THE PRESIDENT: Of course, those figures had nothing to do with wages to be paid to inmates, did they?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, let me say the following in brief terms: Hereon the one hand you have the commercial enterprises. On the other hand, you have the inmates, and in between the two you have the particular Reich authority which is in charge of the inmates. Now, if inmates are placed at the disposal of a commercial enterprise, than the Reich puts those inmates at the disposal of the commercial enterprises, and it asked for that a certain price, or a certain amount of money, which is to be paid to the Reich. That is to say, the same method as is use all over the world, so far as prisoners in jails are concerned, when they are loaned out to third parties. Within the frame of my practice I saw the same thing done by relief organizations. Now it is up to the Reich to see to it that the inmates under the circumstances also receive part of that money. The factory as such would exert no influence in that matter, that one must assume that an inmate will not receive very much when thirty pfennigs are paid out, is a natural thing, and that was one of the reasons not only to eliminate the special privileges of the SS I tried with all the power to have these enterprises pay something to the Reich, which amounted to exactly the same amount as other enterprises also had to pay to it. According to those documents contained here, there were quite a few in Germany. What the Reich did with it neither the enterprises nor I could decide.
THE PRESIDENT: What the Reich did was to loan these inmates to the industries, just as they would loan so many machines, and all they gave the inmates was maintenance;
they just kept them alive. They did not give them the money that they earned, or any part of it, did they?
THE WITNESS: Yes, that is exactly the way it was. Your Honor, how the things were in detail can also be seen from the documents that were introduced by the Prosecution. Here we saw for instance, that, the Reich Finance Minister somehow had a fight with the Reich Ministry for Occupied Territories. They had a fight or a struggle about those millions that resulted from the utilization of inmate labor. It can be seen from that fact only that the man who was sitting in the factory had no influence whatsoever on what the Reich did with the money.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Reich, we'll say, had 5,000 human machines, just as it might have had 5,000 motors, and it said to the factories, "We'll rent these human machines to you for so many Reishsmarks per day."
THE WITNESS: Yes, that is the way it was.
THE PRESIDENT: Just as they could have rented 5,000 motors for so many Reichsmarks per month.
THE WITNESS: Yes, quite so, exactly the same thing.
THE PRESIDENT: The 5,000 human machines just got food and shelter.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And nothing more.
THE WITNESS: No, nothing at all.
THE PRESIDENT: And you say that is a system that prevails all over the world?
THE WITNESS: No, not this system. Your Honor, I started from the point of view that the relationship between the inmate or prisoner and and the factory is about the same; in other words, that there is not a contract between the inmate and the factory, but, rather, there will be a contract between the agency which will place the inmates at the disposal of the factory, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, you have a legal right, a legal relationship between the agency which places the inmates at the disposal and the inmates themselves. There is no direct contact between the inmate and the factory.
THE PRESIDENT: There is no contract between the inmate and the factory.
THE WITNESS: No.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, but is it your idea that, for instance, in the United States, criminals who are in prison are made to work for factories and get nothing for it?
THE WITNESS: Well, I hope they do get something, because after all, we are all against that system that we had in Germany.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you said that this is a system which exists all over the world but not to the extent that the prisoner gets nothing for his labor.
THE WITNESS: No, of course not. I am talking about the relationship so far as the contract was concerned. The method, of course, is entirely different from this one here.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't want you to get the impression that, for instance, in the United States-
THE WITNESS: No, no. definitely not.
THE PRESIDENT: --prisoners are rented out to factories and don't get any money for it, for their work, because they do.
THE WITNESS: Yes, of course. I hope that the same case does not apply over there as it did here. Your Honor, I would, however, like to draw your attention to one consequence. The factory actually did not have any influence on what the Reich did with the money, nor did I have any influence over that. That is the same as if a tax consultant to a firm pays its taxes on time, and the tax consultant is not to be responsible for what the Finance Office does with the money.
THE PRESIDENT: We understand that; that is quite clear.
THE WITNESS: However, the problem is entirely different even if the it had been the way you say it was, namely, that the inmate was to be paid a daily wage and the pay had accumulated. Then what use is it to the inmate if he dies later or if he is gassed or something similar? That is the reason I say that all those things are not primary but secondary. The idea was to eliminate the entire system.
THE PRESIDENT: I can agree with you wholeheartedly on that. We do not disagree on that at all.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, we stopped with the answer to the question; What were the reasons which made you refuse a certificate to the balance of the factories?
A. In the DEST there was the additional fact that the factory was indebted. Quite a large part of their own capital had been lost in it. In the DAW it was a question solely of pay of the inmates and the conditions prevailing in Lublin, which conditions I became acquainted with when I went on that trip with May, and with the German Experimental Station it was again the same thing; namely, the wages for the inmates, and the additional fact that I had to interrupt my auditing work because their bookkeeping was entirely wrong.
Q. Did you have to refuse the certificate to other agencies and affiliated companies of the DWB?
A. Yes. In one company I had to interrupt the auditing work, and that was with the Sudentenquell GmbH because the prices were too high, and, they were absolutely against the law, and even my auditing work never helped in any way.
Q. On the basis of your activity as an auditor, what do you know about the pay of the inmates of the DWB factories as far as inmate labor was used in those factories?
A. I saw the amount of daily wages paid to the inmates, and as an auditor I had to give my opinion on what these enterprises should pay to the Reich, and this should be entered on the debit side of the balance.
Q. Did the amount of the daily wages of the inmates have any influence on the inmate himself?
A. Not so far as 30 pfennigs were concerned, I am sure. If the daily wages for the inmates had amounted to the normal amount, then, at least, the Reich would have had the possibility to place part of that daily wage at the disposal of the inmates.
However, as there was no actual connection between the enterprise and the inmates, the commercial enterprise as such could have no influence whatsoever on the fact of whether the Reich will pass on his daily waves to the inmate or not.
Q What were the reasons that made you suggest the increase in the daily wages for the inmates?
A By this low daily wage, the SS enterprises, compared with private enterprises, had a definite economic advantage. If the SS enterprises had been taken care of in an administratively correct manner, if the price had been based on the so-called LSOE, such low pay would have resulted that the private enterprise could not possibly have competed.
Q Therefore, you suggested the increase in the daily wages for the inmates. Did you have any other reason in connection with this suggestion, apart from the reason which you stated in your letter to Pohl?
A Not only did I suggest that, but I actually tried to get that increase through with force, in order to eliminate this privilege on the part of the SS enterprises which was not justified; The reason was that why if all the inmates were loaned to all these enterprises, should the pay be smaller or lower with the SS, and I could not see why.
Q In your letter to Pohl, you suggested placing this amount at the disposal of the Lebensborn, entirely or partly. What were the reasons which made you make this suggestion to Pohl, which you illustrated by a calculated example.
A For a year and a half I tried in vain to bring the daily waves for inmates to a normal level. You can imagine that the business managers of the enterprises were strictly against it because at the same moment it was asked that they work more economically in their enterprises. When I saw no other possibility to help me get along with my ideas, I made that suggestion to Pohl in order, at least, to show him the entire matter in a different light and make it agreeable to him.
I would like to point out that I am from the tax field myself and that at the time it was already known to me that the differences which I computed here for the Lebensborn were corrected according to the various laws which existed here, taxation laws and war laws, and that they would all have gone to the Reich in their entirety, the reason being that the investment of capital was zero. The loaning to third parties of inmates, according to German law, was a taxation matter. May it please Your Honor, I would like a tax expert to prove this to you later on, because by this document I feel very much accused. Here Pohl, as he stated in his testimony, immediately threw that suggestion of mine into the wastepaper basket.
I would like to point out in connection with this that a few days after that an additional suggestion was made by me. In this particular case it deals with Lublin, namely, to transfer the entire profit made on the utilization of labor of concentration camp inmates to the Reich. Pohl officially approved that and actually gave approval to it.
Q. You stated that at the time you had to make your suggestion agreeable to Mr. Pohl. What was the reason for saying that?
A. That Pohl, just like the business enterprise managers, reacted, or did not react to increase the daily wages for the inmates to such an extent that they were just as high as those other private enterprises had to pay. I didn't succeed in doing so because the first pay wages for the inmates, which were increased, and which were given out by Amtsgruppe D, were definitely too low.
Q. Didn't you believe at the time that Herr Pohl would understand that your proposal could not possibly be carried through?
A. The proposal or the suggestion could have been carried through, because after all it was nothing but a trial to do so, and if I could have done it, fine. In any case it could not be continued and kept up the way it was so far, namely that thirty pfennigs were paid for the daily work of a man.
I shall now refer to Document Book No. XV, introduced by the Prosecution, on Page 5 of the German and Page 4 of the English text. This is NO-1289, Prosecution Exhibit 406. The first part of that document is a letter by Pohl to the commanders themselves of the concentration camps, and to the chiefs of all W offices. This letter deals with the new wage scales for the prisoners, and the fixation of those wage scales. Did you have anything to do with this new wage scale for the concentration-camp inmates?
A. Apart from the fact that I insisted on increasing their daily wages, no. This letter has as its purpose, or shall we say "had" as its purpose, to inform W offices and all the other enterprises about the new wage scales which were to be paid to the concentration-camp inmates, effective the 1st of January, 1943. You can see from the prices that the wage scale for the inmates was still too low. This particular set-up here still means that the SS enterprises were privileged compared with the private enterprises.
Q. The second part of that document is a letter which you wrote on the 22nd of December, 1942, to Maurer, the chief of Amtsgruppe D for "Dog". That deals with the wage scale for the prisoners, for the inmates.
In this document you are speaking of finding the profits derived from the utilization of Jewish labor. What did you have to do with that, Witness?
A. On our trip to Lublin, on that particular morning when Dr. May was with Dr. Koch, I dealt with the bookkeeping of the DAW Works in Lublin. I found out the following: however, I would like to mention this is the only case which I know, I found out that inmates were transferred and loaned out while nothing was paid for them. In other words, it was nothing but white slavery. When I returned I immediately informed Pohl about it, and as it was impossible to separate the inmates who were working for the DAW from those who were loaned out to a third party, to private enterprises possibly, Pohl agreed that the entire profit, which could be figured out by bookkeeping, with respect to the entire matter, which was not very agreeable, was to be transferred to the Reich entirely.
Q. Was the computation of the wage scales for concentration-camp inmates, fixed by you or at least in agreement with you?
A. No, I was never asked anything about the wage scales as such in their amount. No one else from the so-called Staff W was ever asked about it. If it had originated from me I am sure that the inmate wage scale would have amounted to much more.
Q. The amount which was paid to the concentration-camp inmate, did it have a particular influence in this particular case here on the inmate himself?
A. No, not in this particular case here. However, this was a matter of integrity.
Q. Who was in charge of fixing the wage scales for the inmates?
A. You are asking me a little bit too much. In any case it must have been a Reich's authority. Undoubtedly the Price Commissioner, the Reich Labor Ministry, and the Reich Finance Ministry would have participated in this.
Q. Did Staff W, at your time, have anything to do with that?
A. At my time one cannot speak of tasks performed by Staff W because the fields of task of the individual sections which belonged to the Staff W differed entirely from each other. However, neither I as an auditor who was outside of the Staff W, nor anybody else from Staff W, had anything to do with fixing the wage scales and the amount of the wage scales for the concentration-camp inmates, apart from that suggestion which I made and which was discussed before.
Q. In Document Book No. IV by the Prosecution, on Page 46, would you take a look at that document there. It is on Page 34 of the English document book. It deals with Document NO-517, Prosecution Exhibit 608. It is a file note for Chief W for "William" dated the 23rd of March, 1944.
A. That concerns the regulations for the concentration camps and for the inmates, and therefore the camp regulations also. As can be seen from this document the main office chief had ordered that Chief W had to work in computing the regulations for the concentration camps.
Q. Were you still working as an auditor at that time for the DWB?
A. No, I had already left that office for nine months. At my time no preliminary work was done for those things.
Q. Did Staff W, concerning the regulations of the concentration camps, already work on those things before the 30th of June, 1943?
A. I would like to draw your attention to the fact again that prior to the middle of 1943 one could not speak of actual tasks of Staff W. As far as I can recall neither the legal department nor anybody else dealt with any such questions at the time.
Q. I shall now refer to Document Book No. III introduced by the Prosecution, Page 51 of the German and Page 46 of the English document book. This deals with Document NO-1292, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 46. That is a letter by Kammler to the Inspector of the Concentration Camps. As it is stated at the end of the letter, this document also circulated to Amtsgruppe W.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Correction, it is Prosecution Exhibit 56 rather than 46.
DR. HEIM: Just a moment please, your Honors. I beg your pardon, it is No. 56, Exhibit No. 56.
Q. (By Dr. Heim) The letter deals with the setting up of SS construction brigades which consist of inmates, Jews, P. W.'s, etc. Did you at the time have any knowledge about this letter?
A. I can't recall that any longer. It says there informational to the so-called Amtsgruppe W. The Chief of Amtsgruppe W was Herr Pohl. Herr Pohl must have been informed by that about that by Dr. Kammler. If Herr Pohl passed on a letter on that I really don't know, dependent on his mood on that date.
Q. In this Document Book No. III I shall refer to Page 80 of the German document book and Page 78 of the English document book, and there you will find Document NO-1029, Prosecution Exhibit No. 65. It is a letter by the Chief of Office W-I to Staff W for "William" and it deals with the contract, with the Reich, concerning concentration-camp inmate labor. Did you at the time gain knowledge of this particular document?
A. No, those negotiations were probably carried out or carried on by W-I independently, and possibly all this occurred after I left, because after all I left in the middle of 1943.
Q. Was it before the 30th of June, 1943, the same way that those matters were dealt with by Staff W?
A. I should know that for sure, because from the mail conferences which we had I could tell you approximately what those people dealt with. But as far as I can recall it never did occur that anybody ever dealt with such things in Staff W.
Q. What does this document prove as far as you are concerned?
A. That is, well, I came-- I left before that, and therefore I couldn't have dealt with it, and on the other hand it is probably proved they dealt with those things later, after my departure.
Q. Can't you read, can't you understand from this document that from that particular moment only Staff W was used for these purposes?
A. Yes, that is what it says here. On the basis of the regulations concerning dealing with those things they fall into the competence of Staff W. That is the first time I ever read such a statement. That must have been after my time.
Q. In the Document 1039, which has been discussed in part, Exhibit 384 contained in Document Book No. XIV, introduced by the Prosecution -
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess, Dr. Heim, until tomorrow morning at nine-thirty. There will be no session here this afternoon.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until nine-thirty tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 16 July 1947, at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal II in the matter of the United States of America, against Oswald Pohl, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 16 July 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Robert M. Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II.
Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
DR. HANS HOHBERG - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
DR. HEIM: Dr. Heim for the defendant Hohberg.
May it please your Honors, before I continue the examination of the defendant, I would like to make certain fundamental remarks at this point which refer to the examination of the defendant so far and to the introduction of evidence which will be further introduced for the defendant Hohberg.
The defendant has repeatedly stated that at that time he was an opponent of National Socialism and of the SS on principle and that he stressed that point by making derogatory and sarcastic remarks concerning the SS in general and against individual SS leaders of the WVHA. This fact that the defendant at the time made such remarks and statements, is not only proved by the statements made by the defendant on the stand, witness, but also by affidavits and testimonies of witnesses.
Now, the impression could be created that this line of testimony or evidence has as its aim to incriminate all the other co-defendants who were all SS leaders, and thus by incriminating these people to exonerate the defendant Hohberg. I would like to state here explicitly that this is not wanted, nor is it intended, but rather that this line of evidence has the explicit aim to prove that Dr. Hohberg cannot really be accused of the crimes charged against him by the Prosecution, that he was outside the zone which is subject of the trial, and that furthermore, he did not only refuse that, but he also opposed it openly.
It is the right of the defendant, and it is my duty as a defense counsel to tell you those facts in order to help you give a just judgment, the same right as anybody before a Spruchkammer has today, even though the scale there is much smaller than here.
With your permission I shall continue the examination of the defendant Hohberg.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, yesterday we stopped with the questions concerning the wage scales for inmates. In the document which we discussed in part, NO-1039, Exhibit 384 in Document Book No. XV introduced by the Prosecution, on Page 23 of the German, there is a document concerning tasks of Staff W which have not been completed. Under paragraph 4 you are also speaking of an compensation treasury. Did the compensation treasury have anything to do with the labor assignment of concentration camp inmates?
A. Yes, it did have something to do with inmate labor. In certain individual firms there was no thought of working normally because the inmates were put at the disposal of the factory in different strength daily, and as on certain days there were no inmates at all at the disposal of the factory, the fixed expenses in the factories continued a coverage for them. The idea of this compensation treasury was to prevent that by a closing-down of the factory due to an unregular number of inmates working there, expenses, or rather losses were incurred. It had been a necessary consequence, before, that all those losses had to be made up for by working overtime or by working harder. That was no longer necessary now. It was sufficient to simply apply to this self-insurance fund. How necessary this compensation treasury was can also be seen from a document which is contained in Document Book No. III, Exhibit No. 453, Page 114 of the document book.
I am sorry, it is Book No. 17. It is on Page 153 of the English document book. It is stated there how the man in charge of the firm groups "food enterprises", Vogel - V-o-g-e-l - turned in a report to Herr Pohl and states that losses were incurred by the fact that inmates did not come and report to work. His answer is also contained in that document and contains considerable complaints.
According to German taxation law things are the following way: There is no possibility to have a self-insurance fund and to be able to carry-out transfers to this fund without paying tax for it. Therefore, it was necessary to legalize this whole self-insurance fund. That is the reason why when I left I made the suggestion to give this insurance company a mutual insurance company aspect and legalize it thus. The compensation fund was absolutely new, and the premiums were not as yet fixed. They had to be found out first. In reality, however, this fund did not become legalized so that it has to be stated now that according to German taxation law these ten millions which were in the fund at last could not possibly be taxed. The profits according to taxation law would have been higher if this had been submitted.
Q. Witness, the Prosecution furthermore charges you that you participated the spolitiation of private and state property in the occupied territories. The Prosecution thinks that their assertion can be proved by introducing some documents. In this connection it has submitted Document NO-1034, Exhibit No. 444-A in Document Book No. XV, Page 13 of the German and Page 14 of the English document book. It is a letter by you to the deputy of the plenipotentiary general for the occupied Polish territories, Dr. Pfeiffer. In this letter you are speaking of a telephone conversation between you and Maurer on one side and Dr. Pfeiffer on the other hand, in the course of which Dr. Pfeiffer was to find out for the SS in the Government-General, certain furniture factories which could, under certain circumstances be sold.
How was this letter actually originated?
A. Dr. Pfeiffer, as it is stated in the letter, is not a Standartenfuehrer but he was an SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer. Dr. Pfeiffer is a colleague of mine from the time of my studies in Cologne. Me had close contact in Berlin and we visited each other almost every week. Maurer had been with him and had asked him if possible, to name him the furniture factories which could be sold in Poland. I intervened in these conversations,
DR. HEIM: It is document book No. 17, introduced by the Prosecution, Your Honor.
WITNESS: And Herr Dr. Pfeiffer wanted to do me a favor so to speak, while I started working for the SS-enterprises. However, there was no success in that line. However, I would appreciate it if you would not forget that it is explicitly stated in the letter that this would be a regular purchase.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: What document are you talking about.
DR. HEIM: It is Document No. 1034, in Document Book No. 17, page 13 of the German and page 14 of the English document book. It is Exhibit 444-A.
WITNESS: This particular furniture factory Radom which is contained in the document was not purchased either.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. The Prosecution has also introduced in connection with this count in Document Book No. 16, on page 82 of the German and page 85 of the English document book, Document NO-1021, Exhibit 448. This letter is addressed to you by the defendant Bobermin, as chief of office W-2--- and refers to Russian brick factories report to the Reichsfuehrer SS.
Did you have anything to do with the brick factories in Russia, or did you have anything to do with the report to the Reichsfuehrer-SS, since the letter is addressed to you?
A. No, I never did have anything to do with eastern factories. I can only reconstruct the entire idea in my memory, although I don't recall the details. It occured once in a while that Herr Pohl, within the framework of a discussion or conference, gave an order to somebody in order to have that person execute his order. Apparently, he gave me an inquiry on the part of Himmler.
As I knew as little about it as he did, I passed that inquiry on to Bobermin; he was closer to the East. I had nothing to do in Bobermin's field of work, and the auditor there was Fischer.
Q. Finally, in the same document book No. 16, on page 92 of the German and page 93 of the English text, I shall refer to Document NO-1015 Exhibit 451. It is a letter by the Klinker Cement GMBH, to the DWB, and addressed to you. It refers to funds for some enterprise in the GovernmentGeneral.
As an economic auditor and adviser, were you competent for that matter?
A. No; I was not. I never did advise Dr. Bobermin. He had his own economic consultant for that. All the financial transactions of the factories which were directed by Dr. Bobermin were carried out by him personally without any contact whatsoever, without discussions with me. I assume that letter was caused by a special circumstance, namely, the following: upon Pohl's initiation, Dr. Volk and myself had contacted General Konsul Koehn in the Reich Post Ministry. The minister Ohnesorge had agreed to give a credit of 25,000,00 marks on the part of the Reich Post Office. The Reich Postoffice was bound by the bugded regulations and especially those concerning the Postoffices in Germany, and those regulations required a certain security for such a credit. As a security the Reich Post demanded the deposit of the shares of the DWB. Due to this particular demand the credit could not be realized. Mr. Bobermin, however, at the time was still of the opinion, I am sure, that the money from that credit could be distributed.
Q. Did you have anything to do with the lease of these factories?
A. No, at not time. Neither with the purchase nor with the management; nor with the lease.
Q. In the opening speech for the defendant Baier it was stated that Baier in contrast to the hitherto existing tendencies had supported the scheme that the Mattoni heirs, who had the minority of the shares of the Mattoni, were to keep the shares. By that the impression could be gained that prior to Baier's time the Mattoni were to keep the shares. By that impression could be gained that prior to Baier's time the Mattoni heirs were placed under duress to sell the shares to the DWB.
Did you ever exert any such a pressure on the Mattoni heirs?
A. No; never. When I joined the DWB as an economic advisor for the DWB or the enterprises, before the DWB were founded, the shares of the Mattoni A.G. were already in the hands of the Sudetenquell, GMBH. Later on they were transferred from the Sudetenquell, GMBH to the DWB. Almost the entire number of shares - that is ninety-six percent of the total of the shares - had been purchased. The heirs of Mattoni, therefore, only had four percent in their hands. The profit of this soda water enterprise was so extremely high that it seemed absolutely appropriate not to lose any money on this profit by taxes, but rather to use it in order to cover the losses of other enterprises. That was the reason why I suggested to Herr Pohl to also conclude a corporation contract between Mattoni and the DWB. It was natural that the minority shareholders had to be paid for this loss by a current dividend guarantee. According to the legal regulations at the time, the dividend guarantee could not be higher than six percent. That six percent was also granted to Mattoni's heirs. Now, if the Mattoni heirs had been influenced in any way to get rid of the shares then this would have led to a very complicated loss in taxes.
According to German law that if all shares of an A.G. or GMBH are united in one hand, that then the man who writes the taxation laws starts from that point of view, that real estate and buildings have changed owner. Due to that fact in such a moment the real estate taxes will come into effect which amount to five percent. A transfer of the minority shares of the Mattoni to the DWB would have been nonsense from the view of taxation
Q. I shall now speak about the Osti. What do you know about the origination and the development of the Osti?
A. I was informed about the plants concerning the Osti during a conference which took place at Mr. Pohl's office, together with Dr. Horn. The point of departure for those matters was a letter by Himmler which drew Pohl's attention to the fact that in Warsaw there was a whole number of empty factories, and that there were machines and stocks there which would be spoiled. I could still remember that letter before I saw the documents here. They are discussing millions of watch glasses in the document, but during the examination I spoke of eyepiece glasses ... but that was a mistake. I am sorry. Pohl ordered Dr. Horn to immediately go to Warsaw to put all these machines and stocks in inventory and count them, to secure them, and sell them for the Reich in a trusteeship manner.
Dr. Horn immediately after that, together with a certain number of my auditors, went to Warsaw. Approximately at the same time, an agreement had been reached between Mr. Globocnik and Mr. Pohl, probably according to my assumption after they had discusses the matter with Himmler, namely that any number of larger enterprises of which Mr. Globocnik was in charge, were to be placed under Pohl's chief supervision.