A. According to my opinion, nobody wanted to camouflage anything in there. In any case this would not have been very successful because it was generally known that those were enterprises which were quite close to the SS. According to my opinion, it was only due to the fact, that these gentlemen became active as bodies of the company, and not as members of the authority.
Q. Herr Dr. Karoli, according to your opinion, you had, therefore, two entirely different organizations which were separated from each other as to their responsibilities which were only connected by a double activity of two persons. Do you wish to tell me by that that Amtsgruppe W, as such, did not belong to the WVHA but rather had been permitted to enter the WVHA for reasons which you could possibly state?
A. Well, Amtsgruppe W could exist as such but it would have been indubitably more correct and in compliance with the way other enterprises did it in Germany, if a more clear-cut personal difference would have been carried out as far as authority and organizational questions were concerned, and if the parties, as such, of Amtsgruppe W would have been smaller. According to my opinion, it was not necessary to have the business managers of the company become chiefs of offices in the authority.
Q. When then, according to your opinion, was it that the economic enterprises were incorporated into the WVHA, and why was it that the chiefs of offices were appointed business managers?
A. According to my opinion, Herr Pohl had ordered that because he over-estimated the functions of the authority. He himself was a man who had worked for the civil service for quite a while and, apart from that, he was the chief of a Main Office in the WVHA. However, he also wanted to become the chief of the DWB and what he claimed for himself he also thought correct for all the other offices.
Apart from that, I believe that he expected to cronomize personal by this. Particularly, he was in a position to be able to set leading personalities through the military organizations. He made it easy for himself in a personal sense.
In any case, I looked upon the whole thing as a temporary measure which was due to wartime conditions, the reason being that I am of the opinion that in peacetime the remaining Reich authorities, for instance, the Reich Finance Ministry, and the Court of Audits, would not comply with such a regulating of their activities.
Q. According to your explanation so far we have to start from the point that the chiefs of the offices W had two hearts; one of them was a commercial one and the other one was one of authority; is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct. They had two different responsibilities. That is the responsibility according to law as bodies in the companies, and then the responsibility which resulted from their membership in the authority. I would like to stress the point that the legal responsibility as bodies was the one that appeared most.
Q. Did the situation also apply to the defendant Baier?
A. No, it didn't. Herr Baier was merely a member of the authority that is, chief of Staff W. He had no commercial functions according to law. But prior to the end of the war, I believe in March, 1945, he was promoted to a procurist in the DWB, the German Economic Enterprises, because this was the only solution which was left after Herr Dr. Volk had resigned. But Herr Baier was never active as a procurist because at the time all the business activity had almost ceased a short while after the capitulation.
Q. Witness, if we speak about the activities of Staff W in detail, I would appreciate it if you would first answer a preliminary question on my part. Even though ranks are not necessary for an activity. I would appreciate it if you would clear up this question for me. Did Herr Baier have the official title Chief of Office?
A. His title was Chief W. I do not believe that he was an Amtschief compared to the other Amtschiefs, but it is not up to me to decide.
THE PRESIDENT: What does Chief W mean? You asked him if he was the head of a W office.
DR. FRITSCH (Counsel for defendant Baier): Yes. Witness will you please explain to the Tribunal and answer the question what Chief W stood for.
WITNESS: Herr Baier first of all had the title Chief of Staff W. That title thereupon was changed to Chief W. I don't know what the reasons were for that. As Chief, W, Herr Baier was the chief of Staff W.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. Witness, it seems important to me to clear up this expression, this term, "Chief". This is a term which is not quite common in the commercial code.
A. No; in the commercial code there is no such term.
Q. Is it a military term?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, then I would like to speak about the outside position of Herr Baier and about his actual activity in that staff. First of all, was Baier a representative of Pohl's?
A. No. Herr Baier was not the representative of Pohl. Pohl's deputy as chief of the Main Office, was Herr Georg Loerner, and Herr Loerner was also Pohl's deputy in his activity as chief of Amtsgruppe W.
Q. Was the defendant Baier the superior of other Amtschiefs, that is to say, did he have the right to give them orders in connection with their work, special orders?
A. No; Herr Baier was not the chief of the remaining Amtschiefs. He was not their superior, and he personally could not possibly give them any official orders unless, in individual cases, of course, or in special orders unless, in individual cases, of course, or in special cases, he had received the special permission from Pohl to do so. But, generally speaking, he could not do that.
Q. Witness, I would now like to show you, from Document Book No. 14, Document 854, Exhibit No, 401, page 82 of the German and 92 of the English book.
This is a document which is entitled "Business Order of the SS-WVHA for the Economic Enterprises.
THE PRESIDENT: Document Book 14?
THE WITNESS: Document No. 854.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. Did you take a look at that document, witness?
A. I know this document from before.
Q. Did you personally participate in those business regulations?
A. Yes, upon Herr Baier's wish, I helped him in a consulting capacity, in writing up this business regulation.
Q. Did Herr Baier write up this business regulation?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell me how this business regulation came about?
A. Herr Baier, in the autumn of 1944, told me to come and see him and he showed me a business regulation which was already signed by Pohl. He told me that he had received it by Herr Volk without having seen it before, and without having signed it for distribution to the respective and competent authorities and agencies. Herr Baier was very much bothered by the contents of that business regulation. He was shocked. Chief W, of Staff W, was only dealt within a few sentences, and Herr Baier said about it, that, according to the contents of that business regulation, he was of no importance whatsoever in the Amtsgruppe, and that he, now probably, would not be able to carry out a central administration from Staff W in economic, balance, and financial matters.
Herr Baier thereupon askied me to look throught the business regulation with a critical eye and to tell him or consult with him on whether and in what sense suggestions for changes might be made. We then sat together, Herr Baier and Dr. Hoepfner, who was a comrade of his, and we suggested a change of the business regulation. Herr Baier then submitted that business regulation to Herr Pohl, according to my knowledge, and the result of this was this new business regulation. Herr Baier's wish, the largest part, at least, was complied with there.
Q In this business regulation, Witness, I believe there is contained in paragraph 8 the sentence, the sense of which is that Herr Baier is the economic consultant or the auditor of the Main Office Chief?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that Herr Baier?
A. Yes, it was to be Chief W, but Herr Baier was not the man, but that is due to other reasons.
Q. Witness, before I speak about this business regulation in detail, I would like to ask you a question. When was it that this business regulation became effective, and did it result in anything?
A. According to my knowledge, this business regulation became effective with the beginning of 1945. Actually, it only confirmed the conditions which already existed in the WVHA, namely, the tasks within Amtsgruppe W were actually fixed and compiled into one report in the form of a business regulation.
Q. It was not put into a practical execution, was it?
A. Yes, I believe it was. I know nothing to the contrary.
Q. On the 1st of January, 1945, it became effective, yes?
A. Yes, At that time, of course, it was difficult to work according to a certain plan or schedule. The communications were already pretty bad at the time and the various enterprises in the offices were not located in the WVHA building, but rather outside of the WVHA building--most of the time, outside of Berlin.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, I have only one more question belonging to this subject. Then we can conclude it.
Q. Witness, please take a look at Article 9 of that business regulation. They are speaking here of the most important mail, that is to say, the mail to the ministries, to the highest party agencyies, etc., etc.. The impression must be created undoubtedly that the most intricate and difficult problems went through Herr Baier's hands, that is to say, he knew of all the problems and he had to gain knowledge about all of them, is that the way it was, or was there any such mail as I just read to you?
A. No, at the moment, I don't quite know what this point was supposed to refer to. According to my opinion, for the most part, this was nothing but a formality, and it dealt only with taxation matters and similar matters.
Q. Who was it that addressed the mail to the ministries and the highest party authorities?
A. Undoubtedly, Pohl himself.
Q. So that a practical execution of this business regulation couldn't have taken place, could it?
A. Well, the Chief of Office had hardly anything to do with these agencies.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honors, if I may make a suggestion to interpolate a recess now-
THE PRESIDENT: You propose also to ask him about Article 10, the next paragraph? I mean, after the recess will you ask him some questions about that?
DR. FRITSCH: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The court will be in recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for 15 minutes.
( A recess was taken ).
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. Witness, you have the exhibit which we were discussing before recess, that is, the business instructions which were issued do you still have them before you now?
A. Yes.
Q. Please take a look at Article 10 of these business instructions. Please tell us in very brief sentence first of all what conclusion can be drawn from this with regard to the activity of Staff-W?
A. The first two lines are missing in my copy. The first two lines of Article 10 are missing.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, I have compared a photostatic copy, and also in the photostatic copy here, and part of Article 10 is missing. I, therefore, see that a the beginning is also missing that part in the English translation.
THE PRESIDENT: The first line in the English translation in Article 10 reads: "The Chief-W has under his authority the Staff-W, which is at his disposal--" Is there something ahead of that, or before that?
DR. FRITSCH: Yes. At the beginning we have an incomplete sentence, which begins with the following words: "Leadership-His leadership and supervisory task--" and at the beginning of the sentence begins--His disposal of execution for leadership and supervisory task--" and in the photostatic copy which I received this sentence is stated in exactly the same way, so, therefore, it does not make any sense. However, it is not very important in this case.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
THE WITNESS: In paragraph 10 the tasks are listed of Staff-W, and its competence.
Staff-W was competent in tax affairs, in legal and notary affairs, and in examinations.
Q. Witness, of course we do not want to discuss and read this paragraph here, as it is in the hands of the Tribunal also. However, I would like you to explain the most important features of this order to us?
A. I also want to say that all the tasks which Staff-W had are laid down in this order, and I'll explain here in detail. That is, the work of the three departments which were contained within Staff-W, which was subordinated to Chief-W.
Q. Witness, does it become evident from the explanations with regard to Points A, B and C that this shows anything in particular? Does it show anything which you have told us about as yet so far?
A. Up to now I have not given any details at all as yet. I have not said anything as about the task of Staff-W in detail.
Q. Will you please do it now?
THE PRESIDENT: This document is perfectly clear as to the divisions of Staff-W, taxes, legal department, and examinations, and those are explained under A, B, and C.
DR. FRITSCH: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that is sufficient.
DR. FRITSCH: I thought that the Tribunal would like to hear some details about these. According to the statement which was made before the recess, that is shy we discussed this later on, Your Honor. I've obviously misunderstood Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: No. Upon reading all of it I find that it does not need explanation.
DR. FRITSCH: Very well, Your Honor.
Q. I would like to ask the witness one question in this connection, Your Honor, and that is with regards to point C. Here the department for supervision of enterprises and increased efficiency is mentioned. This gives rise to the conclusion as if we are here dealing with production. And, therefore, I would like to let the witness explain the term "department for supervision of enterprises and increased efficiency." Witness, will you please explain it to us?
A. In the revision department* we only had a reviewing agency which carried out the customary supervision which is known in our profession and which has to be carried out according to certain principles, in carrying out the auditing system after the year was over. All other tasks, in particular things which had to do with production or technical questions, were exempted from this. The term, which I personally never liked, I believe was discovered by Baier and it was included here in this instruction. Perhaps this was done in order to express the fact that this auditing department was in his opinion particularly important.
Q. Witness, please give me a very short answer to my question. When we have the term here "increased efficiency and supervision of enterprise" do we have any auditing technical tasks or were they tasks which concerned the production?
A. Only the first thing which you have mentioned.
Q. Witness, before the recess you have stated that this order practically did not have any effect any more because it became effective at a period of time when in Germany no coordinated work took place any more. That was early in the year 1945. In my opinion it does not make any difference here. We are not interested in what the aims were but we are interested in what work was actually carried out by Staff W. I, therefore, ask you to answer the question.
THE PRESIDENT: I have just been informed that there is some break down defect in the recording. We will have to suspend until that is corrected-- just a few minutes.
It appears that all of the workmen who can fix the sound machine have gone to lunch. I would suggest that it might be a good idea for us to do the same thing. We will convene, however at 1:30 O'clock instead of 1:45. At half past one we will return.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
(The Tribunal reconvened at 1330 hours.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. HERMANN KAROLI -- Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION -- Continued BY DR. FRITSCH (Counsel for defendant Baier):
Q. Witness, we left the business instructions we were talking about this morning, and toward the end of your statement you said that the business instruction was a report in writing of the conditions which existed at the time. Did I understand you correctly, witness?
A. Yes, of course, but there is one limitation to the whole thing in that only questions concerning the balance, taxation matters, and legal matters were discussed and were explicitly stated there. A few additional points of view arose in reference to the other questions. Don't forget that business instruction was nothing but a work schedule, and, like any other schedule, those business instructions stated a situation, a condition, which should be reached. In reality, that condition was nothing but an ideal one, because all those difficulties in 1945 existed an account of the war. It was impossible actually to comply with that business instruction.
Q. Therefore, the situation concerning the activities and tasks between the middle 1943 and 1945 should be discussed. Would you tell me now what the actual activity of Herr Baier was?
A. Herr Baier was the man in charge of Staff W. In Staff W you had three departments, which can be seen in this business instruction, and the legal department, to be exact, consisted of 25 people, of which half were civilian employees and female personnel.
In the legal department, especially commercial matters concerning companies were dealt with. For instance, conferences of notary publics and members of a company, and the conference were prepared there. Commercial register entries were made, and also similar tasks. Apart from that, that department consisted of two, or for a certain period of time of three, collaborators, of whom the two main ones, Dr. Volk and Dr. Hoffman, were very hard to find in their offices because they also had to deal with additional tasks. Herr Dr. Volk was personal consultant to Herr Pohl, and as such he had to take care of secretarial matters and private work for him.
Q. If I may interrupt you, the activity of all these gentlemen and their additional activities are not too interesting. What did the taxation department have to do?
A. The taxation department had to deal with the taxation matters in the companies and to take care of them. Most of the companies in a taxation sense were closely connected with each other in a corporation manner, so that the taxation matters were to be cleared centrally. Apart from that, the taxation department also had the bookkeeping department of the DWB within it. The man in charge of the taxation department was Dr. Wenner, who was the Prokurist of the DWB and at the same time competent for the bookkeeping tasks. The bookkeeping personnel, for the greater part, consisted of civilian employees.
Q. And the Auditing Department?
A. The Department of Audits as an internal auditing institution, that is, without an official influence towards the outside, had to control the annual balances of the individual companies, and also had to look through the accounting system of the companies with a critical eye. If there were discrepancies they were to be brought to the attention of the people there. The main task of that department was to inform the people in that company concerning the bookkeeping, the balance, etc.
Q. And what was Herr Baier within the frame of what you just told us?
A. Herr Baier was the man in charge of that agency. He saw to it, for instance, that those tasks were taken care of in an orderly and punctual manner in all three departments. He distributed the incoming mail, and he supervised the work, as such. As far as things were important, they were signed by him.
Q. I understand you correctly, don't I, witness, that all those things which you stated about Herr Baier only refer to Staff W, and not to Amtsgruppe W?
A. Of course, it only referred to Staff W. As far as the execution and distribution of work was concerned, supervision of the work, of Amtsgruppe W, Herr Baier was not competent. It was not possible from a technical point of view because the W offices were not located in the WVHA building, and were for the larger part, outside of Berlin. Therefore, they had their own agencies.
Q. Was it the task of Herr Baier, as Chief W, to supervise the activities of the chiefs of offices?
A. Yes. However, only in questions dealing with balances, taxation matters, and other legal questions as contained in this business.
Q. Those Amtschiefs, were they under the disciplinary power, or authority, of Baier?
A. No.
Q. Did the defendant Baier have anything to do with other problems? By that I mean for instance, purchase, sales, general produc tion programs, labor assignment questions, etc, etc?
Did he have anything to do with all those things?
A. No. All those tasks were all excepted. Herr Baier was not competent for them. He had nothing to do with managerial and technical questions.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. Who did the defendant Baier succeed as Chief of Staff W?
A. Herr Dr. Hohberg.
Q. And I believe you testified that the defendant Baier went in as Chief of Staff W in 1943; in the fall of the year, November?
A. No; I was the one who went there in November. I said that Herr Baier had been there for two or three months prior to the time that I arrived.
Q. I understood you. He went in the summer, and you went in November.
A. Yes; that is correct. He arrived in the summer, before I did.
Q. How did you know that Dr. Hohberg was Chief of Staff W prior to the defendant Baier if you did not go there until November?
A. I saw that from various papers we had there, from conversations I had in Staff W.
Q. From documents and papers you saw in the office, and conversations you had with people who were working there you came to the conclusion that he was Chief of Staff W prior to Baier?
A. Yes, quite so.
DR. FRITSCH (Counsel for defendant Baier): Your Honor, I would appreciate it if you would permit me to ask that question at a later date and discuss it more explicitly. I could ask it right now if you want me to, but I would have a few more questions to ask him which fit much better in the framework of the whole thing.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q. Witness, I would like to talk about a problem now which is in one of the document books introduced by the Prosecution:
Slave Labor. Do you know anything about it?
Let me give you more details about it. The inmates who, on the basis of some sort of measures which I do not have to mention here explicitly, were sent to a concentration camp and this is particularly during the war--had to carry out productive work, and they were also transferred to individual armament factories for work.
What can you tell us about those things from your own knowledge? What can you tell us about this problem?
A. As far as concentration camp questions are concerned, I can't tell you anything at all because I didn't have anything to do with them. All I know is that a few W enterprises employed concentration camp inmates as labor.
Q. Was that only in the W enterprises, or was it also in the other German armament industries?
A. That was no peculiarity on the part of the W enterprises. It is known that in Germany, particularly during the last few years of the war, the conditions on the labor market were rather bad, and that enterprises of the industry were dependent on the so-called foreign labor, and also on the inmates, prisoners; and had to use them in as large an extent as possible in order to be able to fulfil their tasks. This also applied to other German enterprises, not only to the W enterprises.
Q. When you carried out your auditing work together with Herr Baier-- didn't you ever visit factories of the W enterprises. If this is the case, please tell me a few names of such factories.
A. Personally, I didn't go too much to W enterprises because that was the task of auditors who were on the spot and had to carry out their auditions on the spot, whereas I had to direct the operations from the central office; from my desk, so to speak.
In spite of that I went to a few factories. I was in the German Experimental Institute for Food together with Herr Baier, and in his company I also went to see Mummenthey in Oranienburg; and then together with Mummenthey and Baier I was in the Flossenburg concentration camp; then in Berlstedt near Weimar, then in Bohemia near Karlsbad, and others.
Q. Were inmates employed in all those plants?
A. No, in the experimental station, for instance, according to my knowledge, I don't believe they had any.
Q. Did that activity as you just stated that you directed from your desk--does that apply to Herr Baier also?
A. Yes, at least in the same extent as it applied to me.
Q. Did you or Herr Baier gain any knowledge from the books or the reports on the auditing concerning the labor assignment of inmates-and if so, what?
A. I never did look at any such documents, nor did Herr Baier, according to my knowledge. I am quite sure that he never did see anything of the kind.
Q. Excuse me, Witness, wasn't that part of your tasks? Wasn't it part of yours and Herr Baier's tasks to look into those things?
A. No, not at all. Vie had nothing to do with it.
Q. Didn't you see any statistics at any time concerning the employment of inmates and similar things?
A. Personally, I never did see any such statistics, but such statistics were gathered from auditors, in part. That is, they were applied for by the business management of the enterprises, and they were included in the auditing reports in order to generally illustrate the extent of the enterprise. But I never did see any such statistics myself, nor did Herr Baier, I don't believe.
Q. How about the questions of calculations? I am sure that, in the auditing department, you dealt sometimes with general questions of costs and similar things. Didn't the question of cost or of the scale wages of the inmate play any part in there--of the workers, that is. Or wasn't that part of the field of tasks of the Auditing Department?
A. The Auditing Department, as such, only had to figure out the rentability of the companies as a whole. The department did not have to deal with any calculations. Of course, the wage scales for inmate labor were contained in a book, and they were compiled there and they were included in the balance. And that figure appeared in the balances as expenses for wages. But it was not our task to examine the calculations and the wages.
Q. Herr Dr. Karoli, you saw inmates while working?
A. Yes.
Q. I have used the term "Slave Labor" before here in Court. Did you have the impression that was slave labor, that was the explicit use of slave labor and of human beings?
A No, I never did gain the impression that, as far as the labor of the inmates was concerned in the W-Enterprises, it could be considered slave labor. I knew and I have seen inmates at work who were being employed in W-Enterprises. There was nothing unusual in that, because it applies to the whole world that prisoners are used for work so that the labor is not there without any use. And the fact that these inmates were in concentration camps had to be considered as given, first of all, because nothing could be done about it, and, secondly, because the public opinion had been informed by the propaganda, that is the radio, and the press, that those inmates, first of all, were criminals and asocial elements. In part, they were also considered enemies of the State, who had been convicted of some crime or other in a so-called police court and placed in protective custody.
EXAMINATION BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Witness, did you believe that everyone in concentration camps had been convicted of a crime?
A That was the information -
Q No, no. Did you believe it ?
A Generally speaking, yes.
Q Did you think that the women and children in Ravensbrueck had been convicted of crimes?
A It was alleged that those were mostly criminals and asocial elements and I never did gain an insight into the number of inmates, for instance, in Ravensbrueck, concerning the number and percentage of nationalities and also the reasons which brought them to the concentration camp.
Q I want you to answer my question. Did you believe that the women and children in any concentration camp were convicted criminals?
A No, they had not committed any crimes. I did not believe that they hadn't committed any crimes.
Q He didn't believe that they had committed any crimes. Let's get this straight.
Did you think that the women and children were criminals, yes or no?
A I cannot answer this question with yes or no.
Q Why not? I am simply asking you what you believed. Did you believe the women and children were criminals? You can answer that yes or no.
A Generally speaking I didn't believe it.
Q Well, that's the nearest to yes or no that I can hope for, I guess. Did you think that Russian and Rumanian Jews, who were brought into Germany by the train load, that they had committed some crime against Germany?
A No.
Q Well, then, you knew that the concentration camp inmates were not all criminals. You knew that, didn't you?
A Yes.
Q So that the stories that the radio and the newspapers carried, didn't fool you?
A Not to that extent, no.
Q No? Well, here's one man in Germany apparently who formed his own conclusions in spite of what he was told. You didn't think that the labor was slave labor in concentration camps?
A I didn't quite understand the last question.
Q You did not believe that the labor of the inmates was slave labor?
A I stated that I did not believe that the work performed by the concentration camp inmates in the W-Enterprises was slave labor, but, as far as the work of the inmates in the concentration camps was concerned, I know nothing about it. I couldn't tell you.
Q I did not mean working in the camp, but I mean the work which the inmates did, the inmates of concentration camps, did you think they were paid for it? Did they receive any wages?