Q Then the third paragraph deals with a per diem, which you were to receive, and will you read the last paragraph, please?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. Robbins, are we going to get an English translation of this document?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, your Honor.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Why is it necessary to occupy all the time having him read it?
MR. ROBBINS: I think perhaps the last paragraph is not important.
Q (By Mr. Robbins) Will you look at the letter of the 7th of March, 1941, the report there that you made. Do you say that Himmler has ordered the confiscation of the Apollinaris firm and has ordered your commission as administrator of the company, is that right?
A He had ordered me to become an administrator. Nothing came of it later, and that was SS-Oberfuehrer Moeckl.
Q Will you read the second paragraph? I believe it is short.
A "The Secret Gestapo Office of Koblenz has carried out the confiscation on 5 March 1943 and appointed Dr. Hohberg as the administrator of the Apollinaris A. G., including the Rheinaar Glass Factory."
Q Now, it is your contention that after Pohl ordered you to take this over and after Himmler ordered you to take it over, that you did not do so?
A No, Mr. Robbins, it was quite different.
Q You signed the subpower of attorney to Bode, did you not? This is your signature on the letter of the 5th of March, 1941?
A Yes. Could I now explain it, please?
Q Make a very brief explanation.
A Very brief, certainly. One day Moeckl asked me to accompany him to Bad Newenaar in order to, as an administrator of Apollinaris A. G. start my work. I was officially appointed by the Gestapo, which acted then as an agency of RSHA and were allegedly responsible for the appointment. Shortly after that I went to Bad Neuenaar for a second time, saw there that an administrator had been appointed, an auditor called Dr. Wirth of Cologne, who had been appointed by the Reich Commissioner for the Administration of Enemy Property, whereupon I officially resigned at once. I never did any work. I gained a small compensation for it afterwards inasmuch as the Custodian of Enemy Property asked me and ordered me to estimate the value of the property, because it was planned to have the enterprise leased to the Sudentenquell Company, which I did. I was appointed, did not do any work, resigned officially when I found Dr. Wirth there, and later on I only made an estimation.
Q And when you made the power of attorney to SS-Sturmbannfuehrer Bode, you knew that the property had been confiscated by the Gestapo, didn't you?
A Yes, I knew that.
Q And you also knew that no payments had been made to the owners of the properties?
A If you confiscate something you don't seize it -
Q If you confiscate something it is the same thing as blocking property on the basis of law 52. The point here is who was to have the supervision in this enterprise. Up until then the custodian of enemy property had the supervision, and he appointed an administrator, and I was to take his place, but I did not do it, so the appointment was to be rescinded, because the old appointment was still enforced with Dr. Wirth. My sub-power of attorney which I had given was as it became clear later on useless.
Q You say in your report that the property was confiscated because the owners of the property had shown to be an enemy of the state. Will you tell us very briefly what that means?
A The property is British. The shareholders at the time were, I believe, the Gordon Hotel Company of London. The foreign exchange agency with the President of Cologne took the view that the enterprise, because it kept its prices too low had for years acted against paragraph 33 and 34 of the Income Tax Laws, and had paid profits under cover to Britain.
Q I think that is enough. You told Dr. Seidl yesterday, in response to a question, that you have made certain profits in certain speculations with regard to the industries, is that right?
A Yes.
Q What was the extent of this profit?
A About the profit you must make a difference between private profits, and profits made on behalf of the capital concern. Would you like me to tell you of this?
Q Just tell me just how you say that you made certain profits from the speculations. Did those profits accrue to you?
A I was doing a job there which I invented myself.
Q Excuse me, did they go to you personally and not to one of the industries. It was a personal profit that you made, wasn't it?
A Quite right.
Q Let me ask you this. Was it permitted that a public auditor makes profits from speculations with a company that he is auditing? Isn't that prohibited?
A No, that is not. Yes, it is certainly prohibited with the companies which I am auditing, but not otherwise.
Q Weren't you auditing these SS industries that you made the profit from?
A No, you are misunderstanding me. As auditor I am not allowed to speculate on my own leaders. As an auditor I am not allowed to speculate with the Mattonishares and the Wolfram shares because with those shares you cannot speculate on the stock exchange, but on this property with which speculation was carried out had nothing to do with the economic enterprises. This was a matter completely outside of these things in the property which Pohl handled outside the economic enterprises.
Q Are you telling me that you never made any profit in speculation on the SS industries?
A No.
Q You testified that Dr. Horn wrote you quite frequently with regard to the personnel problems of the OSTI. Will you tell me the extent of your authority with regard to personnel matters?
A I have not had any authority, Mr. Robbins. The position was that Dr. Horn went quite alone, and with his auditors to Warsaw and Lublin, and he wanted to have a few typists, and for that reason he addressed himself to me and to Ansorge later on.
Q And did you help Dr. Horn with his recruiting problem, and recruiting men for him?
A No.
Q Did you handle any of the personnel problems of Dr. Horn's?
A He asked me whether he could have allocated a few young ladies, and so far as I know he got from the German Economic Enterprise, or some one else of the Main Office, perhaps, one lady, but I had nothing to do with that.
Q You told us all that you had to do with the personnel of the SS industry. You had nothing else to do with it?
A No.
Q Will you tell us very briefly what contact you had with people in Amtsgruppe-B?
A I knew Herr Loerner, because he would be present at meetings when we discussed interest and capital, and so forth, and then I knew Herr Lechler.
Q Did you have any business conversations with Lechler?
A Certainly, because I audited his enterprise.
Q And did you have any contacts with any one else in Amtsgruppe-B?
A Koeberlein, whom I see in the right-hand square. I don't know, I see him here. I knew what he looked like. I don't know Herr Weckel, and Scheide I must have seen in Berlin sometime, but I did not talk with him so far as I remember.
Q Did you have any contact with any one in Amtsgruppe-C?
A I knew Dr. Kammler.
Q Did you have any business conversations with Kammler?
A I don't think I had any business conversations with him, but I know that when Kammler would pass me in a store or on the street he would say a few kind words.
Q Did you ever have correspondence with Kammler?
A I should not think so, but I have seen in the document that Kammler wrote to me once or twice, but that he made a mistake because he did not know my competence.
Q Did you not know that Amtsgruppe-C was carrying out armament enterprises with underground factories belonging to Amtsgruppe-W?
A Mr. Robbins, I think I know quite a lot about that, because later on in the work what was known as Gewaltaktion 162, Kammler had special orders to establish I think about sixteen to twenty subterranean work shops, built. I believe that was a special order which he received, but that it was not anything to have to do with Office Group-C.
Q Did you know that as a fact, or is that just an assumption?
A It is not an assumption, but I should think it is probably ninety percent proper. I can only say that from the fringes, because I had no actual contact.
Q Now you knew that Kammler had this underground construction in Amtsgruppe-W?
A Yes.
Q And the same with the Messerschmitt plant, they were also located in underground factories of Amtsgruppe-W?
A Yes, I think so.
Q Well, while you were working with ME-162 - - was it 162?
A Yes, it was 162.
Q Did you -
A Heinkel - 162.
Q It was not the Messerschmitt?
A No, the Messerschmitt was 262, and Kammler was commissioned in general for the 162.
Q And the Heinkel industry also had underground factories, did they not?
A Yes, indeed, but not in our program. They only produced wooden wings, and had a factory where no inmates were working.
Q Do you know if inmates were used by Heinkel in the Amtsgruppe-W factories?
A I know that Heinkel used inmate labor. In the assembly plants of Office Group-C, within the scope of Kammler's special order, I don't know.
Q You also knew that Messerschmitt used inmate labor in the W's underground factories?
A I can not tell you that from my own knowledge, because I only was connected with Heinkel and not with Messerschmitt.
Q I only have one more question, witness. Will you turn to Document Book XIV, Document NO-1290, on page 46 of the German, and page 49 of the English, it is Exhibit No. 60. You see the distribution stamp on this document?
AAre we now talking about Document No. 1290?
Q Yes.
A Yes, I can see it, the distribution.
Q Can you tell us what these various letters mean, just for the record. What does St.W.L. mean?
A Mr. Robbins, it is not a distribution list. It is the incoming stamp, as the distribution list is lower down. The office distribution list is Offices W-1, W-3, W-4, and so on.
Q What was this stamp?
A The stamp meant the distribution with the incoming mail within the DWB, of the auditors.
Q. And what does S T W L stand for?
A. That was I at the time. It means director, and Mr. Robbins, may I just speak for thirty seconds about that?
Q. Well, if it is something that you haven't already said, very well, but don't go back over anything that you have already said.
A. The stamp can only be understood if you know that the DWB were founded without anybody being present, and its tasks were only taxation tasks. It had no employees of its own at the time because nothing was to be done. No other work was to be done except taxation work.
Q. What does St W S T stand for?
A. That was the auditor at the beginning who temporarily handled the tax matters if and when they arose. On the whole, he audited.
Q. It stands for S W and what does the St... What is the whole word there?
A. "Steuer" --"tax".
Q. And what does S T W R stand for?
A. That means law -"Recht".
Q. And "V"?
A. Administration.
Q. And "P"?
A. That did not exist at my time. It must be a now stamp. I'm so sorry. I withdraw that. I think it probably means "auditing." The stamp was changed after my time. "P" stands for "examining"--"Pruefung".
Q. This stamp is on a letter dated 22 January 1943, so it must have been during your time.
A. Then I must have the wrong document. My document says "22/11/1943".
Q. Yes, that is what I said. You were there during that time.
A. No, not in November 1943.
Q. Oh, I'm sorry. My document says January 1943. I think you are right. It is November '43. Is there a mistake on my copy? You say that "P" -- that the "StwP" did not exist on the stamp when you were there?
A. Yes, it was contained there.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Mr. Robbins, the document that we have is dated January 22, 1943, Oranienburg.
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, mine is also. I see that the distribution stamp is 30 November 1943, so very likely the date January 1943 is a mistake.
A (By Mr. Robbins): Can you throw any light on this witness? Do you know whether it is '43 or '44? Did this come during your time? Did you see it?
A. It can not have been at my time, because it says care of SS Oberfuehrer Baier.
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, I think the date should be 1944.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Do you want to change that?
MR ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor, 22 January 1943, on Document No 1290 should be 22 January 1944.
Q. You originally designed this stamp, did you not, witness?
A. Yes, that was my idea. This was at the time when the DWB had no employee of its own, and the stamp was kept.
Q. Ant it was continued in use all through your time with the DWB?
A. Yes, for the following reason, Mr. Robbins: There was no other way than to have the daily mail conference about taxation matters jointly, because the whole thing was much too difficult otherwise.
Q. And the mail that reached you was designated StWL?
A. That was our stamp, and Ansorge probably did it.
Q. And that stands for Staff W Leader, is that right?
A. Yes, it does.
MR. ROBBINS: I have no further questions.
DR. HEIM: With reference to the submission of the document books for defendant Hohberg, I would like to make this statement:
Quite obviously not every Defense Counsel seems to know yet that document books are not being distributed by Defense Counsel, but by the Defense Information Center, without the Defense Counsel having any influence on this. Now, in the case of Hohberg's document books, if they are not available in German as yet, this is not my fault, and I therefore will not stand for any assertion that I am not prepared to part with my document books. As soon as Document II is available in German and English, I shall offer it here.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: We have it now.
DR. HEIM: May it please the Tribunal, I have not yet been given one single copy of the German text. I have been given three copies of the English, of which Copy 1 is in the hands of the Court and Copy 2 is in the hands of the Prosecution.
MR. ROBBINS: I might say that the Prosecution has received the English copy, and I daresay that there wouldn't be any objection from Defense Counsel for going ahead and offering the documents now.
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Now, Dr. Hohberg, Pohl's Defense Counsel talked a lot about the second contract you made with Pohl.
It was asserted in this somewhat excitable interrogation that the fees laid down in the contract represented a general gift on the part of Pohl. Did you receive your fees from Pohl or from the DWB?
A. The fees that I was paid were paid only by the DWB.
Q. Why could it now have been a present?
A. Because we had our contract, and I had a claim thereby.
Q. What was the fee which you would have been paid as an auditor of the DWB.
A. If I had paid the auditors under me according to the fees which were laid down in the law, my official fees would have amounted to about RM 70.000 after all salaries for the auditor had been deducted.
Q. What was the actual fee paid to you?
A. RM 24,000
Q. Therefore, the continued payment of this fee was an obligation which arose from the first contract?
A. Well, up to a point, because the contract also served the purpose to tie me as a consultant to the DWB.
Q. Pohl also reproached you yesterday with the fact that you had swindled the German Reich by RM 10,000,000 and Pohl apparently was talking here about certain practices usual in certain circles.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't believe I was here at the time. I haven't heard Pohl accuse anybody in the last three or four weeks. You mean Dr. Seidl did?
DR. HEIM: May it please the Court, what I said is, "Pohl had you reproached."
THE PRESIDENT: Oh.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Will you please explain to the Court how in the DWB your auditor saved RM 10,000,000 without any crime being thereby involved in this?
A The losses accumulated by the subsidiary companies reached such a dizzy height that if you wanted to adjust it by profits, so much money was needed that about RM 10,000,000 in taxes need not be paid, because profits were used to make up for the losses. That is a perfectly proper thing to do, which is perfectly possible according to German tax laws by making a formal contract to adjust profits and losses. It depends only on the fact that such a contract has been concluded. Even Pohl, who was all-powerful in this concern, was in a position to conclude and rescind such contracts, which is a peculiarity possible under German taxation law. That does not mean tax evasion or embezzlement. It is right and proper. Every large concern is in a position to do it.
Q Then you were also asked yesterday how you knew about the atrocities in concentration camps, since you had not been inside a protective custody camp at any time. Will you give us a few brief comments on that?
A If you are given news of atrocities, then obviously you endeavor to find out the real truth, and for that reason, I invited a few SS officers and put very precise questions to them. These were SS officers who, from their competence, should know about these things. This was something which not everybody could do. I was in a position to do this because I knew them.
Q Then references was made all the time in that examination to your activity as an auditor with the WVHA, in which case the WVHA, of course, stands for Main Economic Office; it does not stand in the German sense "We get everything for Hitler". My question is, were you active for the WVHA or the DWB?
A I was active for the DWB, not for the WVHA.
Q Finally, the so-called speculation Abbe was dug up and you were reproached with having bought privately these Abbe shares. I am not quite clear whether the Court would regard this as a criminal action, or as a war crime, or crime against humanity, but in order to be cautious in the extreme I would like you to give us comments.
THE PRESIDENT: May I make comment instead -- that it isn't in the indictment. So you need no worry about it.
DR. HEIM: Thank you, Your Honor.
About this reproach caused on behalf of defendant Pohl, I shall on the same point, submit an exhorating affidavit by witness Pohl. I have this affidavit already in my possession.
Q Witness, this morning you said when asked by the prosecution that you had heard that there were guards who had people run around with a large stone tied to their backs, according to the tales, was this merely sadism on the part of the camp guards, or could it be extended to the leadership of the SS?
A May it please the court, I may not be able to say anything about that. I know that a friend of mine who told me about these things after he had audited one of the enterprises, and I know we heard only the camp guards do this.
Q Witness, you said that the transports of Jews from Berlin could be seen quite publicly. Thus, the statement of yours confines itself to Berlin only, or do you wish to speak of the whole of the Reich?
A I didn't see other parts of the Reich. I don't think it could have been any different in any other part of Germany.
Q That is enough. Witness on cross-examination you said that you had a member of the National Socialist League of Lawyers NSRB) Were you obliged to a be a member of this affiliated Association?
A No, the membership was voluntary, but without that membership I could not have applied to become an auditor. It was, any way, late when I joined in about 1935 or the beginning of 1936, and I then reported to become an auditor.
Q Witness, you were shown Document 2346, Exhibit 576. This is a brief letter by you concerning a teletype of a special registered letter of the Reich Ministry of Labor. I would like to ask you. At any time when you were a DWB auditor was the distribution of any letters among your tasks?
A No, that was never part of my duties, but it happened quite often not only to me but to Dr. Volk and others, that Pohl would simply button-hole somebody and ask him to so something for him.
Q If I follow you correctly, witness, neither you nor any one else distributed these letters; they were obliged to do that in their official position?
A No, that was a matter simply up to Pohl, and I merely acted a a messenger boy. I did Pohl a favor.
Q I want to talk about the document concerned with the economic inspector, I have not got the document with me -- I know it is Exhibit 529. It is document 1954, and it is part of Document Book 22.
Witness, was it your duty as an auditor of DWB to supervise the enterprises of the economic enterprises?
AAs far as it was part of legal auditing, yes; otherwise, not.
Q How was that expressed, practically?
A That becomes clear from the certificates, that I am the man who has to report to the Ministry of Economic Affairs whether or not the economic conditions of the enterprises are in accordance with legal decrees.
Q Was, in that document, any change intended on the part of Pohl, as far as your present activities were concerned?
A Yes, total change. I would not have acted as a legal auditor, but apart from that I would have had to report privately to Pohl. The latter I did not do.
Q If I have understood you correctly you at no time, when you were the DWB auditor, carried out any economic supervision apart from the one to which you were obliged on the basis of the law, as an auditor.
A That is quite correct.
Q In that letter does Pohl express anything about this activity, and does he insist on a change?
A Yes, he does. Within the scope of my auditing work it had become clear that several cases of auditing were not possible, because the amounts were in disorder. I therefore had to send my auditors there in order to correct and improve the bookkeeping accounting. That is why I fell behind in my auditing work, and Pohl, quite rightly became disinterested.
Q Did this economic supervision which was part of your legal auditing activities--did you do that entirely for the sake of the DWB, or for the sake of the Reich Ministry of Economic Affairs?
A The auditor works for the interest of all concerned -- both for the supervising agency as well as for the owner of the capital and the creditors. The auditor is the man who woks for everybody's security.
Q Dr. Hohberg, now let's talk about the question of the Office Chief. I believe that today we have misunderstood Mr. Robbins. The title and designation "Office Chief", which Pohl gave you without your wishing him to do so, was that rescinded in any form for sometime?
THE PRESIDENT: Was it what?
DR. HEIM: Rescinded.
THE PRESIDENT: He answered that both on direct and cross examination. He said it was never formally rescinded. It was just ignored.
WITNESS: May I just point out here that the question was put differently to me this afternoon. It was not rescinded as far as all the other members of the WVHA were concerned. That did not happen as little as did the official announcement. Pohl took it back as far as my own authority and agency was concerned, in a long letter which explained everything.
Q Now, let us talk about Document 2371, Exhibit 578. The document was used by the Prosecution this afternoon and it deals with the consumer goods for the SS industries. On page 1 of the document there is a letter of yours to Ansorge. Did you, at that time, ask Ansorge to do this, or did you order him to do so?
A We had our joint mail conference, and within the scope of that discussion everybody took care of what was part of his duties. Dr. Wenner would talk about taxation nutters, or I would take part of that, and other dealt with other matters, and so on. The case was that he, Ansorge, advised me on these things. I must make a correction here. It is out of the question that Ansorge was present at that mail conference. I find just now, because I wrote to him. Normally, he-- everybody would collect his own mail, and here apparently he was away on a trip or something.
Q Were you in a position to give Ansorge any orders?
A He was my auditor at the beginning, in which case I was in a position to give him orders, but later on by orders Ansorge did a certain type of work with DWB when DWB did not yet have any employees officially appointed by Pohl. I still had the right to issue order to him. That was the foundation period of DWB. But when he had procurists I had, of course, to resign, and logically. I, so to speak was the godfather of this baby, and then I withdrew.
Q Is this letter of June 1943 to Ansorge, signed by you, on page 1 of the document?
A Yes, the name is there.
Q Does it, under your name, say Amtschief -- Office Chief?
A No.
THE PRESIDENT: We can answer those questions by just looking at the letter.
Q. I shall now have reference to page 9 of this document, in the German. I do not know the English page, unfortunately. This is a letter signed by Ansorge of 17 June 1943. Did you ever see that letter when you were the DWB auditor?
A. I don't remember it. Why Ansorge should have signed this letter, I really don't know. It is possible that he wanted to show off a little. I don't know.
Q. The prosecution has maintained today that you had been Pohl's deputy, Witness -
THE PRESIDENT: Don't waste any time on that, Sir. Don't spend any time on that line of questioning.
DR. HEIM: Thank you.
Q. Dr. Hohberg, I shall now discuss the letter which was submitted by the prosecution, but was not given a number. This is the letter addressed to the printing works.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the one I mean. Don't waste any paper on the printing works. We've heard all we want to about that letter and we attach no importance to it.
DR. HEIM: Very well.
Q. Did you, Volk, and Pohl make any arrangement, however, that Dr. Volk should be Chief of Staff W?
A. I don't remember anything about that.
Q. Please explain to the court briefly when the appointment of a member of the Board of Supervisors is valid.
A. Under German law, such an appointment is subject to consent. I did not consent to the will expressed by Pohl.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, we understood sometime ago that he didn't consent. He told us repeatedly he did not consent to the appointment on the Board of Supervisors.
Next -- next question.
Q. Did you have anything to do with the confiscation of Apollinaris?
A. Not with the confiscation.
Q. You didn't actually administer that property?
A. No.
Q. Do you know whether during the war in Allied Countries enemy property of other nations was confiscated as it was in Germany?
A. Yes, I assume that.
THE PRESIDENT: We'll tell you now that the United States had an Alien Property Custodian so did every other country. We understand that rule of war.
DR. HEIM: Thank you very much. I have no further questions of this witness. Well Dr. Haensel, which would you rather do in the morning, make the motion on the conspiracy count or ask the witness some questions?
DR. HAENSEL: Both, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: You want to do both?
DR. HAENSEL: I will want to see the indictment with my colleague Dr. Heim.
DR. HOFFMAN: I have several questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, think it over overnight, and if you insist, I mean, if you cannot be pursuaded to change your minds, we will give you a little time in the morning, not much, just a little.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until July 18, 1947, at 0930 hours.
Official Transcript of Military Tribunal II, Case VI, in the matter of the United States of America against Oswald Pohl, et al., defendants, sitting at Nurnberg Germany, on 18 July, 1947, 0930, Justice Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal. No. 2.
Military Tribunal No. 2 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will indicate that the Defendant Scheide is again absent from the session of court, because of illness. The trial will proceed in his absence by leave of court.
Is there any cross-examination of this witness?
DR. HOFFMANN (Attorney for the Defendant Scheide): I have been thinking all night, but I am afraid I will have to put a few questions to the witness.
HANS HOHBERG - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. HOFFMANN:
Q Witness, first of all, I would like to ask you, did you have any connections, when you were with the WVHA, with the Defendant Scheide?
A No.
Q As far as you know, you met him here for the first time?
A I don't think I ever talked to him before. I did not know who he was and here I found out he was Scheide.
Q Witness, I am very interested in the questions of secrecy. You said yesterday, if I recall rightly, that, however, you were informed by the SS officers about various conditions, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Let me ask you first, when did this happen?
AAt various times. To sum up, at the beginning of 1943, perhaps.
Q Was Moeckl included among the people who informed you?
A Yes, he was my main informant.