Q: In any case, you do not know who gathered the evidence against you there?
A: No, I don't. It was a special group of people that appeared once in a while.
DR. FRITSCH: Thank you. I have no further questions.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for defendant Mummenthey):
Q: Herr Hohberg, in the course of your direct examination you repeatedly mentioned Mummenthey. How long have you know Mummenthey?
A: I have known Mummenthey ever since I started my activity, approximately, as an auditor of the companies of the WVHA.
Q: That was the year of -
A: 1940, in May.
Q: Since 1940, did you meet Mummenthey several times and on several occasions?
A: Yes. I met Mummenthey first of all in connection with the auditing which my auditors carried out with the DEST. Then Herr Mummenthey used to say Hello to me in my office when he walked by.
Q: On those occasions, did you also deal with the official matters of the DEST?
A: Undoubtedly yes.
Q: What did Mummenthey tell you about the conditions in the DEST, and particularly about his position in the DEST?
A: It is very difficult for me to recall all those details, but I will give you a fundamental answer. The position of Mummenthey was difficult for the reason that the technical man in charge of that enterprise, who in reality was in charge of the enterprises, Schondorf, had a special position as far as Pohl was concerned. Mummen they called himself a chief of office.
Therefore, he was in charge of a firm-group. In reality, however, Schondorf as a person was much stronger, as far as I could deduce from conversations.
Q: Witness, when you spoke to Mummenthey, you could gain an impression as to what the attitude of his management of such an enterprise was? I ask you, what did you understand from the statements made by Mummenthey? Did you gain the impression that he in the DEST actually pursued certain aims which were directed at the economy of the enterprise?
A: Based on our audit, it was shown that the economic and financial conditions of the DEST were unbearable. The head of the DEST, one may say, was too large. Hundreds of thousands of Reichsmarks were thrown away. Although Mummenthey did not have too much experience in management he did it easily, and he succeeded in removing all the unnecessary people in order to make the entire management quite small. It was later on practically then that the enterprises belonging to Mummenthey -- that is the enterprises of the DEST -- became independent and were independently managed, while Mummenthey from Berlin directed the financial transactions. He deal to only with larger questions. His apparatus later as compared with former times was only a fraction of what it was.
Q: Is it correct, witness, that in 1940 Salpeter was still in charge of the DEST?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you tell us in a few brief terms a few things about the character and the person of Dr. Salpeter -- whether he saw in Mummenthey his collaborator who was on the same level that he was, or did he just only think that that was an assistant who was working for him?
A: Well, if I tell you anything about it, I believe that it will be prejudiced because Salpeter was entirely against me, and I was against him, but I would like to say that Herr Salpeter wanted to be the man in charge and that he did not want to have anybody beside him, and I don't believe that Mummenthey was a very important person.
Q: Do you know that Salpeter was in charge of the management of the DEST up to the autumn of 1941?
A: That is quite possible. I cannot tell you for sure.
Q: Do I have to understand from that statement that until the end, until Salpeter left, Mummenthey had no independent position within the DEST?
A: Yes, that is quite impossible, because Salpeter took over everything himself.
Q: Did you, from the conversations you had with Mummenthey, gain the impression that Mummenthey in the way he dealt with various business things worked correctly, cleanly and decently?
A: Yes, I always had that impression of Mummenthey.
Q: In the course of your examination, you also told us about your being together with Mummenthey in Minden; is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: The whole thing lasted until the 6th or 7th of January 1947. Was Mummenthey transferred to Nurnberg on that day?
A: Yes, all three of us were transported to Nurnberg.
Q: Can you tell me, witness, how were the last few days of your stay in Minden? Where were you? By whom were you supervised, and what was Mummenthey's activity while there?
A: In the last few days in Minden, we were allowed to move about freely. We went to the movies, and in the evening we reported back to the War Criminal Holding Center in Minden, but I believe that this lasted only for two days.
Q: What did Mummenthey do during all those days?
A: You mean in those last few days?
Q: Yes. IN all that time. I would like to refresh your memory. Do you recall that Mummenthey at all that time studied all those books published by Kogon, Rosch and so forth?
A: Yes, that's right.
Q: Do you also recall that you suggested to him that he should at least stop reading all those things because he would get everything mixed up or something like that?
A: Yes, something like that, yes. He was very much depressed at the time.
Q: Did he speak with you about the contents of those books?
A: Yes, I believe he did discuss it. There was a a certain passage there in which, in his opinion, he had been charged with something he didn't do, but I really can't recall it.
Q: Did you and Mummenthey have to suffer from physical conditions because of the billeting you had there?
A: Your Honors, after this trial, I may be sent back to the British authorities. In any case, I would not like to make a statement here that would be disadvantageous to me later on.
Q: I am interested in this question, only, witness, for the following reason:
Mummenthey was transported to Nurnberg, together with you, on 8 January. On the following morning he was examined by the examiner. Mummenthey made statements which testimony, upon the suggestion of the interrogator, he was to compile into an affidavit and sign. However, he refused to sign it because he had made the statements in a physically bad and psychologically depressed state, and that is the only reason why I would like you to tell me if in the immediate days preceding the 8 January you suffered under physicial duress.
A: Yes. Mummenthey during the entire time, particularly during the last few days, was particularly depressed -- psychologically, that is, especially because the British officers had told him that if one was supposed to be sent to Nurnberg, it was only as a witness. That was a threath that was over all of us. Mummenthey himself, however, during all those weeks had swollen hands because of freezing, which he suffered under. He could hardly move them.
Q: Therefore, he had physical pain?
A: Yes, he did.
Q: And that is how he was transported to Nurnberg?
A: Well, yes, but the swelling had gone down, because the hands had been much more swollen at the beginning.
Q: I shall now return to the first complex of questions. You stated that Mummenthey had no independent position as a DEST manager until Salpeter left, you state the exact period of time. Did you meet Mummenthey after that period of time -- that is to say after 1941?
A: Yes, according to my recollection and opinion, we met quite frequently.
Q. Did Mummenthey discuss with you the question of labor assignment of inmates in the factories of the DEST, the German Earth and Stone Works?
A. I cannot recall that. But he told me other things. It was Mummenthey's ambition to totally mechanize some of those factories he had so that they would run by themselves. And he wrote to me how this was going to be done. He also invited me to come and see it, but I didn't do so.
Q. What were the plans Mummenthey developed and told you about concerning the DEST--German Earth and Stone Works?
A. Mummenthey very much liked this mechanismation which he wanted to carry out. Apart from that I can recall, and it is not important here in this connection, that he personally felt it rather important to sell the DESY, to the Reich, and that they should be used as a Reich company fundamentally. But there were other reasons too.
Q. According to your knowledge of the conditions of the DEST was the DEST highly centralized during 1939 and 1940?
A. It was absolutely centralized between 1939 and 1940.
Q. Did Mummenthey mention to you anything about the fact that according to his opinion it would be much more correct to decentralize the DEST, that is to say, to make every one of those enterprises independent and, if possible, also turn them into official and comrmercial enterprises--for instance, into GMBH, or something, is that correct?
A. Yes, that was the practical result of our auditing report and we had compiled exactly what the expenses would be. We had found that there was very little left to pay the cost by the trials. That is the reason why he had to find a way to cut down expenses and why he was in favor of the decentralization.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take the afternoon recess.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (For Defendant Mummenthey):
Q. Witness, you had stated before that you could not remember any more whether Mummenthey had discussed the allocation of inmate labor with the DEST with you. Can you recall from the conversation with Mummenthey, and did you gain any certain impression in that conversation with regard to his social attitude?
A. I think I was the one who, as far as the successor of Dr. Salpeter was concerned, was able among others to suggest Mummenthey for that position, as far as I was allowed to make such a suggestion. I only did this for the reason that in the scope of several conversations I had discussed the matter with Mummenthey, and I had the impression at the time that he was a very good man.
Q. Did this decency on the part of Mummenthey also express itself in his social attitude?
A. I know that he went to very great efforts in that direction. However, I cannot give you any details at the moment, because our auditing at that time was only limited to a certain amount of work and not to a certain sector of time.
Q. You have further stated that in the year 1939 and 1940 the DEST, as a result of its centralization, had economic and financial difficulties, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know the reasons for this bad financial and economic condition?
A In my opinion the reason for it was that the ambition of Dr. Salpeter was to develop a big machine in that organization, which almost had the character of a ministry. He did not pay any attention whatsoever to the financial aspects.
Q May I assume from that that the DEST in the years 1938, 1939, and 1940 already had undertaken too many obligations?
A Yes, it had entered into too many obligations, However, certain circumstances were responsible for that.
Q Was it the fault of Mummenthey?
A No, the first business managers in Berlin who had let the two Berlin construction firms do whatever they wanted to, let them spend too much capital.
Q In the course of your examination you have already mentioned the corporation charter which had been concluded between the DWB and the DEST. When did this contract go into effect?
AAs far as I can recall, this contract went into effect before the 31st of December, 1940.
Q What results did this corporation charter have, as far as the legal independence of the DEST was concerned?
A I believe the conclusion which you want to draw is not quite correct. The corporation charter was only carried out for the purpose of helping the DEST over its losses. May I continue in this matter?
You are right insofar as the Higher business management in the DWB as a result of the corporation charter, was now entitled by commercial law to supervise and to rule over the DEST. However, that actually had been the case before, already.
Q Did you gain any insight into the activities of the DEST, in so far as the position of the business managers was already considerably curtailed through the directives coming from Pohl and the DWB?
AAlready from the moment on when I became an auditor of the SS enterprises there were official instructions which also applied to the DEST; and by virtue of these instructions the business managers of the DEST, although they were not subordinated by commercial law, could not dispose of certain sums; that is, the expenses of more than fifty thousand marks.
Of course this differed in all the enterprises, and Pohl had the sole authority over these things.
Therefore, no great expenditures could be made without the agreement of Pohl, and that was a long time before the DWB was founded.
The balanced of power from the top down and from the DWB to the companies did not change as a result of the founding of the DWB. After all, the high position above was already in existence.
Q Are you informed, witness, about the purpose of the SS enterprises? Were these aims in the cultural, the economic, or any other field?
A I would like to answer this question to the effect that this depends on who is the contractor in this case. I have seen here from a report from the Chief of the Office III-A -- that is, Dr. Salpeter -that he thought the purpose of the SS enterprises was the labor allocation of inmates, and that was a new method of carrying out punishment. This very narrow point of view, however, only originated from the fact that Dr. Salpeter only saw these things from his own point of view. Mr. Pohl described these things to me in a completely different way. He was mainly interested in cultural and social aims.
Q Did you get any insight into the papers and books concerning the inventory of the DEST which went to the DWB, together with the balance of the DEST?
A That was done by one of my auditors.
Q Did you personally occupy yourself with these inventories?
A Well, from the commercial point of view, we understood by inventory the inventory of goods. Not with the inventory of goods. However, with the inventory of the plant.
Q What point of view did you get of the inventories? According to your opinion, was this a capital intensified company?
A Yes, of course, they were companies in which the capital was working intensively, too intensively.
For example, if normally a plant would cost one million marks - now these plants cost approximately three million marks. Of course I wanted to see that this difference was written off.
Q Now, I only have very few individual questions.
Did Mumenthey ever discuss the difficulties with you which the DEST had with various concentration camp commanders?
A Yes.
Q What did he complain about in detail?
A In connection with the foundation of the equalization treasury Mummenthey complained in this respect that inmates who had become well trained in their work suddenly were not furnished to him any more, and that the camp commanders made it very difficult for him.
Q Was it, therefore, the attempt of Mummenthey to train inmates for a certain work, and to use them for certain work, and to keep them within the DEST?
A Yes; I have that impression. I know that he always took care that they received cigarettes, and so on.
Q Do you know that Mummenthey pursued the plan to help these inmates to get back to a free life, an economically free and secure life by trying to train them; and that after the war -- or even during the war -to see that they were discharged so that they would be used in the enterprises of the DEST as free civilian workers?
A I know that plans in that direction existed; however, to what extent they were carried out I do not know, because I actually did not have any immediate contact with the DEST after the auditing was ended. Since 1941.
Q You have already mentioned the plant at Linz. Do you know who actually handled the matter there?
A Yes. Herr Schondorf was appointed by Pohl to negotiate this matter. Just what happend in this case I don't know. As far as I know, only a small experimental station was established.
Q And now my final question, witness. You know from the course of this trial that the Prosecution has produced a document where the DEST is expressively called an plant which led to this letter from the DEST to Pohl, of the DWB?
A I don't know anything about this letter.
Q It is document 1276 in the document book 16 page 19 which you have in your hands. It is Document 1276, Exhibit 428. And I want to ask you, do you know anything about the matter?
A Yes.
Q Will you please describe the matter to the Tribunal?
A Here we are dealing with the talking-over of the Gmundner Lime Works, AG, at Gmund, Austria. One day Pohl ordered me to investigate whether these Gmundner Lime Works were an enterprise which could be purchased -
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Just a minute---
INTERPRETER: ...Whether this was an enterprise which could be purchased.
A Witness, the stock of this company belonged to an SS officer, This SS officer had some sort of a position within the WVHA. I ascertained that this enterprise was very highly in debt and the economic conditions of this enterprise were so bad that it bacame apparent that this SS officer was trying to decieve Pohl, and in a certain way to try to turn over this plant to him, the value of which in reality was only a fraction of what he was trying to get for it. That was the reason why the purchase of this plant was disapproved. Just what caused Dr. Salpeter to make a statement of this kind; namely, to call this plant a plant employing inmate labor, I don't know. However, there certainly was no reason for that.
Q Did you discuss with Salpeter or Mummenthey the experiences which you gained, with regard to this enterprise?
A I can't recall that any more. However, it may be possible. It is probable.
Q I am asking you this question because the business management had to be informed from some side if they wrote this letter.
A I compiled a report about that. I sent it to Pohl, and it is probable that Pohl passed it on.
DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for Mummenthey): I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Prosecution may cross-examine.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Witness, as an expert on German commercial law, I want to ask you a few questions about different types of companies in existence in Germany. I would like for you first to turn to Document Book XIV, if you will, to Exhibit 384, page 16 of the German page 19 of the English, Document NO-1930. It's on page 16, I believe, of Book XIV. There are known to German law the following forms of individual business enterprise which are not legal entities, are there not? The OHB?
A Yes, such a company exists also.
Q The KG?
A Yes, we have two kinds of Kommandit Gesellschafts. There is one on shares and we have a Kommandit Gesellschaft where the person holding kommandits is not based on shares but is actually one of the owners.
Q For the record, would you give us the full German name for the OHG and the KG, please?
A It is an open trade company, the OHG, the Offene Handelsgesellschaft, which is an open trade company where everybody is liable.
Q And the KG, Kommandigesellschaft. It has one or several partners who are personally liable, just like in any trade company and beyond that it has partners which only are liable with a certain amount of capital. However, these Kommandit stocks can also be in the form of shares; then we call it a Kommanditgesellshaft on shares.
Q It is, in other words, a kind of limited partnership?
A Yes, it is a company with limited or unlimited liability.
Q And OHB is a kind of general partnership?
A The partners of the OHG are always liable for the entire property.
Q These are the two main types of individual business enterprises without a legal entity, not possessing a legal independent entity, is that correct?
A Well, in this case we have to consider the individual firm. Then, of course, we have the so-called silent company. That silent company is something between individual firm and the Kommandit-gesellschaft.
Q Before we take up the firms with legal entities, the associations having a legal personality, let me ask you if any of the industries or concerns listed in Document NO-1039 are the type of individual business enterprises which we have just discussed, namely, the OHG and the KG?
A No, here we are not dealing with an OHG, nor with the KG.
Q These are industries with a legal personality. Now in Germany there are several kinds of enterprises with legal personalities. There is the AG, is there not?
A Yes.
Q First for the record will you give us the complete German name for AG?
A The AG, the Aktiengesellschaft is a non-personal company and its stock is divided up into various shares and the stock holders are only liable for the nonimal amount of their shares.
Q In other words, this is a stock corporation?
A However, in Germany, we have stock by names and stocks which are owned.
Q Will you give us a brief description of the body which manages the AG, namely the Aufsichtsrat and the Vorstand?
A The AG, according to the new stock law, has three organs: One is the Hauptversammlung. These are the stock holders who might have certain legal jobs. The second is the business management, which is called Vorstand. It is actually the Board of Directors. The rights of these Vorstand are clearly defined in commercial law. Then we have a third organ, which carries out the supervision over that Board of directors.
That is, the Aufsichtsrat, the so-called Board of Supervisors. The main assembly appoints the supervisors and the Board of Supervisors appoints the directors.
Q And the Aufsichtsrat also has the power to remove the Vorstand, as well as appoint has it not?
A Yes, through a majority resolution.
Q So then, would you say that the Vorstand is the executive Board of the corporation and that the Aufsichtsrat is the supervisory board, that board which supervises the Vorstand.
A Yes, that is quite correct.
Q And an other type of corporations in Germany law is the Kommanditgesellschaft KAG or the KAA, is that correct.
A That is a Kommanditgesellschaft auf Aklein, yes. The Kommanditgesellschaft on shares in practice is a Kommanditgesellschaft, that is to say with partners who are personally liable with the entire property.
Q Excuse me. We don't have any such firms listed in NO-1039. Then still another type is the G.M.B.H. Will you please give us a brief description of the G.M.B.H. and of the manager of that corporation?
A The G.M.B.H. is an enterprise with limited liability. It is abbreviated G.M.B.H. It is also now personal capital enterprise. Its own capital is not divided up to shares, but into so-called partner shares and these partner shares, whenever they are passed on, has to be turned over through a document signed before a notary public. The company stock, therefore, cannot be sold as easily as for example, a share that is personally owned. The G.M.B.H. has the following body there for example, it has the General assembly. This corresponds to the main assembly in the case of the AG. Then it has the business manager.
Q Excuse me, the main assembly is the stock holders, or the share owners, is that right.
A That is right, yes, that is the owner of the company shares.
Q And the second body, you were about to say -
A The second body is the public manager or the business manager.
Q Or Geschaeftsfuehrer, is that correct?
A Geschaeftsfuehrer; in the AG it is called the Board of Directors and in the GMBH they are Geschaeftsfuehrer, business manager.
Q There is no Vorstand in the GMBH?
A No, but this other body compares to it. Only the legal obligations in the stock law and in the GMBH law vary and they are differently divided. However, in principle if is the same. The third party in the GMBH is only a voluntary board of supervisors. The AG must have one, the GMBH may have one. The German Economic Enterprises, the DWB could have had one. However, they did not have one.
Q Did it have to have one according to the law or according to the charter?
A No.
Q Where a corporation, a G.M.B.H. does have an aufsichtsrat, then it performs the same function for the GMBH that it does for the AG, namely, to supervise the Executive Board.
A Yes, that is correct. Only this specific functions varies a little bit in the different kinds of companies. However, the principle remains the same.
Q Now, are there any other types of German corporations that should be mentioned before we go on? We have mentioned three, I believe.
A Well, we don't have to mention the Gewerkschaft; after all, we are not dealing with that question here. The Gewerkschaft is capital company which instead of shares has a special sort of stock, the Kuse and they are limited to any certain amount.
Q I think that is sufficient.
A We have not as yet mentioned the so-called Genossenschaft, a cooperative society. Amongst these companies we have a Genossen schaft; that was the sale store of the Berlin, furniture manufacturing, G.M.B.H. That is a registered cooperative society with limited liability.
Of course, there are various types of cooperatives with limited liability, unlimited liability, and so on. There are various types and we don't have to go into detail here.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q That particular form was under W-4 that you just mentioned?
A Well, in this chart which I was to look at, it is all mentioned on the first page. It is under three, under the German Economic Enterprise of the DEST enterprise, Staff-W.
Q Now referring to this Document NO-1039, except for the one exception which you just pointed out, namely, the furniture factory, all of these corporations are either GMGH or AG, is that correct?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Can you tell us what the functions of the Prokurist is under the German Law, under the German Commercial Law?
A The Prokurist according to the German Law has the character of a small business manager. We have certain types of business which the Prokurist is not allowed to handle by himself. That is to say, where a board of directors or a business management have to carry out that work themselves. Normally a Prokurist has a certain field assigned to him through instructions, as a general order of procedure.
Q Can you tell us, does the AG Associations and the GMBH Associations have Prokurists?
A Yes, either one can have Prokurists.
Q And they can have a Prokurist at the same time as they have a Vorstand?
A I don't quite understand your question. I understand it to mean that where there is a Prokurist in a company, he at the same time can be a director in another company.
Q No, the fact that a corporation has a Vorstand or executive board does not preclude it from having a Prokurist?
A No.
Q Will you tell us what is the relation of these two organs?
A The Prokurists are automatically subordinated to the business management in the case of the GMBH, or the executive board in the case of the AG.
Q The Prokurist, however, does carry out some executive functions, is that correct under the supervision of the Vorstand?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A Under the entire direction of the executive board, that is correct. I don't want to bring that conception of supervision in connection with the executive board, because in all these things according to the German Law one thinks of the board of supervisors.
Q Now I am talking about the Vorstand. Does the Prokurist always act under the supervision of the Vorstand?
A Yes, in the AG he would work under the supervision of the executive board, and in the GMBH he would work under the direction of the business management. The names vary in this respect.
Q Does he have any sphere of action in which he can use his own discretion, or does he have to get an approval for every action from his superior body?
A Yes, that is a normal procedure. However, for the most part he is always authorized to sign documents, or whatever may be necessary. This is fixed by his superiors, and it is quite customary in general that the Prokurists either together with one or Prokurist signs letters, etc., or he signs together with a business manager, or he signs them together with a member of the executive board. Then we have the individual Prokura, however, this is very rare.
Q Then in addition there is what we have heard here as the business manager. Is that a separate official under the German Law from the Prokurist and a member of the Vorstand?
A I don't want to go into the differences according to the Law. The business manager in a GMBH is in his position the same as a member of the executive board of the AG; only the title varies in this case.
Q Here in the case of AG, it is like the Vorstand, you say. Does not he work under the Vorstand, under the supervision of the Vorstand?
A No. According to the German Law, the conception Vorstand, combines on the executive board, only exists with regard the law about shares. The same function, however, with somewhat different defined has the business manager as in the case of GMBH. In the same company we do not have an executive board and a business manager. The executive Court No. II, Case No. 4.board and a business manager.
The executive board belongs to the AG, and the business manager belongs to the GMBH.
Q We have heard from several of the witnesses of defendants, that the DEST in numerous cases had as business manager the commandant of the concentration camp in connection with which the concern was located. Can you confirm that?
A It is completely out of question. The business management is a body according to the commercial law, and generally was not in accordance with the civil law. Pohl, to whom all conceptions of commercial law were unknown, by virtue of a sudden idea wanted, in order to interest the camp commandants, appointed them as so-called directors. Of course, that was something new. However, this was not a concept according to the commercial law. Anybody can be appointed director. That can go for a company of only two people wherever located. Therefore, no functions were connected with his appointments, no functions according to the commercial law.
Q Do you recall Pohl telling us he had appointed the concentration camp commandants in numerous cases as business managers of several of the SS industries?
A Yes, he wanted them appointed to so-called plant directors.
Q And these were the people who managed the concern locally, that is, they immediately supervised production?
A No, I don't think so.
Q Tell us what they did in connection with the SS industries?
AAt the top is the GMBH. The GMBH has a business management. Now we have individual plants. The individual plants have subordinated to the business management, so-called plant managers. They were in charge of the individual plants. Furthermore, Pohl has gave a concentration camp commandant the beautiful title plant director. This is a designation which did not mean anything at all, because the commandants had no authority in those plants at all. They had nothing to do with the administration, and this was only the basis on which they could be paid some sort of compensation. This was to induce them to furnish their in Court No. II, Case No. 4.mates more regularly.