Q. Why wasn't this order of Pohl executed?
A. I think I understood what Pohl was trying to do here. I believe that he was trying to bring me under his authority in this matter. I did not take over this work, and I must assume that this was the reason why four months later quite suddenly from one day to the next all my auditors who had been assigned to me in order to carry out the mandatory auditing as prescribed by law were taken away from me. Pohl gave me the reasons for removing the auditors by referring to the Unruh action in that connection. That was General Unruh who was recruiting soldiers for front-line duty.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I regret that in this complex of questions I have to go into some more detail. However, in this case the fault is not with me but with the Prosecution because they have submitted innumerable documents on this subject in their indictment and in this case with regard to this state of affairs. I cannot do anything but to have the witness make statements with regard to these documents.
Q. (By Dr. Heim) Witness, why couldn't you be the business manager of the DWB as it has been alleged by the Prosecution?
A. I had not been appointed business manager, and I was not listed in the trade register.
Q. What shows beyond any doubt that you actually were not the business manager of the DWB?
A. The Prosecution themselves have submitted the excerpt from the trade register. I am not listed in that register.
DR. HEIM: May it please the Tribunal, I offer from Hohberg Document Book I on Page 64 Document No. 29 as Exhibit No. 22.
This document shows that the defendant was never the business manager of the DWB, and that he could not be the business manager because the excerpt from the trade register which was presented by the Prosecution shows that he was never listed there as business manager.
Q. (By Dr. Heim) Dr. Hohberg, did you carry out any other functions in the business management of the DWB?
A. No. I was not a bookkeeper and I did not have any executive powers with regard to the business.
Q. Did you ever carry out any supervisory activity over the directors of the DWB or one of its affiliated branches? This has also been alleged by the Prosecution.
A. No, I have never carried out any such functions. I only gave considerable advice to the chief of the taxation department, Dr. Wenner, as was specified in my contract, and it was my duty to do that. I had to do that because I had such a high liability with regard to my property.
Q. Is the profession of the auditor so little known that one could conclude that you had such an influential position as has been alleged by the Prosecution?
A. I described already on Friday afternoon that the auditing profession only exists since 1931 and that there were so few people in that profession that outsiders and laymen are hardly informed about this work. This applies to the defendants, at least part of them, and it also applies for all the persons who were within the WVHA.
Q. If I have understood you correctly, several members of the WVHA never clearly recognized your activity as an auditor?
A. Yes, that is correct. Only very few persons correctly evaluated my activity, and that is why we have the various conclusions and misunderstandings here.
Q. The Prosecution has further stated that you were an accountant and authorized to carry out business in the DWB, is that correct?
A. I have just stated that I did not occupy that position.
DR. HEIM: In this connection I offer Hohberg Document No. 23 on Page 53 of the document book. I offer it as Exhibit No. 23. I further want to offer Document No. 24 as Exhibit 24. Finally, I want to offer Hohberg Document No. 30 on Page 65 of the document book as Hohberg Exhibit 25.
Q. (By Dr. Heim) Witness, I now want to turn to the development of the SS industries, and in particular let us discuss the capital and the ownership conditions. In its opening speech the Prosecution has stated, and I quote: "The SS industrially, commercially and politically, and from the military view wanted to become a state within the state." The Prosecution alleges that together with other persons you also were one of the chief economic experts, that you were an industrial captain of the new order, whose aim it was to convert the fundamentals of business and economic activity to the National Socialistic ideology. "Fanatical National Socialists became fanatical businessmen. Their purpose was profit for the SS State and for themselves, as a result of the decreasing amount of income of the SS industries." That is the end of my quotation of the statements by the Prosecution In order to explain your activity, and under consideration of this count in the indictment, it is necessary in this connection to clarify the question: to whom did the so-called SSenterprises belong: who was the business partner and who was the actual owner?
In this connection I would like to ask you: to whom did the shares of the companies belong before they were converted into the holding company?
A. This question is very difficult to answer. We had a whole number of companies and they appointed a partner, and he was called the trustee. However, it wasn't stated who this trustee was. He was always called the Reichsfuehrer-SS. The people furnishing the funds were leagues or organizations, and in part these organizations were financed by the banks. I have already mentioned this morning that the capital owned by the companies was extremely small, and I would like to demonstrate this again by means of an example. The DEST had 20,000 marks capital. The parter was Dr. Salpeter. He was a trustee for Mr. X. However, the DEST had already 20,000,000 marks in debts. That is to say it had a thousand times its original capital in debts.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Counselor, you read a paragraph from the opening statement of the Prosecution which is an indictment against the SS as an economic enterprise. Now, do you intend to have this witness defend against that proposition, and if so, how does that apply to him directly, since you claim he had nothing to do with the economic enterprises insofar as individual participation was concerned?
DR. HEIM: The Prosecution in its opening speech had expressly mentioned the name of the defendant, and with other defendants it has named him as one of the chief economists, as an industrial captain who was to develop the new order of the SS, that is to say, the state within the state.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Then you intend from his answer to elicit information directly pertaining to him and not general ly as defense of the SS, is that right?
DR. HEIM: Yes, your Honor.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: If that is true then, of course, I can understand the reason for it.
DR. HEIM: May it please the Tribunal, in the examination when, with regard to this field of questions, I have the witness describe the capital status of the DWB, I have two reasons for doing so. First of all my client is the first defendant whom the Prosecution has brought into connection with the Office Group W, so that up to now this complex of questions has not been discussed in detail.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well, I understand your proposition
THE PRESIDENT: Let's take a recess now.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for fifteen minutes (A recess was taken.)
BY DR. HEIM:
Q: Before the redess we talked about the ownership conditions of what is known as the SS Economic Enterprises. Witness, were these firms later on incorporated into the DWB.
A: Yes, the firms existing at the time which were owned by Mr. X were incorporated into the DWB.
Q: In your testimony so far you have told us that the basic capital of the DWB was 100,000 marks. How did things develop after that in the DWB?
A: Several increases in capital were affected. 1.7 million; later on 5.3 million; after that 7 million; then 12 million and in the end when I left it was 16 million. The source where this money came from for the capital was the Reich mainly, at the time. That is to say of the 16 million about 8.5 million marks came from the Reich and 7.5 million came from the Party. The Reich had a slight majority.
Q: What about relations between the Reich and the Party concerning property conditions after the last increase of capital to 16 million marks?
A: In order to confirm what I have said just now that the Reich had a small majority, I would like to mention the various sums from which the capital was taken. But, I believe we can do without that because that is contained in detail in the Minden report.
Q: You keep talking about the Reich and Party as capital owners but the indictment calls it SS enterprises. Will you please clear up that contradiction?
A: The SS did not own anything independently. If I mention that it was financially part of the Party inasmuch as the Allgemeine SS was concerned and the Waffen-SS was financially speaking part of the Reich.
Pohl, for instance, was the deputy of the Reich Treasurer of the NSDAP on behalf of the Allgemeine SS. As far as property law is concerned there were no SS enterprises, neither at the beginning nor later on. Therefore, they could only be Reich enterprises or else they were Party enterprises. If Pohl was listed in the Commercial Register as SS trustee for the Reichfuehrer SS it was completely unclear in what capacity Himmler was to be regarded in this case. Privately he could not be a partner because he didn't have that much money and as an official the question was what agency he represented. In the end he did not represent any department which could own property; to speak therefore, from the legal point of view only any reference to Reich Fuehrer SS as owner is pure bluff.
Q: Was there a Reich law to be expected on the basis of which the SS could own property independently?
A: I don't know. But, the tendency existed on the part of the SS to own, legally speaking, property as independently as possible. I deduced that from remarks made frequently by Pohl: "The law which applies to the SS is yet unwritten!" I personally looked on the matter in the following was: That the whole of the economic enterprises of the DWB concern was maintained only for that time; then the SS, through a Reich law, would become the official owner of property and capital and until such time this large economic complex had to be camouflaged in some manner. For that reason, it appeared as Reich property, if the Reich wasn't interested. That moment when the SS would independently own property would not occur before the end of the war. In fact the DWB, at the end, was a Reich company tut within the scope of the development it was at one time property of the Party and on another occasion it was Reich property.
Q: How do you conclude that at the end the DWB concern was the property of the Reich?
A: I deduced that from the conditions at the back of the fund which were used to increase the capital of the DWB. I only have to add up these things.
Q: That is sufficient witness. Was Pohl a partner in the DWB concern?
A: Yes, according to the Commercial Register he was the sole partner but for the purposes of his own tax declarations he was not charged with that because he was only a trustee. On whose behalf he acted, as a trustee, was not clear to the public; Actually in the end it was the Reich.
Q: Did you have any influence on the manner in which the capital was used?
A: Not really, but of course I was very happy to see that a Reich fund would be used to increase capital of the DWB; thus the claim of the Reich on the DWB became stronger.
Q: What was the result of the fact that the Reich and not the Party or a third person became a partner in the DWB?
A: Since the Reich became a partner in the organization of the DWB, the management of the DWB was now under the obligation to observe all Reich laws concerned. That would not have applied if the DWB had been a party firm. About all it was impossible for Pohl to take even one penny from the DWB concern without the consent of the Reich Minister of Finance.
Q: Would Pohl or Himmler have been in a position to ignore the Reich laws and use the money of the DWB concern to finance the SS?
A: We must differentiate here between two things. When an economic fortune is being invested into a commercial enterprise then without defaulting it is impossible to take out money from that company for the purposes of the partner or for any purposes not connected with the firm itself. German commercial laws were extremely severe in this respect. If a limited company of a share-holding company wants to take out one million from its funds, for instance, a meeting of the partners had to be convened and a decision had to be reached, certain terms had to be observed, and newspapers have to publish the fact, the creditors have to voice their opinion, and only then is one allowed to take something out. As a result of the fact that the property, was invested in the form of a company it was impossible for the SS, Himmler or Pohl to use anything for the purposes not connected with the firm. It is quite different with profits. The share-holders meeting and partners meeting passed a resolution about that but since Pohl acted as a trustee for the owner, which was the Reich, he was not allowed without consulting the Reich, to distribute the profits. When I worked with the DWB as an auditor the DWB was not deprived of one penny for alien purposes. I have found out by asking questions that this did not happen later on either and only by chance when I wast downstairs next to Sievers did I hear that a small sum was given to the Army as a gift. You can think about that what you like but there is no doubt that the manager or the head of a company can give a gift if he can give a good reason for it.
Q: That is sufficient, witness. In your affidavit of 4 February 1947 which is document No. 1924, Exhibit 16, page 101 of document book I of the Prosecution and on page 82 of the English text you say and I quote: "I was the only man who was able to do something against Pohl and I was the only one who would have been in a position to take the whole of the money away from Pohl. One knew, however, how extremely powerful Pohl was. One word from him and somebody was done for. I had to be extremely cautious but meanwhile, until I left, I collected material and evidence against Pohl." Witness, what did you mean when you gave that statement in your affidavit?
A: Just what it says. I did not say it in the form in the way it is put here. This is an extract from a long interrogation which was carried out by the interrogator, Mr. Ponger. I tried to have a large number of changes made, but I had to fight for every word and every phrase.
What I wanted to say was this: by having the shares transferred to the Reich, I had achieved that as far as the profits the DWB were concerned, nothing would be put at the disposal of the SS, because Pohl was not in a position to do with the profits what he liked, unless he asked the Reich Minister of Finance first.
By the middle of 1942, roughly, on the basis of an arrangement with my friend, Dr. May, I turned away from the ideology of the WVHA entirely and we also hoped to have the political power of the DWB concern transferred somewhere else which is what I wanted to express here.
I did the following: I made a list of all funds which had been used for the capital of the DWB, including photostatic copies of all letters which had dealt with the capital increase, and I deposited them with the bank in order to have the evidence there, that the enterprise was a Reich enterprise, pure and simple, and therefore should be administered by the Reich Ministries concerned. This was the Reich Finance Ministry in collaboration with the Reich Ministry of Economics.
Q: Where did you keep these documents?
A: In the Dresdner Bank at Berlin, in the deposit room.
Q: Have you still got these documents?
A: All of these were confiscated by the occupation forces in Berlin.
Q: Did you take any other measures in that respect?
A: I had deposited these photostatic copies in various places. When we escaped from East Prussia, my wife more by chance than by anything else, took the most important copy with her, which I handed to the British officer who arrested me. This was a capital increase of 3.5 marks which had come from various funds, and represented Reich moneys.
DR. HEIM: In this connection, I beg to submit Hohbert Document No. 22, on page 49, which will be deemed Exhibit No. 26.
I should like to draw the Tribunal's attention in connection with what the witness has just told us, to page 51 of the document book.
Witness, did you not at one time attempt in Berlin to publish the fact to the Ministry concerned that the Reich was the real owner of the DWB concern?
A: That was a somewhat dangerous venture. My successor was an auditor, by the name of Dr. Richard Karoly, the brother of Dr. Karoly who was later on active on Staff W. I informed him in great detail. Dr. Karoly was the chairman of the German Revisional Trusteeship company in Berlin, which is the Trusteeship company of the German Reich, whose board of directors contained almost all ministerial representatives; The Ministry of Economic Affairs, Finance Ministry, Ministry of Labor, and the Reich Auditing Court.
I already pointed out the consequences at the time, which resulted from the fact that the DWB was a Reich enterprise. He took notice of this, and I assume that later on he informed his brother Richard who was in the auditing department of Staff W about these things.
Q: Did he do anything in that respect?
A: I don't know. He was an SS officer, and therefore, it may be doubtful.
Q: Why didn't you do something about it?
THE PRESIDENT: Some documents and exhibit numbers we do not follow. No. 22 is the document. What exhibit number did you give it?
DR. HEIM: I apologize your Honor. It is document No. 22, on page 4 of the Document Book 1. This document will become Exhibit No. 26.
THE PRESIDENT: No. What happened to Exhibits 22, 23, 24, and 25?
DR. HEIM: The last exhibit number was given to Document No. 15; that was exhibit 21. Document 15 was given 21. No. 22 was given to Document No. 29. Exhibit 23 was Document No. 23. Exhibit 24 was given to document No. 24, and Exhibit 25 was given to Document 30, and 26 was given to document No. 22.
Witness, to repeat my question, why did you not do something about it?
A: It was my view that there was no hurry, because there was no financial danger concerning the Reich. There was no harm in the concern growing any further, and practically speaking, it was in my power, after the concern had been transferred to the Reich financially, to transfer everything else to the Reich, and what had to be done there should not naturally cost one's life, if trouble could be avoided. The occupation by the Allied troops cleared up the point automatically, of course.
Q: What in your opinion, would have been the practical results of the so called transfer of the DWB to the Reich?
The Reich party laws and the economic regulations prescribe how the concern has to be managed. It would have been handled by the Reich Minister of Finance and Minister of Economic Affairs; secondly, a Board of Directors would have had to be formed which did not exist at the time, with the Reich having its share, that is to say, about 50 per cent. The management would have had to be appointed by the Reich itself, and that would be decided upon by the Reich Ministry of Finance.
The Reich Court of Audits exercised the finance law. It was the auditing authority above the auditing official. These would have been the results.
Q: What profits were given to the SS from the Economic Enterprises?
A: No profits reached the SS from the economic enterprise.
Q: That is enough. After the Prosecution has submitted various documents your testimony sounds incredible. Please tell us more about this point.
A: Until the time I left, by the middle of 1943, some enterprises had gathered a fair amount of profit. All of these were for covering up the equally high losses.
Q: In summation, one could say that you were in no way in a position to promote the economic power of the SS in any sense; on the contrary you did what you could to have the economic enterprises taken away from the SS, in favor of the German Reich? Is that correct?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Would you say that question was a little leading?
DR. HEIN: I only want to sum up what the witness has said hitherto in order to make sure that I have understood him correctly.
Quite necessarily could one also say that the SS did not have any profits from the economic enterprises?
A: Aside from a few salaries which are not important they had no profits from these enterprises.
Q: As far as document books of the prosecution are concerned, page 13, English version, page 11 of the German, page 12, English Text Book No. 17, we find Document NO 1034, Exhibit 444-A, which is a letter from you to Pohl concerning the taking over and transfer of the Dachau Enterprise to the German Equipment works, are the contents of this letter comparable with your activities as an auditor?
A What this document shows is the same thing that I have described as a principle just now, that there was an economic enterprise in Dachau without any foundation in commercial law; that if that enterprise owned a million marks in a bank account, nobody could be stopped from drawing 500,000 marks more for any purpose not connected with the firm. The only possibility to tie down this money was to give this property a basis in the commercial law, which was the reason why I suggested to Pohl to make this capital a part of the German Equipment Works, and to increase the capital of the DAW accordingly.
DR. HEIM: I now have reference to Document Book No. 16 of the Prosecution, which is the document on page 29 of the English version. This Document is NO-1022, Exhibit No. 432. It is a letter from Chief of Office A-1 to you concerning a discussion about the open credit for the DEST with the German Gold Discount Bank.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Please give us your comments on that document, and explain to us whether on the basis of your activity, such as you have described in this letter, the support of the SS industries was effected?
A What document book is that, please?
Q In this Document Book 16, page 28, the German version?
THE COURT: Please refer to that again.
DR. HEIM: It is page 29 of the English Document Book.
THE WITNESS: Shall I start? This is a large credit which was given by the German Gold Discount Bank. The German Gold Discount Bank is a subsidiary bank of the German Reich Bank. The extent of credit which the DEST had was considerably higher because this credit was cheap. As far as I remember it was a two and one-half percent. On the other hand, there were a number of other enterprises, which were being financed by a third party, and which had to pay a considerably higher interest. This is the reason why I suggested to the DEST to exploit to the full extent the credit which the German Gold Discount Bank was prepared to give and to pay two and one half percent interest, only for a total amount in order to use the additional credit for paying back the other credits which were more expensive.
This is a very obvious advice which I gave in my capacity as an auditor when we came across a thing like that.
Q Witness, I have understood you to say that you were not in agreement with the aims of the SS. Did the SS leaders, of the WVHA end the DWB, not take offense because although you were not employed you were acting as an auditor for the SS enterprises, although you belonged neither to the SS nor the Party?
A I did not want to make friends among the SS leaders during my activities. I always met with a large amount of obstruction where I was concerned. That obstruction happened for two reasons, for a political reason, which was plausible, and for another, the indignation that there was any form of supervision at all, and they were highly indignant that a civilian should supervise them. In order to keep up the example, it was quite easy up to then for the manager of an enterprise, even when he employed inmate labor in his enterprise, to have the inmates work in his garden, or to charge the company with any private acquisitions, or, questions concerning the use of his car, official trips. Now for the first time a regular supervision was established. That was the reason why opposition was inevitable.
Q In this connection I would like to have reference to Document Hohberg No. 23, Exhibit No. 23, which I have offered already, and I want to have special reference made to the last paragraph. It is the last sentence, and if I may I would like to read it. It is on page 54 of the Document Book. In the affidavit Opperbeck who was employed by the WVHA made the following statement, and I quote: "I know that strong animosity existed towards Dr. Hohberg on the part of several SS Officers especially within the WVHA."
Q Witness, were you not in danger of being arrested at the request of the SS?
A Not at the beginning but the situation changed all of a sudden when my friend Dr. May was in a Gestapo prison. From that moment onwards evidence piled up against me. That was an open secret, and it was only a question of time when I would follow Dr. May.
Q How did you know that?
A I know that because a number of SS officers felt an obligation to tell me this. I also know it through my friend Weissenbach.
Q Can you tell us more about this imminent arrest?
A I was on an official trip one day. My wife received a visit from an officer of the SS. The man told her that I would be arrested on my return. The man's name was Bruhne, and he worked in Office W-4. He came in the middle of the night at 11:00 o' clock, in order not to be seen. Then I went to see Pohl on Monday morning, and Pohl rank up Dr. Schmidt-Klevenow, and he connected me either with the Gestapo, or the Reich Criminal Police Office, I don't know which, and it became clear that I was accused of having forged a check in Vienna at a time I had not been in Vienna, and as the result of my sudden action I was now arrested.
DR. HEIM: Here I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to Hohberg Document No. 22, which I have submitted as Exhibit No. 26, the last paragraph on page 51 of the document book.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Do you know another case where your arrest seemed to have been imminent?
AAfter Dr. May's arrest by order of the SS Officer I was told to see Pohl and I was accused of having caused Dr. May to have photostatic copies made of his files.
I denied that, and nothing further happened.
Q Do you know now of another case?
A My defense counsel here told me a third case. Again by the same SS Court officer I was accused of having defrauded seven-hundred thousand marks, though I have heard here for the first time about this. The Main Office of the SS Court was supposed to have issued the order of my arrest. That was the same method, of course, which was used against Dr. May, in as much as he was accused of something first then locked up, and afterwards he was patted on the back and told: "All is well now."
Q Was ever an attempt made to make you join the Party, on the SS?
A Oh, yes, on several occasions I was invited to join the SS.
Q Please give us more details about that?
A Shortly after I had concluded my contract with Pohl in 1940, the Replacement Officer of the Waffen-SS, Spree invited me with a letter marked "secret" to turn up at the replacement office of SS and join the Waffen-SS. This secret letter also said that I was expected to continue my work as an auditor in a civilian capacity.
Q Why did you decline to join?
A I declined to join the SS from the beginning, and Pohl, with whom I concluded the contract, knew this and approved of it.
Q Did you hear anything about your declining this offer later on?
A I was sent another two letters with an invitation, and also telephone calls, which were rather rude, but I did not react.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What year was this?
THE WITNESS: That was in 1940.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q When were you invited again to join up to the SS?
A The next invitation was issued by Pohl himself. Pohl offered me a job with the DWB, and he also offered me a higher SS rank. The positions which Pohl offered to me were higher at first, and later on as far as the rank was concerned they became lower and lower; at the end he only offered me the rank of a Hauptsturmfuehrer.
Q Was an attempt made to force you to join the Waffen-SS?
A Yes, an extremely strange attempt was made once in February 1945, when I was working with what was known as the May organization. At the time I worked on the project "Gewaltaktion 163" as deputy for Dr. May. I went to Berlin, and the driver of Pohl told me to come and see Pohl at once, but the driver told me that I had been looked for by a wireless message. I made an appointment with the adjutant of Pohl, and turned up to see Pohl on Monday or Tuesday. Unlike his usual habits, Pohl did not shake hands with me when I came in. He told me to sit down, and he told me he knew very well where I had been for the last fornight, and, he said, if I can recall it, almost literally: "If you think that you can run away when we mount the barricades then you are making a mistake. We shall find you even if I should not be alive anymore." I remember these two sentences almost verbatim.