of other groups, either of the administrative offices in the concentration camps or of the Inspectorate of the concentration camps.
Q Excuse me, I would like to call
THE PRESIDENT: May I interrupt, Mr. Robbins? Did Frank - Who was responsible for procuring or requistioning clothing for the concentration camp inmates?
WITNESS: Well, Your Honor, I have to ask first what you mean by procuring?
THE PRESIDENT: I mean getting clothing from the manufacturers, from the supply houses.
THE WITNESS: We, in the WVHA, as far as clothing was concerned, only fixed the quota on the basis of the applications of the Fuehrungshauptamt, in other words, on the basis of the total complement for all the troops; then the orders were given to private industries which were to make these clothes, and from then the clothes were then transferred to the various units, also to the concentration camps.
THE PRESIDENT: Then did your Department WVHA buy directly from clothing manufacturers, from the supply houses?
THE WITNESS: No, we only fixed the raw material quota with the Economy Ministry and these quotas were then passed on to these various firms in order to manufacture these garments.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, wait a minute. Let's take a particular instance: You need 5,000 jackets, wool jackets, for concentration camp inmates. How did you go about getting those jackets?
WITNESS: Well, the securing did not take place several times. You could not say that 5,000 jackets were to be procured and 5,000 jackets were gotten, but the yearly necessity was fixed, or the yearly requirement was fixed first, then requisitioned from the Reich Economy Ministry for one year a certain quota of garments and we had clothes made out of that, and those garments that were completed were then picked up by those offices that had required them. That was the activity of the WVHA, as far as the clothing department was concerned.
THE PRESIDENT: You determined the quota, or your probable needs for clothing and then you drew against that requisition or that quota as you needed the garments?
THE WITNESS: Yes, well, our requirements, our total requirements, were not always completed by what we received most of the time.
THE PRESIDENT: I know that never happened. You never get what you order, you asked for as many as you expected to need?
WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Who did that in the WVHA? Who ordered the clothing?
WITNESS: Those matters were taken care of by Amtsgruppe B.
THE PRESIDENT: What's the man's name?
WITNESS: Loerner.
THE PRESIDENT: Georg Loerner?
WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
Q That isn't what you told the court when you were asked by Loerner's attorney, is it? I would like to read again from that:
"Did Georg Loerner in his ministerial instance have anything to do with clothing of the inmates in concentration camps?
"Answer: The administration of the concentration camps were competent for that.
"Question: And in a supervisory instance?
"Answer: In a supervisory instance, Amt D-4 was competent."
A Yes, in other words, above the administration of the concentration camps was the administrative office of the Inspectorate; that was the center to which the administration of the concentration camps came with all its requests.
Q And this morning on the stand you stated that Georg Loerner had nothing to do with the supply of food to the concentration camps. That's what you stated in answer to the question of Georg Loerner's attorney. I would like to read to you from a sworn interrogation of yours of the 8th of June, 1946:
"Question: Who was responsible in your office for the reduction of the daily rations at Mauthausen toward the end of the war?
"Answer: The whole feeding program was under the jurisdiction of Loerner and Amtsgruppe B, since the whole matter of billeting, clothing and feeding was under the jurisdiction of Loerner."
I would like to show you another affidavit of yours, Document NO2527, and ask you to turn to Paragraph 19. This is an affidavit sworn by you, is it not?
A Yes, that's correct.
Q I would like to read from paragraph 19: "And Georg Loerner was in charge - "
THE PRESIDENT: Hold it just a minute, Mr. Robbins. Are we going to get copies?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute then.
Q Paragraph 19. Paragraph 19 of NO-2527. "I was very much interested in keeping inmates alive so as to maintain as great a labor source as possible. Georg Loerner was in charge of clothing provided to concentration camp prisoners, and therefore I frequently conferred with him in order to be assured that inmates were properly taken care of." Will you turn to paragraph 19 of the third affidavit, which I have given to you, NO-2736. "Because I was greatly interested in keeping inmates alive so as to maintain as large a labor source as possible, I frequently conferred with Loerner to be assured that the inmates were properly fed and clothed." Do you still wish to maintain that Loerner had nothing to do with feeding the concentration camp inmates?
A That was stricken out by me in the original. The German original reads as follows: "Goerg Loerner was responsible for the clothing of the inmates in the concentration camps and I had frequent conferences with him in order to make sure that the inmates received the proper clothing." The word, "Food", was stricken out by me in the original and I stated before that we, of course, in the framework of our ministerial activity had to work on the prerequisites to provide these inmates with clothing.