DR. SEIDL: Your Honors, I would like to answer the following to this. This document was admitted in the former trials while they reserved themselves the right that the prosecution would introduce this man as a witness in order to cross-examine him and defense also made certain application to that effect. The Secretary-General of the International Military Tribunal and further the secretary general of these military tribunals now, investigations have been carried out with reference to this Gerstein and the following facts have been procured that this Gerstein has disappeared without leaving any trace since May, 1945 I have an information here from the secretary general and from the 11th of April 1947 from which this fact can be seen. I shall take the liberty now, to show or to introduce you to the information which I have received from the Secretary General so that the Tribunal can take knowledge of it.
THE PRESIDENT: Was this witness present in person at either trial? The International Military Tribunal or Tribunal No. 1?
DR. SEIDL: This witness has never been examined before a Tribunal, neither by the IMT nor before the medical case, Tribunal No 1 that is the prosecution would try to find the witness and the Secretary General helped us in that respect. As a result since the witness disappeared since May, 1945, one must assume on the basis of this statement that this could be a play boy perhaps or there must be some other reason which makes it impossible for him to appear before the Tribunal. In other words, seeing that the prerequisites are not justified under which such a statement would have been admitted by the Military Tribunal, I am of the opinion that a further admission of this document before this Tribunal is not possible as it is now clearly shown that this witness is no longer available.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the exhibit consists of two parts. The first is, I believe, a record of shipments of certain chemicals and the second part an unsworn statement by the witness gerstein.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit consists of two parts, the first apparently a record of shipments of certain chemicals; the second part is an unsworn statement by the witness Gerstein.
DR. SEIDL: In our German document book, Your Honors, we first have the statement which was not sworn to by Kurt Gerstein. My objection is only restricted to the admission of that statement by Kurt Gerstein. I have no objections with reference to the other documents which are connected with this one.
THE PRESIDENT: Then without objection the first eleven pages, which are copies of shipping records, will be admitted.
MR. HIGGINS: In Your Honors please, we have the photostat of the original here, the exhibit, and it appears from this that it is part of an official report compiled by the Consolidated Advance Field Team Number 7. The photostat shows it was directed to the CIOS Secretariat, Shaef, and from all appearances, according to this photostat which I should like to submit for your scrutiny, I am of the opinion that it would be admissible as an official report.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it was an official captured document?
MR. HIGGINS: That's right, Your Honor. No, an official report. In other words, it appears that this team was directed to secure information pertinent to this subject, and as a result the testimony of the subject affiant was taken and is compiled here.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean an official United States investigating team?
MR. HIGGINS: That's right, Your Honor.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, I should like to add to the prosecution's statement the following. It is correct that there is a remark of the Consolidated Advance Team prior to the remark. However, from the whole document it results that this is not an official government report of the United States as it should be according to Ordinance Number 7, and it could be admitted in this Court according to this ordinance. It can be seen clearly from the whole statement that the witness Kurt Gerstein just by mistake or just by chance spoke to this Consolidated Team man and that he made a statement to him and that, furthermore, this investigational report is nothing but a remark or an addition to the statement of Kurt Gerstein.
The statement by Kurt Gerstein, according to my opinion, cannot become an official report of the United Nations unless it is accompanied by a containing letter.
I must apply here for the fact that only such governmental reports be admitted which are really based on actual investigations of the commission in charge and that it is not admissible that every statement which is not sworn to becomes an official government report when an opinion is added to it.
MR. ROBBINS: May I say, Your Honor, that Ordinance Number 7 does not require a statement to be sworn to. It only requires the Court to determine that the statement has some probative value. I think the fact that it was signed before an army officer and was taken in the course of an army investigation, added to the fact that the bills attached to the statement are addressed to the witness Gerstein and the fact that it was accepted by the other two tribunals, give the statement some probative value, and the Court should, therefore, take it for whatever it is worth.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the situation before the IMT? Was this document admitted in evidence as part of the proof?
MR. HIGGINS: I contacted the office of Mr. Reymon, who is in charge of the documents, and was informed that this document had been introduced into evidence as Exhibit Number 350.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but was it received in evidence? Was it admissible?
MR. HIGGINS: I was under the impression that it was, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl was present at that trial and he says not.
MR. ROBBINS: I don't believe Dr. Seidl said that it wasn't. I think he agreed that it was.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, according to my recollection the document was admitted in evidence before the International Military Tribunal, not as an official government report, though, but only while reserving the right that the prosecution would he in a position to bring the witness Kurt Gerstein as a witness:
in other words, it was assumed that they could.
THE PRESIDENT: They never did? They never did bring the witness?
DR. SEIDL: Yes - well, they tried to get the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: But they didn't?
DR. SEIDL: No, he wasn't brought, and then apparently it was forgotten to refer to this document again before the International Military Tribunal and to make application that the admissibility of this document not be granted.
THE PRESIDENT: Your recollection is that it was admitted provided the witness was produced later?
DR. SEIDL: Yes, Your Honor, That's the thing I can still remember, Your Honor, that's all.
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO): Do you know whether the Court in its eventual decision took any note of this particular document or its contents?
MR. HIGGINS: No, I don't, Your Honor. I don't have that information.
THE PRESIDENT: It isn't referred to in the judgment.
MR. HIGGINS: Upon getting the information that it had been granted an exhibit number by the IMT and introduced into evidence, I just assumed that.
THE PRESIDENT: It could get a number, of course, merely upon being offered, which doesn't mean necessarily that it was received.
MR. ROBBINS: May I suggest that we investigate the ruling of the IMT in Tribunal I before the Court rules on the admissibility?
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Musmanno just made the same suggestion. It might make a difference what action the IMT actually took and perhaps the record ought to be the best evidence of that. We will not admit it at this time, but you may re-offer it later. This applies only, of course, to the latter part of the document containing Gerstein's statement.
The first eleven pages are admitted without objection.
MR. HIGGINS: As is obvious from the face of the first twelve pages, the record consists simply of accounts rendered for the delivery of Zyklon B gas to Obersturmbannfuehrer Gerstein for use in the Auschwitz and Oranienburg camps.
The next document is contained on page 62 of the English document book and is Document NO-482. I should like to offer this as Prosecution Exhibit 469. I should like to make a correction in that. This document has been presented previously in Document Book 4 and was granted admission. As I have stated, this document has been previously introduced in Document Book 4 as Exhibit 79.
It is a series of letters passing between Himmler and the defendant Pohl, concerning the transforming of transient camp of Sobibor in the district of Lublin into a concentration camp. Pohl suggested that the camp remain in its present condition, and this suggestion was accepted by Himmler.
At page 66 of the English Document Book, I offer Document 2376-PS as Prosecution Exhibit No. 469.
DR. SEIDL: Dr. Seidl for the defendant Oswald Pohl. Your Honor, in our document book the document 2367-PS consists of two parts, and in both cases they have statements made of a man by the name of Dr. Mildner. According to the document which I have here, I have to assume that the first statement is not sworn to, and, therefore it cannot be accepted or introduced as an affidavit. (consultation among the counsel at the rostrum) Your Honor I have just found out that in the original, both affidavits were sworn to together by the witness, Dr. Mildner. This can not be seen in our copies. Therefore, I shall withdraw my objection in this connection. However, I make the application that the same as in all the other cases, a document only be admitted while reserving the right of the Prosecution that the defense will produce the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the document will be admitted with that understanding and limitation. You have seen the two documents, Mr. Higgins?
MR. HIGGINS: Dr. Seidl spoke of two but there is only one document here ---
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. HIGGINS: --- contained in our English Document Book.
THE PRESIDENT: On the basis of our copy, it does not appear to be sworn to. Can we assume that it is sworn to?
MR. HIGGINS: Yes, Your Honor, the photostatic exhibit stows that it has been sworn to.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
MR. HIGGINS: This is an affidavit of Rudolf Mildner, one time Colonel of police and commandant of Security Police in Vienna. His presentation of the affidavit discloses the channel through which execution orders were issued. This statement implicates the defendant Pohl. On page 66 of the English Document Book he states: "The concentration camps were under the SS Wirtschafts and Vorwaltunghauptamt in Oranienburg near Berlin. The head was SS Obergruppenfuehrer Pool. He was directly under R.F. SS Himmler. In this bureau all matters concerning concentration camps and prisoners were handled by the Amtsgruppe D. The head of this was SS Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks, who was inspector of all concentration camps. Orders of the R.F. SS Himmler concerning the type of labor employment of the prisoners on the extermination of the Jews, so far as I could gather from conversations with comrads of the Sipo, went directly through Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks, head of the Amtsgruppe D and the head of the concentration camps as "top secret."
MR. ROBBINS: Your Honor, to keep the record straight, I do not think that Dr. Seidl correctly stated the prior ruling of the Tribunal in regard to the admissibility of the affidavit. I don't believe they have been admitted conditionally, but have been admitted for whatever value they may be, and the defense may apply for bringing the witness to Nurnberg, am I correct in that, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: That is right.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: In three instances the name of "Pool" appears. I presume that is a typographic error?
MR. HIGGINS: Yes, Your Honor.
Document No. 2128 has been previously introduced into evidence, and is shown in Document Book No. 12 as Exhibit No. 331. This document is the Himmler confirmed draft of Pohl's order establishing the SS Economic Administrators with a higher SS and Police leaders in the occupied territories. Mr. Robbins on presenting his material treated this document at great length, so I don't feel that it is necessary to discuss it at this time.
On page 81 of the English Document Book, I would like to offer Document No. 3944-PS, as Prosecutions Exhibit No. 470. It is an affidavit of Emil Puhl, who was vice president of the Reichsbank, and discloses the arrangement made for the receipts of valuables seized by the SS in the East. In writing about the arrangements entered into, Puhl stated, and I quote: "Funk told me that he had arranged with Reichsfuehrer Himmler to have the Reichsbank receive on safe deposit gold and jewels for the SS. Funk directed that I should work out the arrangements with Pohl, who, as head of the Economic Section of the SS, was in charge of the administration of the economic aspects of the concentration camp program."
In paragraph 4 of this document, Puhl goes on and states: "I arranged subsequently with one of the responsible officials in charge of the cash and vault depart ments for receiving the material, and reported the matter to the Board of Directors of the Reichsbank at its next meeting.
Pohl of the Economic Section of the SS, on the same day telephoned me, and asked if I had been advised of the matter. I said I would not discuss it by telephone. He came to see me and reported that the SS had some jewelry on hand for delivery to the Reichsbank for safe keeping. I arranged with him for delivery and from then on deliveries were made from time to time, from August 1942 over the following years."
Document No. 2132 I offer as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 471. It contains the personal record of Max Horn, and includes contents of the record of his employment of labor for the SS and Economic Administrators at Dachau.
Page 85 of the English Document Book I offer the Document NO724 as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 472. This letter of the defendant Frank, dated 26 September 1942, and addressed to officials at Lublin and Auschwitz, lays down regulations for the disposition of property seized from the Jews. Frank in prescribing the procedure had dual desires to conceal the true nature of this loot. In the introductory paragraph Frank stated: "Property which will in all orders in the future be called goods originating from thefts, receiving of stolen goods and hoarded goods." The report paragraph by paragraph states what disposal is to be made of the various items seized through the program of extermination.
Page 89, I note is Document NO-1005, which has been previously introduced in Document Book No. 14 as Prosecutions Exhibit No. 390.
THE PRESIDENT: Three what?
MR. HIGGINS: 390, Your Honor, 3-9-0. This document consists of an exchange of letters between the defendant Bobermin and the defendant Hohberg, Chief of Department W-II, which pleads for assignment of broad orders to his office, and defendant Hohberg replies: "I am extremely sorry that my reply has to be in the negative. All available auditors who have not already been conscripted into the army or sent to other places of duty, are car-marked for a special task to be carried out at Lublin under the direction of SS-Brigadefuehrer Globotenik and SS-Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Horn."
I would like to state that this auditing work referred to at Lublin is in direct connection with the work of administrative nature, which is there being carried out in regard to materials confiscated from the Jews through "Action Reinhardt." The previous documents concern those materials also, and as to the order of Frank these goods are described to be referred to as stolen goods, hoarded goods and goods received through thefts.
On Page 90 of the English Document Book I offer Number 056 as Prosecution Exhibit 473. This is Globocnik's letter of 4 November 1943 to the Reichs fuehrer SS, serving as a cover letter for his report on Action Reinhardt. In writing of the utilization of labor, he states that the enterprises have grown so large that well known industries have become interested. He than remarks; and I quote, page 90:
"In the meantime, I have turned over these labor camps to the SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl."
On Page 92 of the English Document Book I offer NO-060 as Prosecution Exhibit 474. This document contains an accounting of valuables received from Action Reinhardt, and it is stated that the materials have been transferred, or rather, forwarded to the WVHA for transmission to the Reichsbank, Ministry of Economy.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, in our document book there is here a statement by Waldemar Hoven.
MR. HIGGINS: I am quite sure, Your Honor, that is a mistake in the number of the German document.
THE PRESIDENT: What number do you have on your document?
DR. GAWLIK: As Document NO-060 I have a statement of Dr. Waldemar Hoven.
THE PRESIDENT: It is a mistake in the numbering of the document?
MR. HIGGINS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, you will receive a copy of the proper document.
MR. HIGGINS: On Page 94 of the English Document Book I offer NO-061 as Prosecution Exhibit 475. This report consists of a further breakdown of the account contained in Document 060. It simply itemizes the material going to make up the figures as contained in the previous document.
On Page 98 of the English Document Book, I should like to offer NO 058 as Prosecution Exhibit 476. This is Himmler's reply to Globocnik's report of 4 November 1943, in which he confirms receipt of Globocnik's letter and thanks him for the matters sent. He states:
"I express to you my thanks and gratitude for the great and unique merits you have earned by the performance of operation Reinhardt for the benefit of the entire German nation."
Page 99 of the English Document Book. I offer Document L-18as Prosecution Exhibit 477. This document is a report submitted to the Higher SS and Police Leader East, Krueger, on 30 June 1943, by one Gruppenfuehrer Katzmann and consists of a report detailing the measures carried out in the solution of the Jewish question in Galicia.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, Document L-18 is not contained in our Document book. I would therefore appreciate it if the Prosecution could give us a document later on.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be admitted provisionally.
MR. HIGGINS: This document contains in great detail measures taken in the solution of the Jewish Problem, and on Page 107 is contained a reference to the Reinhardt staff, followed by an account of valuables and goods confiscated.
At. Page 119 of the English Document Book I offer Document NO-055 as Prosecution Exhibit 478.
DR. MUELLER-THORGOW (Counsel for defendant Georg Loerner):
Your Honor, I have to object to the admission of the Document NO 055. This is not, as is stated in the index, an affidavit by the defendant Georg Loerner. It is merely an examination, which was not sworn to.
MR. HIGGINS: He intend to introduce this document, not as an affidavit of Georg Loerner, because, as it appears from the text of the document, it is not properly executed. However, we would like to have it admitted as a statement made by the defendant Georg Loerner, to use solely against him as an admission made by him.
THE PRESIDENT: A statement by a defendant does not necessarily have to be sworn to. If it is a statement against his own interests, or an admission, or a confession, it is admissible without being under oath.
DR. MUELLER-THORGOW: Your Honor, as far as I can recall, such examination in similar cases so far were withdrawn by the Prosecution.
MR. HIGGINS: I didn't have the earphone on in sufficient time.
THE PRESIDENT: He says in other instances statements of this kind have been withdrawn by the Prosecution. I don't know why. Well the ruling of the Tribunal is that this is a statement by a defendant and admissible, even though it is not under oath. In fact, if it was merely a verbal conversation not reduced to writing, it would be admissible because it comes from a defendant.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Would that not be true in German Law, Counsel, that any statement made by one under accusation may be used for or against him? Is that not true in German law? I would think that is fundamental.
DR. MUELLER-THORGOW: Yes, in my opinion, it is the same in German Law. However, as far as I know, it has been handled differently in these Tribunals.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think so. If so, it is time to correct the error.
We've only got a minute. Let's break at this point. Recess until 1:30.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1330 this afternoon.
(A recess was taken.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1340 hours, 25 April, 1947).
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the courtroom please take your seats.
Tribunal No. II is again in session.
MR. ROBBINS: With reference to Judge Tom's question about Concentration Camp Wewelsburg that is referred to in the affidavit concerning the Defendant Klein, I have learned that is the same as Camp Niederhagen. That is Concentration Camp Wewelsburg.
THE PRESIDENT: Niederhagen. What is that document?
MR. ROBBINS: That is the last document in Book 17, NO-2169, Exhibit 456.
MR. HIGGINS: The last document introduced prior to the recess was NO-055 presented as Prosecution's Exhibit 478. That is the statement of Georg Loerner concerning various subjects, the first section dealing with the labor commitment of prisoners; No. 2, structure and tasks of Office Groupe D; No. 3, foreign purchases and provision of foreign currency.
The paragraph which is of most interest to us here in paragraph 4 on page 121 of the English document book which concerns the receipt by Loerner of clothing from Lublin. Also mentioned here is the receipt of precious metals and other items.
Writing of this matter, he states: "Once it was said that these were articles which came from fleeing Poles. Again it was said that they were articles from the ghettoes. A small group rumored secretly that the stuff emanated from dead convicts. This view, however, was rejected by us as quite impossible. By whom? Today I know that that information was based on the opinion of the majority. That a man should be capable of conceiving and ordering such monstrosities, I cannot comprehend yet today."
Page 123 of the English document book I would like to offer, NO-606 -- sorry, Your Honors. I notice that this particular document has been previously introduced; it is contained in Book V as Exhibit 151. It consists of correspondence between Himmler, Pohl and others, and deals with the distribution of clothing and utensils stored at Auschwitz and Lublin, to German nationals in the Reich. At page 124, Brandt, in writing to Pohl, states that the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler has ordered distribution of the clothing of German nationals.
On page 123 a letter written by Brandt to Pohl supplements this past-mentioned letter, and sets out the type of clothing which is to make up the shipment. Subsequent documents are concerned with the question of just where this material is to be received -- that is, at which railroad station.
At page 128 of the English document book I offer Document NO-1257 as Prosecution Exhibit 478. I am sorry, Your Honors. Thank you, it is (Exhibit) 479. This document consists of correspondence between Himmler and the defendant Pohl, and concerns the utilization of stores and materials contained at Auschwitz and Lublin. In his letter of 15 January 1943, on page 131 of the document book, Himmler demands a more satisfactory utilization by the defendant Pohl of the materials stored in the Jewish warehouses.
Pohl replies that difficulties in transportation of these supplies to deserving agencies have slowed up the distribution. This letter is on page 128 of the English document book; appended to this correspondence is an accounting of textile materials delivered from Auschwitz and Lublin by the WVHA.
On page 133 of the English document book; once again I am sorry -this document NO-1015 has been previously introduced and is contained in document book 16, as Exhibit 451. It is a letter from the defendant Bobermin to the defendant Hohberg, dated 28 April 1943. Bobermin states that his office has taken over four new enterprises in the GovernmentGeneral, and he requests Hohberg to postpone until 1 August 1943 the repayment of loans extended to him through the Reinhardt Fund. He further requests the extension of additional credit for the operation of the industries under him.
On page 135 of the English document book, I offer NO-2003, as prosecution Exhibit No. 480. This is the defendant Frank's letter of 1 May 1943 informing Himmler of the manner of disposition of property obtained from the Jews.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this the defendant Frank?
MR. HIGGINS: Yes, Your Honor.
Document NO-1031 has previously been presented and is contained in Book 16. I am sorry that at the present time I do not have the exhibit number, but I shall provide it to the Tribunal as soon as I can find it.
This is Mummenthey's -- the defendant Mummenthey -- letter to Pohl, dated 28 June 1943, in which he suggests -
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What page is that?
MR. HIGGINS: This is page 138, Your Honor. 1031.
THE PRESIDENT: And that exhibit number is 437. This is Exhibit 437.
MR. HIGGINS: This document, Your Honor, NO-1031, is contained in Book 16 -- it is page 37. Thank you, Your Honor.
In this letter to Pohl, Mummenthey suggests that DEST take over the stone works at Roemhild and operate it with labor furnished by the Gestapo.
Reference is made by Mummenthey in this letter to the Treblinka Gravel Works which uses labor furnished by the Higher SS and Police Leader at Warsaw.
On page 141 of the English Document Book, I offer NO-554. This document is contained, I notice here, in Book 17. I do not have the exhibit number for that. It is Exhibit 447, Your Honors.
This is an exchange of correspondence between the DWB and the Economic Enterprises of the WVHA concerning the repayment of loans to the creditors of these companies with funds advanced by Frank, the defendant Frank, from the Reinhardt Fund. Document NO-1569 has been previously presented and is contained in Document Book 14, and is Exhibit 391. It is Hohberg's -- the defendant Hohberg -- memorandum dated on 3 August 1943, setting out the unfinished jobs of Staff W which should be completed. Among the unfinished business mentioned is the details of the loan to the DWB from the Reinhardt Fund. Defendant Hohberg states that this loan agreement should be put in writing.
At page 175 of the English document book, I offer NO-725, as Prosecution Exhibit 481, being the defendant Pohl's letter of 9 December 1943 to authorities concerned with the handling of currency realized through action Reinhardt. Defendant Pohl directs that receipts and expenditures are to be treated according to the rules of the Reich Auditing Code, and the Reich Budget Ordinance, Expenditures are only authorized insofar as they are basically connected with the execution of the action. All amounts over expenditures are to be handed over to the competent SS Economic Office to be transferred to the WVHA, and presented for auditing to Section A-4 of the WVHA.
I have been given copies of document 3363 which were not available at the time I began the presentation of the documents in this book. I should like to pass these English copies to the Tribunal.
(Documents passed to members of Tribunal.)
MR. HIGGINS: The number 458 has been reserved for this document. It is the second document listed on the index sheet. It is Heydrich's teletype to the SS troops in the East dated 21 September 1939 informing addresses of measures to be taken in the solution of the Jewish problem. Jews are to be concentrated in large cities possessing good railroad facilities. The further reason for the concentration of Jews is there were better partisan leaders and leaders. Heydrich, in concluding, states that German Industry and the Army must not suffer as a result of this evacuation, it may be necessary, it is stated, to leave some people in key positions until replacements are found. I would like to make at this time the presentation of document contained in Book 19, which is Part D, the subject of the extermination of Jews. The first document in this book, NO-1270 has been previously presented and is contained in Book 3 as Exhibit No. 61. It is the memorandum -
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Which document are you speaking of now.
MR. HIGGINS:NO-1270, Your Honor.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: You say that was previously introduced?
MR. HIGGINS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Under what number?
MR. HIGGINS: Book 3, Exhibit 61. It is a memorandum on a conference held February 1943 attended by Defendants Pohl, Georg Loerner, Volk and Hohberg, together with Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Horn. It stated the object of the conference was to arrive at basic regulations for the newly formed Osti. On page 7 of the English Document Book, I offer NO-1265 as Prosecution Exhibit 482. Dr. Horn writes to the Defendant Hohberg on 26 February 1943 that the financing of Osti is solved. Globecnik confirms this fact. It is stated that the original capital of 25,000 RM's is sufficient for Osti. This amount has been placed at its disposal. The defendants Volk, Georg Loerner and Pohl are mentioned in this letter as being informed in the establishment of this company. The works which are to be turned over by Osti are listed and in addition Horn states that a number of small Ghetto plants are incorporated in the Lublin works of the DAW.
The Osti will work side by side with these works.
Document NO-2182 has previously been presented and is contained in Book 18 as Exhibit 471. It is the personal record of Horn of an aim to be economic administrator at Cracow.
On page 12 of the English Document Book, I offer NO-1266 as Prosecution Exhibit 483. Defendant Hohberg in this document writes of the Reinhardt fund. As of 26 June 1943 he states that the money making up this fund will be placed at the disposal of the Reich upon order of Osti. Hohberg states that the defendant Frank was not responsible for the transfer of a part of the fund to German industrial firms.
On page 13, of the English Document Book, I offer NO-1269 as Prosecution Exhibit 434. Horn in his letter of 17 August 1943 states that Frank has approved a credit request to be supplied Osti from the Reinhardt fund. It is requested that this 2,500,000 RM's credit be withdrawn and be released by 5,000,000 Zloti's credit. It is stated that the matter was thoroughly discussed with the Defendant Frank.
Defendant Pohl, in referring to this matter of 31 August 1943 requests that the wishes of Hohn be fulfilled and this credit made available to Osti. On page 16 of the Document Book is contained Document NO-599. This document, however, has been previously presented and is contained in Document Book 3. I am sorry that the number -- I do not have the exhibit number on this document but I shall locate it.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment we will get the exhibit number.
JUDGE MUSMANNO:NO-599.
JUDGE SPEIGHT: Exhibit 63.
MR. HIGGINS: Thank you very much. This memorandum of September 1943 concerns the discussion held among Defendant Pohl and Loerner Horn, Globocnik and other concerning the taking over of the labor camp in the Lublin district by the WVHA.