The problem which is being debated now is, simply, that apart from the conviction of war crimes or crimes against humanity there should be a conviction of the conspiracy count, with reference to these crime here. As far as the carrying out of the trials is concerned it means that a conviction or a sentencing could not be derived from a system of law as the Anglo-American law is, which only applies to one single country but rather the legal basis of our proceedings here is international law which can be found in international treaties, regulations, science and decisions of courts.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't want to cut short your interesting discussion, but you will remember that we heard your argument when all of the Tribunals sat together. So what is it you now ask this Tribunal to do, Mr. Haensel?
DE. HAENSEL: I believe I can stop my deliberations, then.
THE PRESIDENT: And what do you now ask this Tribunal to do?
DR. HAENSEL: I would appreciate it if the Tribunal would make a resolution of the following contents, as contained in my application here.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Dr. Seidl, on behalf of the defendant Pohl, has filed a similar motion in writing and the Tribunal will consider Dr. Haensel's motion as made on behalf of all the defendants. Paragraph one of Count One of the Indictment in this case charges that time defendants, acting pursuant to a common design, unlawfully, wilfully, and knowingly, did conspire and agree together to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity as defined in Control Council Law No. 10, Article II. It is charged that the alleged crime was committed between January 1933 and April 1945. It is the ruling of this Tribunal that neither the Charter of the International Military Tribunal that neither the Charter of the International Military Tribunal nor Control Council Law No. 10, had defined conspiracy to commit a war crime or crime against humanity as a separate, substantive crime.
Therefore, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try any defendant upon a charge of such conspiracy considered as a separate, substantive offense. Paragraph One of Count One will, accordingly, be quashed and stricken from the Indictment. This ruling must not be construed as limiting the force or effect of Article II, paragraph 2, od Control Council Law No. 10, or as denying to either prosecution or defense the right to offer evidence of any facts or circumstances tending to prove or disprove the actual commission of war crimes or crimes against humanity, as defined in Control Council Law No. 10.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take just a ten-minute intermission for the relief of the interpreters.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for ten minutes.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. HEIM: Dr. Heim for the defendant Dr. Hohbert. Your Honor, with the permission of the Tribunal, before calling the first witness to the witness stand. I would appreciate if I could say one sentence namely, the following: Document Book No.II for the defendant Dr. Hohberg has not as yet been introduced, and the affidavits contained therein were one part of our dispute. Dr. Seidl very kindly began to introduce these affidavits. I shall introduce Document Book II as soon as the other defense counsel have received it in German also, with the permission of this Tribunal I now would like to call as my first witness, Herr Dr. Wolf.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will bring in the witness to the courtroom.
Dr. Max Wolf, as witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will raise his right hand and repeat after me. "I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing." (The witness repeated the oath) You may be seated.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, will you please give your full name?
A. Max Wolf.
Q. Where and when were you born?
A. On 8 February 1902, in Magdeburg.
Q. What is your address at the moment?
A. Duesseldorf, Kaiserswertherstra. 134.
Q. Will you tell us in a few brief details your professional curriculum vitae, and also your technical training and the position which you occupy at the present.
A. I was trained as a merchant, then I studied law, and when I was 21 years of age I received my law degree.
Then again I worked as a merchant. I also studied technical science, and I went to a technical high school, where I received my technical degree, after having passed my examination. After that I worked on a voluntary basis in an electrical plant, and, also in a research institute, and, even before I had finished my technical studies, I became a lecturer at the first German University for Electric Science in Garmstadt. I worked there for five years in my capacity as a lecturer at the technical high school. After I had become an assistant I went to my present firm, the Economic Consultation Company for German Cities, or as it is called today, the Economic Consultation Institute for the German communities. I established the technical department of that institute and I worked myself up to the position of technical member of the board of directors.
THE PRESIDENT: "Langsam, bitte" Slowly, please.
THE WITNESS: In that capacity I carried out an advisory activity with regard to the German power plants, particularly the electric power plants of the communities. Then almost every year I traveled abroad. I visited fourteen countries altogether-----for my studies in part, and also in order to gain technical experience. I visited the United States, Canada--
DR. HEIM: Witness, please speak a little lower, and make a pause.
THE PRESIDENT: Bring the witness down to around 1933, Dr. Heim. Go on from there.
DR. HEIM: Please be a little more brief about your professional career.
THE WITNESS: I am through now.
DR. HEDI:
Q. Will you describe please just briefly the field of tasks of your enterprise?
A. Our enterprise is an auditing enterprise. It was established for the purpose of auditing the electric power plants, of the German communities, in technical, commercial and economic respect, and to audit them.
The enterprise also carried out other tasks, and particularly as far as the affiliated companies were concerned, the Continental Trusteeship Company and the firm of Van Aubel Reetsch, we also acted as trustees and as auditors for a large part of the German heavy industry.
Q How long have you known Dr. Hohberg?
A I have known Doctor Hohberg approximately since 1934. I can't recall very well the first time I met him. That was due to the organization of our enterprise. It so happens that we worked in the same enterprise for five or eight years before we met.
Q That is sufficient, witness. How was your relationship to Dr. Hohberg since you first met him?
A Our relationship was of a business nature. We had common contacts, particularly when carrying out our activity in the area of East Prussia where Dr. Hohberg was in charge of an affiliated company at Koenigsberg. At the time, we did not discuss political matters too much because there was a negative attitude toward politics in our enterprise and I knew in advance that Dr. Hohberg shared my political ideas.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Heim, please try to keep control of the witness. Ask him particular questions more frequently. If you leave him loose, he goes way off into the field, so direct his attention to particular question, please.
BY DR. HEIM:
Will you please tell us in brief terms what the first contacts between you and Hohberg were at the time, particularly with reference to your political attitude?
AAs I just stated, I met Herr Dr. Hohberg, at least as far as the main part of our relationship was concerned, in the area of East Prussia. At the time we were in a predicament because Gauleiter Koch, had interfered with us.
Q Witness, just a moment.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I think it necessary that the witness tell us about the political attitude of the auditing company, A.G., where he was active, together with Dr. Hohberg, because that fact is also of fundamental importance for the judgment of the political attitude of the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: Don't argue about it. Just go ahead and ask him.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, would you please tell us in brief terms what the political attitude of Dr. Hohberg was at the time, as he explained it to you and as you noticed when you met him and worked together with him?
A I had just begun to say that together we had to carry on a struggle with Koch who was a Gauleiter at the time in Koenigsberg. Gauleiter Erich Koch happened to have established an auditing company of his own, and he had told all the mayors, and agencies in East Prussia to only give assignments to his auditing company and not to do business with us any longer.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Dr. Heim, when was this, please?
Q Witness, what year was that in?
A I couldn't tell you for sure.
Q Could you tell us the approximate date?
A It could be between 1935 and 1938.
Q Witness, you stopped when you were telling us about the common struggle which you and Dr. Hohberg had against Koch.
A Yes, I was telling you about it. There were very few mayors at the time who had the courage to continue dealing with our company because we were a special company. A large number of these mayors complied with the Gauleiter's orders. Under these circumstances, it can be understood that we also spoke about political things of a general nature, and the result was that Dr. Hohberg to the fullest extent, shared our opinion.
Q In the time after that, did any close, friendly contact develop between you and Dr. Hohberg?
A Yes, between Dr. Hohberg and me there was a close, friendly contact, and it developed in the course of the years, particularly after 1942, because in that year I moved to Berlin, and I believe that Dr. Hohberg had an apartment in Berlin around the same period of time. I couldn't tell you for sure, though.
Q Dr. Wolf, we shall come back to a point now very briefly. Will you tell us please very briefly what the attitude of the Deutsche Wirtschaftsberatungs A.G., the German Economic Consultation A.G. was as far as politics were concerned, and how this affected you and Dr. Hohberg?
A Our company was established in 1931. Since most of its employees were people from the Rhineland and since most of the employees were Catholics, it was called the so-called "black auditing company". I would like to explain this by saying that in this particular case "black" stands for the term "Zentrum" the Center Party. In our company we only had very few members of the rightist parties. After the so-called Seizure of Power, that tendency increased. We became a company, we can say today, which absorbed all political persecutions who joined us. We had communists, socialists, pacifists, and members of the Russian trade delegation which had resigned, in our ranks. Hofrat Weiser was one of our members.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What period is he speaking of?
DR. HEIM: The witness is telling us about the time after the Seizure of Power; that is to say, the time after 30 January 1933.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Can't we have it a little more specific? Some year? It is a long time between 1933 and 1945.
DR. HEIM: The witness is only explaining the political attitude and opinion of the auditing company from 1933 onwards, in which Dr. Hohberg was also working.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Please continue, witness.
A In our company we had Jews, and we even employed these Jews after the Seizure of Power. It is easy to say today that we were an anti-Fascist organization. I would still like to support this statement by giving you a few additional facts.
From our auditing company, three people were sentenced to death, or they died a few weeks after they had been incarcerated in prison. A few of the members of our supervisory board and members of the Assistant Board of Directors, the Beirat, were relieved of their positions, thrown into prison or executed. We did everything we could to help and save our political persecutes. I personally helped some of the members of our company who were Jews to emigrate. Of the Jewish members of the company, none died, and they are all abroad.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q That is sufficient as far as this point is concerned. Do you know when Dr. Hohberg discontinued his activity with that company, and can you tell us the reason why he did so?
A Dr. Hohberg probably stopped working for us in 1940.
THE PRESIDENT: The next question.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Do you know the reason why Dr. Hohberg ceased his activity with the German auditing company, the Deutsche "Wirtschaftsberatung?
A Yes. He wanted to join an organization which was closer to the SS. He told me that he would go there.
Q Did Dr. Hohberg tell you what his activity was going to be there?
A Dr. Hohberg told me that he was going to work there as a free private auditor.
Q Do you know if at the time the SS made a proposal to him to carry out his activities as an auditor?
A Yes, I do know that, because Dr. Hohberg immediately after the beginning of the war went from Koenigsberg to Vienna, where I was working together with my engineers, and a few weeks after that I heard that he went and applied for leave, amongst my colleagues of the Board of Directors, the Vorstand, in order to carry out a special mission for the SS organization. Please excuse me if I use the term "an SS organization". I really don't know what the name of the organization was at the time.
Q You told us before in a few brief terms that Dr. Hohberg was opposed to the National Socialist regime. Can you tell us whether Dr. Hohberg, when he took that job as an auditor, liked that job very much, and whether he liked his assignment as such?
A When he took over this assignment to do some auditing work, he really didn't like it in any way. According to my opinion he was actually acting under a certain circumstance which could indicate duress, the reason being that he thought that it was a smaller evil to take over this auditing work rather than to join the Wehrmacht, which in East Court No. II, Case No. 4.Prussia had treated him in a very bad manner.
Speaking of this assignment, he told me that this task also interested him very much, but generally speaking he was not too agreeable to that task due to the fact that he came from a Catholic family and he was opposed to the SS organization.
Q Do you know if there were financial motives which moved Dr. Hohberg to take over that auditing work?
AAt the time we discussed that question in our Vorstand, and again and again I was of the opinion, and I am still of the explicit opinion, that no financial reasons played a part when Dr. Hohberg took that job. I believe there were three motives which I would like to stress. First of all he was interested in his job, then he had the wish to become more independent, and finally, thirdly, he had the possibility here to be able to dodge the draft. I would like to add here that Herr Dr. Hohberg, according to my belief, was an anti-militarist. I would not like to say that he was a deserter but rather he was fundamentally opposed to anything that was military.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Dr. Heim, before we get too far away from the statement made by the witness, perhaps I took it down incorrectly, and I want to be certain, I understood him to say that Hohberg ceased working with his, the witness's organization, because he, Hohberg, wanted to join an organization closer to the SS. Am I correct in what I have indicated in my notes?
THE WITNESS: No.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: That is the way the translation came through.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: That is the way I got it, and I wanted to be certain.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Witness, I believe there was a misunderstanding here. Witness, this misunderstanding could occur due to your statement because you were speaking of the interests on the part of Herr Dr. Hohberg. You were speaking about his interest as an auditor with some SS organization. Now, will you please explain to us briefly what you meant by saying "interests" or to be interested in an SS organization Court No. II, Case No. 4.when you gave your testimony here?
A He was interested in working with an organization, to work in a large organization, to have a larger field of task. However, the Judge just asked me if I spoke of an organization which was closer. That is a misunderstanding. I stated that it was an organization which was close to the SS.
THE INTERPRETER: That is the literal translation, your Honor.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Witness-
JUDGE MUSMANNO: C-l-o-s-e-d, closed?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes, he means an organization which was close, c-l-o-s-e, to the SS.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Which was near, in other words?
THE WITNESS: That is correct, it was near to the SS. It was close to the SS.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Witness, do you wish to say by that that Dr. Hohberg maintained a sympathetic attitude toward this organization which was close to the SS?
A No, he was simply interested in the task as such. I stated before that he was fundamentally opposed to the SS. I would also like to state that I asked him, "Tell me, Herr Hohberg, how can you go and work with them?" And he told me, "One of the terms will be that I will not have to join the SS; nor will I have to join the Party; nor will I have to resign from the church."
Q Did Dr. Hohberg at the time tell you what kind of a contract he signed with that organization?
A Dr. Hohberg told me that he had a contract; he had signed a contract as a free auditor.
Q On the basis of your knowledge of the facts, was he independent, or was he just an employee there?
A Dr. Hohberg was independent and not an employee on the basis of that contract as a free auditor.
Q According to the regulations and the law, do you think that Hohberg could have been employed anywhere else as an auditor?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A That is absolutely impossible. An auditor can either be independent or he can be employed in an auditing company, and he can only be a Prokurist or a member of the Vorstand. Dr. Hohberg, however, was, and I know that for sure, a member of the Institute of Auditors, and the Institute of Auditors was a top organization of the auditors, to which only those people could belong who were auditors, and at that particular moment when an auditor started an activity or some sort of a job with a private industry, he had to resign from that organization.
Q Therefore, based on your knowledge of the facts, are you in a position to describe to this Tribunal whether Dr. Hohberg would have lost his qualifications as an auditor if he had become an office chief in the WVHA?
A Counsel, I would like to ask you what the term "office chief" stands for. May I tell you the reason for asking that question? If that was a military office, or a military organization, then he could have become a member of a military organization, if he had to carry out a military function. If this is a commercial term then Dr. Hohberg could no longer be a member of the Institute of German Auditors.
Q Witness, I can tell you that Dr. Hohberg could not be an office chief if that term means a military organization because Dr. Hohberg was never a soldier.
MR. ROBBINS: Defense counsel telling the witness what Hohberg could be this is a very plain attempt to lead the witness. The witness has already said that he could be an office chief of a military organization and still retain his membership.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Just a minute.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I would like to object to the objection of the Prosecution and say the following: I simply informed the witness of the fact that Dr. Hohberg, prior to the 30th of June, 1943, was not a soldier so that it could not have been a military function, because a military function can only be carried out by a person who is a soldier.
MR. BOBBINS: Now Defense Counsel is going right ahead and doing the same thing that he was doing before. I think this is an outlandish Court No. II, Case No. 4.case of leading the witness, and telling the witness what to say.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course the difficulty is the witness asked to be led. He asked what the term "office chief" in counsel's question meant, and counsel is trying to tell him what he meant by that form as used in his question. I think what you want to know, Dr. Heim, is whether or not Hohberg could have served on the Board of Directors or the Board of Supervisors of one of the DWB industries and still remain an auditor, is that what you mean?
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, that is the way the question should be formulated.
Q (By Dr. Heim) I simply wanted to ask, do you think it possible that the Defendant Hohberg, as long as he was an auditor, could be a business manager, a Prokurist, a person with the authorization to handle the business in such an enterprise or such a company which he had to audit, or then could he carry out any other commercial function there, even if that commercial function was used somehow differently, by some other company?
A No, that is absolutely impossible.
MP. ROBBINS: That wasn't the question put to the witness, it was whether he could have been an office chief, and the witness gave a very illuminating answer, and it is exactly what the Prosecution has contended all along, that he could have been an office chief and still retain his membership.
DR. HEIM: Mr. President, the allegation made by Mr. Robbins does not quite correspond to the facts. The witness asked me for an illuminating explanation concerning the fact and concerning the term "chief of office". He asked me if that was a military or a commercial term, apparently because that name hadn't become known to him in his practice. Therefore, I really do not see gust how far the objection on the part of the Prosecution is justified.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
MR. ROBBINS: Well, let's let the witness tell us what he knows about the possibilities of retaining his membership without any leading. That is all the Prosecution is asking.
THE PRESIDENT: Suppose we regard this as the question: What could Hohberg have done without forfeiting his membership in the Auditors' Institute?
BY DR. HEIM (Counsel for Defendant Hohberg):
Q Witness, you just heard the question put to you by the Tribunal. I would appreciate it if you would answer the question for me.
A Dr. Hohberg could carry out every consulting activity which an auditor can conduct. However, I would like to stress this point because I didn't express myself clearly. He cannot carry out any commercial activity according to law in one of the enterprises where he is auditing as a broker, as a business manager, or as a member of the supervisory board. However, if you ask me if he could have been an office chief, then, in this particular case, you are asking me too much. That was the reason why I asked you a question by saying what the term "Office Chief" meant. Of course, an auditor has the right to work in a military organization aside from what he is doing. That was the reason why I asked you what you meant by "Office Chief." Is that a commercial term, or is that a military term?
Q Witness, can a person who is not a soldier carry out a military function, apart from his activity as an auditor?
A Excuse me again. I didn't get that.
Q Now, a man who is not a soldier, apart from his economic auditing work, can he do that?
A No, he cannot.
Q If I understood you correctly, then the following holds true. Dr. Hohberg, while carrying out his activity as an auditor, could not carry out a commercial function, according to the law, of any kind; nor could he, since he was not a soldier, carry out any function in a military organization.
Did I understand you correctly?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A Yes.
Q Do you know whether Dr. Hohberg was a member of the Institute of Auditors?
A Yes, he was.
Q You stated before that Dr. Hohberg, in his activity as an auditor, had to comply with certain regulations; namely, that he did not have the right to be an auditor and to carry out certain functions at the same time.
Can you tell us, based on your knowledge of the facts, what department issued those regulations?
A I must tell you that I couldn't answer that for sure; I am not very precise on it. I am a member of the supervisory board of an auditing company, but personally I am not an auditor. As far as I know, however, those regulations were issued by the Institute of Auditors. This is the professional organization of the auditors, and as such, it imposes certain laws and regulations.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Let me get this straight. Let me ask this one question. Witness, if I understand your testimony correctly, you have stated the following, in substance. While Germany was at war between 1939 and 1945, if Dr. Hohberg, the defendant, had been called in to a military organization and made chief of an office for the purpose of carrying on war industries, or war industries vital to the war effort, in a managerial capacity, that he would have forfeited his membership in the Auditing Institute? Is that correct?
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, would you please answer that question on the part of the Tribunal.
A I didn't quite understand that question because the translation was not very good; but I believe that I can answer it correctly.
I believe that Your Honor asked me whether Dr. Hohberg, if he remained a member of the Auditing Institute, would have been able to carry on work in a war industry in a managerial capacity. Is that correct?
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Yes, that is correct.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A No, he couldn't have done that.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, I would still like to speak about this subject. Apparently this problem has not been quite clarified yet. Is this correct: Did Dr. Hohberg lose his qualifications as an auditor if, at the same time, he worked in any other enterprise in a managerial capacity--not in his capacity as an auditor, but rather supervised and managed the enterprise? Is that correct?
A I don't understand your question.
Q Dr. Hohberg was an auditor?
A Yes.
Q Now, if Dr. Hohberg had managed an economic enterprise, managed or supervised or directed it, do you think that he could have been able to carry on his activity as an auditor?
A Of course, he could have a private practice of his own--and he did have one.
Q Witness, you didn't understand me correctly. I don't mean that Dr. Hohberg was auditing another enterprise. Rather, I mean if he was a member of a board of supervisors or a business manager, if he was active there in one of the enterprises, could he still carry on his activity as an auditor?
A No, he couldn't have done that.
Q Can you tell us if an auditor has the right to issue orders or give advice in those enterprises where he is doing auditing work?
A Well, you cannot very well make a detour around such an authority to give orders. It appears quite often because if an auditor received a special assignment, the man who gave him the auditing assignment, either the manager or a member of the board of supervisors, would ask him to act as liaison, so that he wouldn't have to go and bother people who were members of the board of supervisors or the management. He had certain rights, a certain authority. For instance, when he needed an eraser or a pencil, or when he needed statistics, he didn't have to go to the supervisor, and ask him about it.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q But, by that, the independence of an auditor is not at all touched?
A No.
Q Did Dr. Hohberg, with respect to his former company, use that company in order to clear up economic matters--and by that I mean during that time when he worked as an auditor for the DWB?
A Dr. Hohberg consulted us in two cases. The first case was that of the Bohemia Porcelain Works, and on the second occasion he asked us to compile a report on the auditing work of the Apollinaris. I couldn't tell you when the DWB was established, and I can't tell you with certainty whether the first assignment with the Bohemia was given to him before the DWB existed.
Q Who issued the order in these two cases?
AA certain Herr Moeckl issued that assignment. I don't remember his rank anymore.
At the time I carried out negotiations myself with Herr Moeckl. In the case where the Apollinaris is concerned, I don't know whether Moeckl also gave the orders. The handling of the Apollinaris case was given to my colleague Winkelmann, who was a member of the board of supervisors.
Q With respect to those two orders, was Dr. Hohberg the one who gave the orders?
A No; in those two cases Dr. Hohberg did not appear at all. He was extremely correct in that respect, and he was correct in other smaller matters also. I am thinking of one occasion where I had to have an entry permit for the Protectorate in connection with the Bohemia case, and I asked him if he could possibly be of help to me; but he did not want to sign for that and said that an organization of the DWB, or a department of the DWB, had to do that because he did not have the authority.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess until one forty-five.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1345.
(A recess was taken until 1345 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, July 18, 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. MAX WOLF -- Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION -- Continued BY DR. HEIM: (Attorney for the Defendant Hohberg):
Q. Witness, before lunch we stopped when we were discussing the two orders which your firm received. What did the Bohemia assignment deal with and when was it given?
A. The Bohemia assignment was given to me by Herr Moeckl, as I said before lunch. I did not receive the assignment there Unter den Eichen, where the DWB was located, but in some building near the Anhalt Station. That was the only indication for me to find out when the first order was given. The second order was given, as far as I remember, when I was under Den Eichen. The first order was concerned with a general technical certificate to the effect of whether or not the Bohemia was technically sound. The second order was concerned with making propositions as to how one could have this factory, which was producing luxury china, produce consumption china.
Q. Did you on that occasion get to know the concerns of the DWB?
A. No, I did not write the certificate myself, but I had it done by a so-called free assistant, Herr Winnrich of Erfurt. I didn't see anything of that enterprise; except the report, because as it is said in the auditing world, I merely analyzed the enterprises, as we called it.
Q. Were any enterprises employing inmate labor audited by your auditors?
A Our institution never audited such enterprises, but I know, for instance, that the Mechanical Works in Neubrandenbrug -- that was a Luftwaffe enterprise which employed inmates -- was audited by auditors, if I recall rightly, of the German Revisional and Trusteeship Company, which is the official reviewing institute of the German Reich.
Q What was the impression you gained of the enterprises which your firm audited?
THE PRESIDENT: DR. Heim, a question like that just leads to an endless answer, and I don't think we are interested in what kind of an impression he gained. What is the real point that you want to know?
DR. HEIM: What I wanted to know was how these enterprises of the DBW looked which were audited by that firm, particularly, how the commercial side, the accounting and so forth, was dealt with.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that's a better question. If you want to ask how was the accounting handled, that's a narrow, definite question. Answer that question, please.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Witness, how was the accounting handled and the management, and the bookkeeping, and financial contact, in the enterprises which you audited?
AAs far as the Bohemia was concerned, we had received only a technical assignment and later on, an organizational assignment. My assistant, Dr. Winnrich, reported to me that this was one of the best porcelain factories which he had ever come across. That enterprise, for instance--I recall particularly well--had manufactured the porcelain for the coronation in Egypt.
THE PRESIDENT: That doesn't interest us at all.
Q (By Dr. Heim) Witness, please answer my question. Can you tell us how the commercial management of this enterprise was or are you unable to answer that question?
A No, I am afraid I am unable to answer that question.