A. I myself did not occupy any position at all there. I was an independent auditor by virtue of my working contract, and beyond that I also had to deal with other tasks. So that in the Main Office, Administration and Economy, an organizational place would exist for the auditors who were furnished to me, Pohl invented the title "Staff W."
Q. What other personal and factual relationship was it that existed between your office and the other office groups of the Main Office, Administration and Economy?
A. The office which I directed in the WVHA and before that in the Office for Administration and Economy, was the same which is furnished every auditor when he carries out some auditing work. Only in my case it was a permanent institution because I had a permanent auditing assignment. I did not have any professional contact with the other office groups, unless something had to be done in that particular field.
Q. Did you deal with the question of the organizational construction of the Main Office, Administration and Economy? That is to say, did you deal with the organization before the First of February, 1942?
A. No, as far as I dealt with organizational questions on the basis of my contract, these were only questions of the commercial organization, that is to say, bookkeeping and tabulations.
Q. Your answer apparently contrasts to document NO-1299, which has just been presented by the prosecution. It is Exhibit 35 in Document Book 2, on page 64 of the German, and page 54 of the English text. Have you found the document? According to your description, should we not reach the assumption that you also participated in the organizational construction of the WVHA?
A. I suggested to Pohl that Dr. Bobermin who administered the Polish Brick Works, which were under his trusteeship, -- that these enterprises should be removed from the direction of Dr. Salpeter.
Dr. Bobermin constantly complained that through Dr. Salpeter, as a result of his powerful position as a superior SS officer, he was constantly forced to do various things. For example, whenever Dr. Bobermin had procured large amounts of iron for his companies, Dr. Salpeter would take away part of that iron from him, although he was not actually in charge of the brick works in the East. Then the following factor was added. I myself had worked with an auditing company for four years and its partner was the Deutsche Gemeindetag, that is, the league of German Towns and Communities. This German Reich authority from the very beginning was opposed to National Socialism. Therefore, it was only natural that I had a special confidence in Dr. Bobermin. This was also the reason why I suggested that he should be taken away from the direction of Dr. Salpeter.
Q. With regard to the assumption that you worked in the organization, one could also reach that assumption by virtue of your affidavit which you gave to the prosecution. This is a document in Document Book I of the prosecution and is on page 83 of the English document book. It is Document NO-1924, Prosecution Exhibit 16. In your affidavit you state that you had the task -- and I quote -- "to consult the business management in taxation matters and also in organizational matters." What did you try to express when you made that statement?
A. As a result of my contract as advisor I was obligated to advise the business management on all questions of the commercial and business organization. As I have already mentioned before, commercial organization mainly deals with the question of the accounting system.
Q. I now want to refer to Document NO-620, Prosecution Exhibit 33, It is in Prosecution Document Book No. II. This is an organizational chart of the Main Office, Budget and Construction, or the Main Office, Administration and Economy. Witness, have you found this chart?
A. Yes.
Q. Here you are listed under the Main Department W. You are directly subordinated to the Main Office on this chart. I now want to ask you, is your position correct as it has been described and reproduced on this organizational chart?
A. Never in my life was I appointed to be in charge of a Main Department. Of course, it is up to every concern, whenever it compiles an organizational chart of the entire organization to also include the auditor of this concern, above all, when he has a permanent assignment there and when he has even been furnished his own office. Of course, I could not prevent them from listing mine on their chart. However, in this form, this reproduction is not correct. I would like to mention that undoubtedly this chart was more or less a dream, because it had been planned from the very beginning that I was to be included in the business management of the DWB in some form.
Q. If I have understood you correctly, Witness, the position which you occupied as an auditor is wrongly listed on this organizational chart. Here you are listed as being dependent on Pohl, and, therefore, you are listed as part of the Main Office, Administration and Economy, is that correct?
A. An auditor can never be dependent and Pohl knew that. After all, I expressed that in my contract. Already in the first clause it states, "as an independent free auditor."
Q. I also want to refer to Document Book II of the prosecution; on page 64 of the German text, on page 54 of the English text we have prosecution Document NO-1299. This is Prosecution Exhibit 35. This is a letter which you addressed to Pohl on the 26th of May, 1941. On the letterhead it states, "ST. W. HO-FA. I now want to ask you: Did we already have a Staff W in existence at that time?
A. Yes, we had a Staff W from the very moment I came there. After all, the people who were furnished to me by virtue of my con tract, that is to say, the auditors and the clerks, after all, we had to occupy a certain place within an organizational chart which Pohl compiled and this place was called "Staff W" by Pohl.
In this trial it will be shown that Pohl placed fundamental value on the fact that all commercial forms and functions which pertained to commercial law be provided with a military designation, and, therefore, in this case, he invented the name and title, "Staff W". When we consider these things, then the special mentality of the people must be considered who work within this main office. After all they mainly consisted of soldiers who only obeyed commands and for them only military expressions could be used. That is also the reason why Pohl requested me to use the letter head "Staff W" in my correspondence as an auditor. However, this letterhead was never actually printed. I myself did not have any actual reasons for refusing this request by Pohl, which, in itself, was rather harmless. However, of course, I compiled the auditing reports in my own name. The correspondence from enterprise to enterprise when it dealt with the auditing work, was provided with the letterhead, "Staff W".
Q. The designation, "Staff W" therefore was the invention of Pohl? Please describe for us the development of Staff W?
A. In Staff W at the beginning we only had auditors and a secretary. These were the people who had been furnished to me. Approximately six months later, gradually the DWB G.m.b.H. was established. It had its own employees. Pohl also included these employees on his organizational chart and put them in "Staff W". If he had wanted to use a different title, he could have invented a new name. Later on, individual companies were added and in this case companies were personnel union existed between the directors of individual departments of the DWB and the business managers of the companies in question. To give an example here: the house and property ownership G.m.b.H, whose business manager was Dr. Volk and at the same time he was also the legal department of the DWB. Then finally we also added enterprises which Pohl could not list anywhere else on the organizational chart because as far as their branch was concerned they could not be included in the other group of firms, for example, the German Medical G.m.b.H, which made medicines and therefore constituted a different branch. Then we had the OSTI. This enterprise, on Pohl's wish, was also included in Staff W on the organizational chart. Staff W in its entirety consequently was only a square on the organizational chart, therefore, with fields of tasks in masses of property which had nothing whatsoever to do with each other. However, this can be explained more clearly by means of the chart which has not been translated as yet.
Q. What position did you occupy at the time within Staff W?
A. I, myself, was outside of the WVHA as a result of my contract. The auditors and the secretary, however, did belong to the main office of administration and economy and later on to the WVHA. The auditors and the secretary had been furnished me in order to carry out my auditing work.
Q. In the course of your examination you mentioned briefly a daily mail or correspondence conference. Please describe to the Tribunal some of the details in this matter and show in particular the methods of these conferences.
A. In order to understand this daily discussion of the mail we must start from the point that first of all only the auditors and I attended. The first mail which was discussed, consequently, was the mail which referred to auditing work, and the mail with regard to the central organization of the stocks and shares of the various companies. After the so-called corporation charters had been concluded, the entire tax mail, which referred to taxation matters, also arrived. Herr Amsorge, who was with me at the beginning as an auditor, first of all temporarily, had been furnished by the DWB and he worked, therefore, four hours and at that time already he had compiled some small statistics. This mail was also discussed. And the same procedure was followed afterwards, when the experts statutes of the DWB were also completed; that is to say, they did not have to comply with my advice any more as had been the case at the beginning; they did not know the field of work at all and I had to show them everything that had to be done.
Q. Was the entire mail which arrived for "Staff W" discussed at these conferences?
A. No, only the mail with regard to the auditing work was discussed, the mail about the taxation matters and the statistics. These were the things with which I was personally connected as a result of my consulting activity. However, we did not discuss the mail of the various enterprises which belonged to the so-called Staff W and we did not discuss those which were administered directly in the offices of Staff W in Berlin. As far as I can recall, only part of the mail which arrived for the legal department was discussed there, if it just happened to arrive there by accident.
Q. Witness, I now want to refer to the time after the WVHA had been established on the 1st of February 1942. Did this reorganization have any effect on your position and your activity?
A. No, the reorganization of the main office administration and economy did not have any influence at all because I was an auditor of the Commercial Law Organization and we were not affected by this reorgani zation at all.
Toward the outside only we received a military designation as listed on this chart.
DR. HEIM: In connection with the establishment of the WVHA it seems appropriate to me to describe the statutes of the DWB within the organization of the WVHA and also the position of the so-called Staff W. I believe that whatever has been stated in this trial was only part of the entire organization; that is to say, it was only fragmentary and it did not give us a clear picture of the economic enterprises after the establishment of the WVHA. In order to gain a more complete insight into this matter, I have compiled four charts in Hohberg Document Book I that is to say, I have included these charts in this document book. The document book has not as yet been translated. At least, I have succeeded in having three charts translated. In this connection I offer Hohberg Document No. 12 as Hohberg Exhibit 1. It is a chart entitled "The Organizational Chart of the DWB up to the 30th of June 1943". I further offer Hohberg Document No. 13a, which will become Exhibit 2. It is a chart entitled "Staff W until the 30th of June 1943". A mistake has occurred in this document "Hohberg No. 13a". The document should read No. 13a. I had enlarged photostats made of this chart. Unfortunately I do not have the English translation available yet and I take it upon myself for the time being to submit this chart in German and I shall offer it as an exhibit as soon as I can submit it to the Tribunal in the English text.
THE PRESIDENT: We'll take the customary recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session
DR. HEIM: Before continuing with the examination, I should like to correct a mistake in the translation. The witness testified that Dr. Salpeter had been in a position to discharge himself as a manager, that he could dismiss himself but the interpreter has translated it as "he could dismiss himself."
If the Tribunal please, just before the recess, Document Hohberg's No. 12 was offered, which became Exhibit No. 1, and it is entitled "Organizational Chart of the DWB" until the 20 July 1943, as Exhibit No. 2. I offer Hohberg's Document No. 13-A. Hohberg's Document 13-B I offer as a photostatic copy of charts of Staff-W up to 20 July 1943. This should become Exhibit No. 3. This chart has not been translated as yet, and I would, therefore, like to ask the Court in the meanwhile whether the German plans suffice. The translators have a copy of this plan, and in the course of the examination will offer translation of the copy. As a fourth document, I should like to offer Hohberg's No. 14, which will become Exhibit No. 4, which is a chart called Staff-W after 30 June 1943. That chart has been drawn up exclusively because of the documents submitted by the Prosecution No. 854, which was Prosecution's Exhibit No. 401.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, would you please give us your comments on the organizational chart of the DWB, which is Hohberg's Document No. 12, and which is Exhibit No. 1. Why according to the chart was there between the DWB and the WVHA any collaboration at all? If the Tribunal please, this is Hohberg's Document No. 12.
A. The DWB concern was not part of the WVHA, but it was a top organization consisting of a large number of independent firms, and they formed a holding company. Pohl, who had been trained in the administrative services of the army, gave to the concern, set up on a commercial status under law military terms, such as "Office Group", "Office Chief", "Office", "Staff", and so forth.
The picture which results there is completely incorrect. Pohl achieved thereby only one thing. He managed to have the whole of the DWB concern, parallel to his own department, to appear on one organizaional chart. That was a plaything from the point of view of the description of an organizational chart as such, but basically a masterpiece. For the DWB concern it had no value whatsoever. The disadvantage became clear, because now the Prosecution base themselves on the assumption that the DWB concern was a government department. In order to make this quite clear, a separation line has been drawn in the document between the official SS organizations, such as Office Groups A to D, on the one hand, and the commercial organization on the other. It becomes clear at once that Pohl was the first manager, partner, and that he had at the same time, as chief of the WVHA, the official supervision over the concern.
Q. Therefore, we had Pohl in his person uniting the two functions, namely, the WVHA and the DWB; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. How could one see from the beginning that DWB had nothing to do with the WVHA but was completely separated, apart, of course, from Pohl uniting the two things in his person?
A. Pohl was the first manager and Loerner the second. These two as well as the officials of the DWB and the directors and managers and the managers and officials of the subsidiary companies, were not entered in the commercial register with the SS titles but simply with their civilian names and with their status under commercial law, commercial registers.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Counsel , please, I presume this will become clear as we go along, but I would like to put the question immediately because it is fresh right now. DWB was in no way connected with WVHA, you tell us, but the industries within DWB did employ, did they not, concentration camp labor? I'd like to have that answered.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, you heard his Honor's questions. Will you please give us your comments?
A. Yes, indeed. It was like this: From among the 40 companies of the DWB concern, six or seven employed inmates. Those inmates were not employed by the WVHA, but by the subsidiary companies of the DWB. In other words, it is the same as if the Junkers or Heinkel Works, as indeed they did, were to employ inmates.
THE PRESIDENT: Before when you were testifying you said there were 20 companies of which three employed inmates.
A. Mr. President, may I point out that I said that while I was the official auditor there, twenty companies were established, and of those, three employed inmates. But the total of all firms amounted to 40 companies, and there were six employing inmates.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, what you wanted to say is that at your time twenty companies were newly established; that is to say, added to the ones that already existed?
A. Quite right.
Q. Witness, I would like you now to look at the chart which is Document Hohberg 13-B. This is a photostatic copy which the Court unhappily has only in the German language. The document is called "Staff W until 30 June 1943". It represents a larger and more detailed description of Document Hohberg 13-A. Will you please give us your comments on this chart for the benefit of the Tribunal?
A. The triangle in the middle is the DWB. Right on top it gives the name of the partner Pohl. If the Tribunal please, I may add here that German commercial registers never mention the name of the owner, if somebody is listed as a trustee.
Then the triangle gives the name of manager Pohl and his Deputy Loerner.
Then I should like to draw attention to the square which has two lines around it. That square included all those things which Pohl understood as Staff W in his own organizational chart.
Q. Who was in charge of the groups of firms which are listed outside that square, W-1, through "-7?
A. The subsidiary companies of the DWB were subdivided according to the various branches, which is well known; I need not talk about that anymore. They were immediately under Pohl during the time when I was auditor of the DWB. For that reason, this line goes direct from the manager Pohl down to the groups of firms which were called offices in the WVHA.
Q. Now, in order to explain the so-called Staff W, which is listed here inside the square with its two lines, tell us what was your position towards Staff W?
A. Staff W as such is not a very concrete term. It is simply a name for the organizational chart of Herr Pohl. In Staff W, firms, as well as spheres of task, are listed side by side, although they have no contact with each other. This is the reason why one cannot, as the Prosecution did, say for the time while I was auditor, i.e. until the middle of 1943, speak of tasks of Staff W. I was, myself, outside. I had two organizations which were above me. One was the professional organization, the Institute for Auditors, and the other was the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs itself, or the Main Department for Public Auditors, which was for all practical purposes part of the Ministry for Economic Affairs.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, are not Documents 13-A and 13-B identical?
DR. HEIM: May it please the Court, these two document 13-A and 13-B are the same. If I had made a photostatic copy. I did that in order to have the chart which is Document 13-A become more clear to the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: But the information is the same on both 13-A and -B?
DR. HEIM: The information is the same, except that on Document 13-B, on the photostatic copy, there are one or two more names up on top. The information contained in both documents is identical.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, from your person there are two lines, one going to the management of the DWB, and the other going into Staff W, to the square which says "auditors transferred by the WVHA". Will you please explain what those two lines represent?
A. The line which goes to the auditors, into Staff W in other words, signifies my contact with the auditors which were put at my disposal "by the VVHA or the Fain Office, Economy and Administration. The small square right up in the left hand corner is the fundamental organization of Staff W, the original one.
The second line which goes to Pohl direct is the official order to audit, and also the order to advise in professional matters. No other relations existed between myself and what was known as Staff W.
Q. Will you also please explain on the chart the position of Staff W both inside the DWB, as well as towards the organization of Staff W itself?
A. The square in the left-hand corner is the auditors. The three squares in the middle are the sub departments of DWB. Dr. Wenner, he is the taxation accountant. General office administration, statistics etc., there we had Ansorge in charge, and the third department was law, the legal department, and Dr. Volk was in charge. That was the second element of the Staff W which was added. Now, the development showed that these three people, Dr. Wenner, Ansorge, and Dr. Volk, were put in charge of various companies, uniting the various functions in their position. These are the five companies which I immediately listed in the middle underneath. The lines connecting them with the departments of the DWB does not signify that these companies were subordinate to the department, but it signifies connections between the man in charge of the department and the various firms in personal union. Finally, we find two companies at the bottom of the square which Pohl also listed in the organizational plan of Staff W, because otherwise he couldn't find any room for them anywhere else, the Deutsch Hulmmtrel, DHM GMBH in Prague, and the East Industry of Lublin. The orders reach these two companies from the manager, Pohl, through these lines. There is no connection between any person of Staff W and these two companies, nor is there any connection, for instance, between Dr. Wenner and The Estates Company GMBH (Hans - und Grundbesitz Guibk) of which was Dr. Volk, nor is there any connection between the employee, Dr. Volk, and the company to fight pests, (Gesellschaft fur Senchrenbebaupfing), nor is there any connection between the auditors and the German Home and Dwelling Places, Limited, (Gemienntzige Wohung-und Heinstaken). There is not the slightest connection, for instance, between myself and any of those companies or with the departments of DWB, with the exception of my activities as a tax consultant which, of course, brought me into daily contact, if I was in Berlin and with the enterprises, to audit.
The three departments of the DWB are listed here on the same level, but it is difficult to say whether they really were on the same level, because within the framework of the DWB Concern there were internal arrangements whereby the SS rank was the decisive factor.
Q. Did you have, therefore, as far as the departments of DWB were concerned, or the five companies within Staff W, any right to issue orders?
A. No, I did not, which is the reason why there is no line from me to those companies.
Q. Now, will you please look at Document Book II of the Prosecution, on Page 125 of the German text, which is probably Page 108 of the English text, it is Document NO-1016, Prosecution Exhibit 46, and it concerns a list of the organization and tasks of Staff W. The second paragraph says, and I quote: "In charge of these offices is staff W of Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl."
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 46 is the lecture material and runs from Page 105 to Page 112.
DR. HEIM: It should probably be on Page 108 of the English book, your Honor. It is in Document Book II of the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: That is right. Page 108 is still a part of the lecture material. It runs up to Page 112.
DR. HEIM: Yes, it says within the frame of this document, "Staff W heads these offices, Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl is in charge. From the point of view of private economy it is the DWB".
THE INTERPRETER: The paragraph actually reads, your Honor, "At the head of these offices stands the W staff of the SS Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, regarded from the point of view of private economic the German Wirtschaftsbetrieve G.m.b.H." It is the second paragraph on 108.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
Q. (By Dr. Heim) Witness, does your testimony so far contradict this document?
A. Yes, it does. When I left in the middle of 1943 Staff W was completely changed and reorganized. What conditions were like later on I can only say from the business instructions which have become part of the documents, and which I have represented on my third organizational chart. At my time it was different. When I was there the authority to issue orders went from Pohl direct to all the companies. That Staff W was not a uniform organizational formation but merely a conglomeration of tasks and duties without any uniform direction. It was quite impossible to have the auditor and the manager of a company under one and the same orders, let alone have the auditor be the manager of the enterprises. I would, therefore, like to make another additional statement to the former question. When I drew up my organization Osti has been listed as a subsidiary company of the DWB. That fact is being disputed here in some cases. I personally am of the opinion that it does not matter very much whether Pohl had already founded the Osti and passed on the shares to DWB or whether he had not, because the authority to issue orders remained the same. I just wanted to mention that.
Q. If I have followed your testimony correctly, Witness, one could sum up and say that up to 30 June 1943 there was no office chief of Staff W, which is contrary to what the Prosecution has alleged, is that correct?
A. At my time there was no chief of Staff W, but I was appointed to that position once, but I declined the appointment, and Pohl shortly afterwards withdrew the appointment officially in a letter.
Q. This testimony you laid down also in your affidavit of 4 February 1947. This is Document NO-192, Exhibit 16, in Document Book I of the Prosecution on Page 101 of the German and on Page 83 of the English book.
You said that in 1942 you were appointed office chief by Pohl. Will you please describe briefly when and how the designation Office Chief Staff W was invented?
A. I believe it was roughly at the time when the two main offices, Economy and Administration and Construction and Budget, the WVHA, was formed. Pohl came and told me one day he wanted to distinguish me particularly and would therefore appoint me to what he called Office Chief of Staff W. I said to Pohl immediately that on the basis of my professional obligations it was impossible for me to accept a title or designation of that sort, because then one could easily conceive the idea that I would take the influence comparable to that of a director on these companies or one would come to take the position of a Government official.
Q What in your opinion were the reasons why this designation was coined?
A When the DWB was founded as a holding company there were centralized suddenly with Pohl a large number of new fields of tasks which, up to that time, had been looked after by the enterprises themselves. Pohl had no expert at his side, and he was looking for somebody whom he could appoint to that position. For that reason, Pohl on several occasions made me that offer to cease being an auditor and to join the management of DWB. This would not have been the position of the General Manager, but that of the deputy manager under Pohl's supervision.
Q What was your position?
A The result would have been that I would have discontinued my profession as an auditor completely, and therefore I took a negative attitude. Furthermore nothing could have been further from my mind than to enter a firm relationship with the WVHA because that would have meant that I would have under Pohl in disciplinary matters. That position had never existed actually. I was never under Pohl's disciplinary authority but many attempts have been made to achieve the position that I would be under Pohl's authority.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you leave the WVHA on the 30th of June, or the 30 of July, 1943?
WITNESS: On the 30th of June. Mr. President, I will produce another document later on-
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q Well, if you never did take the position as chief under Pohl of one of the "W" offices, why did you put it in your affidavit?
A I was appointed officially chief of staff W by Pohl, and that is what I mentioned.
Q Did you accept the appointment?
A No; I did not accept it.
Q In other words, you meant to say in your affidavit that you were appointed chief of this office by Pohl but did not accept the appointment? Is that what you mean to say?
A Yes, that is just what I wanted to express.
BY DR. HEIM: (Counsel for defendant Hohberg):
Q Witness, you said that you took up a negative attitude towards that appointment of Pohl's. Did you show your negative attitude also towards Pohl?
A Yes; I told Pohl that is was impossible for me to accept that appointment, from a professional point of view. Pohl didn't take the matter too tragically because he didn't have any clear idea about it. Pohl was sometimes very generous with titles and designations--but from a professional point of view, I could not accept it.
Q What was it that Pohl said when he talked to you? What expression did he use?
A I recall distinctly that Pohl used the expression: "Either you remain loyal, and then you will be well off--or you will lose your head,"
Q What did you understand from that? What did you think he meant?
A The expression meant that I did not bother about this designation any more. It became superfluous after Pohl's letter to the Institute of Auditors, and I let matters rest.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, please; what is the document reference to Pohl's letter to the Institute of Accountants? Do you have that handy?
The witness just mentioned Pohl's letter to the Institute of Public accounts....
DR. HEIM: Mr. President, a document is not available about that, but I shall submit various affidavits in my document book which are concerned with that problem.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, how was it that the designation Office Chief of Staff W is a completely ficticious one?
A The form Office Chief is not a rank in Germany; it is merely a position. The term Office Chief is something which has reference to governmental habits, a ministerial designation, or a military title; but it is not a title under commercial law. It is the same thing as though the manager of some commercial enterprise- would be given a ministerial title. I would be the same thing if you called the manager of Ford a State Secretary--the manager of that company surely would smile about that.
For the so-called Chief of Staff no official office existed. No document was drawn up. No official letter of appointment was written; nor where there any governmental functions connected with it, nor Party functions, nor SS functions.
Also I knew that the appointment expressed by Pohl was, from the point of view of official SS directives, an impossibility. In addition to that, there was the fact that as an auditor on the basis of legal regulations, I was not allowed to be an official or an employee as a sideline, automatically, I would have lost my qualifications as an auditor.
If the Tribunal please, I would like to have you understand it to the effect that I had my firm tasks for which I was paid, and it would have been stupid of me to avail myself of the appointment in order to have a new title without improving my financial background and my professional duties.
DR. HEIM: If the Tribunal please, I believe this would be an opportune moment for me to submit further documents from Hohberg Document Book No. 1 the document book is now available in the translation and is in the hands of the Court, the Prosecution and the interpreters.
I shall offer on page 35 of the Document Book, Hohberg Document 16 which will become Exhibit No. 5. This is an affidavit by Karl Wolff--the Court is familiar with that witness as he testified here as a witness on behalf of Pohl. In that affidavit Wolff says that it was quite impossible that somebody became an office chief without being written an official letter of appointment which would have to be signed by the Reichsfuehrer SS. I venture to read a few brief passages from that affidavit. I shall start with paragraph four of that document:
"The nominating of any chief of office was a definite privilege of the Reichsfuehrer-SS himself.
In the next paragraph--the last sentence, reads:
"A Chief-of-office appointment became effective only when it was signed by Himmler in person. My many years of practical experience up to 1943 led me to believe that it would have been impossible for anyone who was not a member of the SS and the Party to have received an appointment as Chief of Office of the WVHA."
Then, I beg to offer Hohberg Number 17, which is on page 37 of the German and English books, Hohberg No. 1. This will become Exhibit No. 6 and is an affidavit by Dr. Schmidt-Klevenow was a court officer in the WVHA, and, on the basis of his experiences and knowledge, he is in a position to comment on this. Again I would like to read two sentences from that document. I shall read from paragraph 3, in the middle:
"At the appointment as office chief, a document was handed over which was drawn up by the Main Personnel Office or by the Reichsfuehrer -SS. In my opinion, someone not belonging to the SS could not be appointed as office chief ina main office since only an SS-Fuehrer could become office chief."
On that subject I shall offer another document which is on page 39 of the document book, Hohberg No. I. It is Hohberg No. 18, and it will become Exhibit No. 7. It is an affidavit by Gottleb Berger.