A. All the tasks which concerned the prokurists and the employees of that Staff and all of the tasks which were handled by the prokurists and the bookeepers in Staff W and the DWB, these tasks did not result from their membership in the government, i.e., in Staff W, but it resulted from their contracts with the enterprises of the DWB or the DWB itself.
Q. Witness, can you tell me the official functions?
A. I told you yesterday that the official tasks of Staff W consisted of the exercising of a certain supervision. The supervision is usually carried out in some Government agencies in enterprises which are not owned by the Reich.
Q. You therefore say that the DWB was owned by the Reich?
A. Yes, in my opinion, it was a public enterprise.
Q. Well, I shall refer to this question again later on. Did the House and Real Estate, G.M.B.H., belong to Staff W?
A. Yes.
Q. Did it have anything to do with the government agency itself?
A. In what respect?
Q. You said that Staff W had been a government agency. You just said in the affirmative that the House and Real-Estate G.M.B.H. belonged to the DWB. Therefore, would the House and Real-Estate G.M.B.H. have anything to do with a governmental organization?
A. Yes.
Q. Could you tell us to what extent the House and Real-Estate Property G.M.B.H. had anything to do with a governmental organization?
A. As far as I know it was supposed to carry on the supervision to which I have just referred.
Q. And therefore it was part of the DWB?
A. Yes, I think it belonged to the DWB.
Q. Just what was the governmental function of the House and and Real-Estate, G.M.B.H.?
A. You could also ask the same question, what were the official functions of the other enterprises.
Q. Well, that is sufficient for me. You told me that the office chief had to carry out an official function and Defendant Mummenthey, for example, was an office chief. Can you tell me what official function he had to carry out?
A. I have already stated yesterday that the main part of the activity of an office chief ---
DR. FROESCHMANN(Attorney for the Defendant Mummenthey): Your Honor, I object to this question. It is completely irrelevant to the case.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I am of the opinion that my question was relevant, because I want the witness to clarify the question to what extent an office chief had to carry out official functions.
THE PRESIDENT: Exactly what was your last question?
DR. HEIM: "Mummenthey was an office chief. Can you tell me what official functions Mummenthey carried out?"
THE PRESIDENT: The question is proper and may be answered.
A. I have already stated yesterday that the main part of the duties of an office chief was in his tasks according to commercial law as a business manager or as a member of the Board of Supervisors of the enterprises which he to take care of. Just what his official functions were in detail I cannot say, because I don't have the necessary information about that. However, I believe that the official functions of an office chief only had a certain character for the most part, that is to say, the office chiefs or the business managers of the economic enterprises were given the character of an office chief by Pohl for the reasons which are not clear to me in detail. However, I think the reasons for that were that Pohl was trying to save in personnel and that he wanted to make it easier for himself to procure the proper people for the various offices.
Q. Witness, could Pohl appoint somebody to bear the title of Office Chief? Could Pohl give any person the title of Office Chief?
A. Yes, I must assume that. However, I don't know that for certain. It is just an assumption on my part.
Q. However, you just stated that Pohl was able to give the title of Office Chief to the individual business managers.
A. Without any doubt, the decision for the appointment to Office Chief was with Pohl. Whether he did this all by himself, or whether Reichsfuehrer Himmler had to make these appointments, I can't say.
Q. You testified yesterday that Staff W, after Hohberg left, lost some of its importance. Can you give us more details about that?
A. To put it very briefly, I reached that conclusion because, as soon as Dr. Hohberg left, the export and the economic brain disappeared from Staff W. Since his successor, Dr. Baier, did not fulfill these prerequisites -- that is to say, the knowledge and the experience in economic questions -- this was brought about.
Q. You came to Staff W only when Dr. Hohberg was no longer an auditor with the DWB. Therefore, you do not know anything about the activity of Dr. Hohberg from your own observation. However, you describe Dr. Hohberg as an economic expert. You describe him as an economic brain. I would like to ask you, how come you know so much about Dr. Hohberg?
A. I know Dr. Hohberg from what I have heard about him. I also know him from his good reputation which he had in his profession, and, not least, I know him from various articles and various works which Hohberg carried out before my time and which I looked at afterwards.
Q. You testified that Dr. Hohberg, in contract to Dr. Baier, participated in the conferences with Pohl. Just how do you know that?
A. I did not testify that.
Q. Witness, as far as I can recall, you testified to that effect yesterday.
A. I believe that your memory is incorrect.
Q. Therefore, you can not claim that Dr. Hohberg participated in the conferences with Pohl?
A. I don't know anything about it.
Q. Very well. Was the business order just a dream, or was it carried out exactly as specified in writing?
A. Are you referring to the business order which was discussed here yesterday?
Q. Yes, that is what I am referring to.
A. In that connection, I already stated yesterday that this was strictly a program. This was a coordination which we were striving at. However, since the conditions that were caused by the war in 1945 did not allow us to carry out this program anymore, and in my opinion this business order only went into effect early in 1945, this program was not carried out in detail because at that time we were unable to carry out such a program.
Q. What did you think as an auditor when you saw in the business order that the auditors were subordinated to Staff W?
A. That is not contained in the business order.
Q. Did you consider it correct from the point of view of commercial law that, according to the business order, the Chief of W could violate commercial law, because, for example, the board of directors of an AG had to subordinate itself to the Chief of W?
A. Could you help me and give me an example in that connection?
Q. I don't have the business order before me. Do you have it?
A. To what extent did the member of the board of directors of an AG have to subordinate himself?
Q. According to the business order, the Chief of W, with regard to the board of directors of an AG, had a certain right of supervision. This, of course, violated the regulations of commercial law. What did you think at the time when you helped work out this business order?
A. I don't think that this was a regulation just as it is laid down in the business order. I don't think that this aimed at a violation of commercial law. I don't think that it would have resulted in this violation at all.
Q. As a certified public accountant, can you say what importance the confirmation certificate of an auditor had?
A. The confirmation certificate of an auditor is the official confirmation prescribed by law that the conditions with regard to the annual balance, the accounts, the bookkeeping and the business report of the enterprise which has been audited are in order and comply with the commercial law. The confirmation certificate is a statement of public and legal importance, because the certified public accountant is the trustee of the public to that extent.
Q. Is an account without this confirmation certificate of a certified public accountant valid or not?
A. An account which has to be audited by law is not valid if it has not been provided with this certificate of confirmation.
Q. Witness, therefore, it is not valid if it has not been provided with the certificate of confirmation?
A. There are special regulations about that. I can not recall all the details at the moment.
Q. Witness, I thought that you were an auditor. The certificate of confirmation, after all, is the basis of the professional auditor. You should---
THE PRESIDENT: I think the witness has answered your question fully and fairly. At any event, we have heard all we care to about certificates of confirmation.
Q. You testified yesterday that after Hohberg left no more confirmation certificates were issued; is that correct?
A. During my activity as chief of the auditing department, no certificates of confirmation were issued anymore.
That is what I testified yesterday, or that is what I meant. I can recall -
THE PRESIDENT: Next question.
Q. Witness, in order to refresh your memory, I would like to show you an affidavit which was given by Opperbeck, which is located in the Hohberg Document Book No. I. Please tell the Tribunal the Document Number on the right hadn corner of the page in the document book.
A. It is Document No. 23, Exhibit No. 23.
Q. What page is it?
A. It is page 53.
Q. Witness, please take a look at Page 53 and read the last paragraph on the bottom of the page. I underlined it.
A. "During my activity in W-IV, other auditors audited the balances of the firms of Office W-IV."
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What page did you say that was?
DR. HEIM: It is page 53 in Document Book I. It is Document No. 23, Exhibit 23.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: English page 53?
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I believe so.
THE PRESIDENT: This is the affidavit of Josef Opperbeck?
DR. EHIM: Yes, Josef Opperbeck, and it is on page 53 in the English Document Book also.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, please read the phrases which I have underlined.
A. "During my activity in W-IV, other auditors checked the balance sheets of the firms in W-IV."
Q. Will you continue?
A. "As far as I can recall, during this period of time of my activity in W-IV, all the firms concerned have received the certificate of confirmation of the auditor to a limited extent.
Dr. Hohberg had already been conscripted into the Luftwaffe at that time."
Q: That is all, witness. Witness, you still maintain your testimony that after Dr. Hohberg left no certificate of confirmation was issued any more?
A: I can only repeat what I have stated yesterday. I stated that during the time I was in charge of the auditing department neither I nor the auditing department signed any balance sheet. That is to say that they did not issue any certificates of confirmation.
Q: Witness, that is sufficient.
A: May I add -
DR. HEIM: Witness you have answered the question. Now, that is all I wonted to hear.
I beg your pardon, your Honor, the witness would like to answer this question completely. He has just stated it, and he has just stated he hasn't quite answered the question yet.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, he has. He has answered the question. He was asked whether he still wants to maintain his prior statement, and he says yes. That answers the question.
Q: (By Dr. Heim): On the basis of what fact was then the business management of the DEST justified if no confirmation had been issued on the balance sheets?
THE PRESIDENT: Either the question is confused or the translator or the court, but we don't understand the question.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I am afraid that the word "Entlastung", just as it was several days ago, has again been mistranslated. The word is "Entlastung" which means justification and not "Entlassung" which is dismissal. Your Honor, by virtue of German law after a balance sheet has been written and audited and found correct, the business management is given what is called a confirmation.
That is to say, it is recognized that the business management has carried out its business in a correct manner.
Q: (By Dr. Heim) I therefore repeat my question. You testified that the DEST also had not been audited according to your previous testimony. According to that a balance sheet was not legally valid. By virtue of what facts was then the DEST business management given recognition for its balance sheet?
A: Whether the DEST business management was given the confirmation that everything was all right, I don't know. Furthermore during the war the law about the mandatory auditing as a result of the fact that so many auditors had been conscripted, was changed, and in part this law had been suspended.
Q: Witness, do you know just how long this mandatory auditing was suspended during the war?
A: I can't recall that in detail. However, you must consider that the DEST was a G.m.b.H. and therefore it was not organized like an A.G. and was not subject to the regulations about the mandatory auditing. It is possible that in the corporation charter of the DEST the mandatory auditing had been provided. But, I am not precisely informed about that. These regulations, however, could be suspended as a result of the stockholders' meeting, and the stockholders' meeting was also authorized to give an acknowledgment to the balance sheets of the business management, without issuing a certificate of confirmation.
Q: Witness, you have stated that the office chief had an official function, and you gave us the reasons for that by saying that in an enterprise under public trustee ship he carried out his work according to the legal provisions.
However, public enterprises have to be audited under all circumstances, therefore, could the mandatory auditing be suspended without any further difficulty?
THE PRESIDENT: What has this to do with the guilt or innocence of Hohberg?
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, the witness has incriminated the Defendant Hohberg yesterday. I believe that according to the regulations governing the procedure of this trial I am entitled to ask the witness in order to determine his veracity in general.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but there is a limit to your right to do that. You are going into collateral and immaterial matters to impeach him, and you must accept his answers. I think your cross-examination is covering too much ground.
Q: (By Dr. Heim) Witness, if according to your own testimony you heard about the activity of Dr. Hohberg, I would like to ask you, do you know that Dr. Hohberg before had refused to give a certificate of confirmation to the DEST, the DAW and DVA?
A: No.
THE PRESIDENT: You are entirely overlooking the fact that this witness did not come into the WVHA until after Dr. Hohberg left.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, the witness, however, has stated that he is informed about Hohberg's activity to some extent. He states that he heard these things through stories, and he learned of them through documents to which he had access while he was in Staff W.
THE PRESIDENT: But you see the question you last asked him whether he knew what Dr. Hohberg had done before he, the witness, came to WVHA?
Obviously he couldn't know that.
Q: (By Dr. Heim): Witness, you therefore are not well informed about Dr. Hohberg's activity?
A: I know about it in broad outlines just as I have emphathetically stated yesterday:
Q: Who, at the time you were working in Staff W read the auditing reports?
A: You mean the reports from the other agencies of Staff W, that is outside of the auditing department? Well, Baier, probably also Pohl, and of course the business managers.
Q: Witness, do you know whether the DWB was a Reich enterprise or whether it was owned by the party?
A: I only know that this question was the basis of a dispute for a long time, and that the auditing work which was done by the German Auditing and Trusteeship, A.G., was also to bring clarity into this question. However, the auditing work did not proceed far enough to clear up this problem.
Q: Witness, you testified yesterday with regard to the arrest of May, and this in some paints contradicts the testimony of the Defendant Hohberg. I, therefore, would like to ask you several questions about this subject.
THE PRESIDENT: We are not trying any case against Dr. May, and we are really not interested as to whether he was arrested lawfully or unlawfully nor what happened to him. Let us confine our deliberations to Hohberg and leave Dr. May to his own devices.
DR. HEIM: Then, Your Honor, I only want to ask one more question.
Q: (By Dr. Heim): Witness, you have stated yesterday that during the last days of the war you buried several boxes containing files, and you also testified that you advised Baier to turn these boxes over to the American Occupation Forces two or three weeks later, is that correct?
A: No, you haven't quite understood me correctly. I must correct you. I only stated that I advised Baier not to surrender at that time immediately after the capitulation to the American Army, because I considered this moment to be too early. The American Army at that time had to disarm many hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, and they were preoccupied with that task. I only stated that I advised him he should wait for a few weeks. That is exactly what I did. I only surrendered to the American Army early in June.
Q. Now, my last question to you, witness. At the time didn't you give each other your word of honor that you would not tell anybody about the hiding place of these boxes?
A. No-
THE PRESIDENT: That is an answer.
A. I must make a statement on that subject -
THE PRESIDENT: I am afraid you must; go ahead.
WITNESS: First of all, we didn't give each other our word of honor, but at a time when the war was not yet over we promised each other that we would not discuss this matter at all. Later on, after the surrender had already taken place, Baier and I were on the mountains together and we discussed this point at that time. Both of us -
JUDGE MUSMANNO: How tall were the mountains?
WITNESS: ---I can remember quite clearly that both of us were of the opinion that this promise which had been agreed upon under other conditions had now become obsolete as a result of what had happened -
JUDGE PHILLIPS: What became of the boxes?
WITNESS: Well, the boxes were then taken away after Baier surrendered to the Americans.
DR. HEIM (Counsel for defendant Hohberg): Your Honor, I would like to offer Hohberg Document 66 for identification. It will become Exhibit No. 41. It is an affidavit of Josef Opperbeck which contradicts the witness's testimony. Both of the persons concerned at the time gave each other their word of honor.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, will you please read the second paragraph of that document?
THE PRESIDENT: Is this the Opperbeck affidavit?
DR. HEIM: It is the same Josef Opperbeck. However this document is not in the document book, Your Honor. I only offered it for identification. I shall offer it in evidence afterwards.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, will you please read the second paragraph of that document to us?
A. "I was at Sagran, Upper Bavaria in May 1945, and I was present when several boxes containing files belonging to Staff W or the DWB were buried under the ground, in order to save them from being captured by the approaching American army. The Chief of W, SS-Oberfuehrer Hans Baier was at the time in charge of that project. All the persons participating shook hands and gave their word of honor that they would keep complete secrecy about the matter."
Q. Witness, that is sufficient. Can you still maintain your testimony that you did not give your word of honor to keep secrecy?
A. I maintain my testimony, that as far as I can recall we did not give our word of honor to keep secrecy. However, this matter became obsolete anyhow as a result of the happenings there; the capitulation.
THE PRESIDENT: It is still obsolete as far as we are concerned.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I have no further question.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other questions by defense counsel?
DR. HOFFMANN: Your Honor, Dr. Haensel is attending a meeting at Bielefeld and he has asked me to represent his client Loerner during his absence.
THE PRESIDENT: You think you can take Dr. Haensel's place?
DR. HOFFMANN: Not quite, Your Honor, because I still lack several characteristics. However, I hope they are sufficient for me to examine this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, just do your best.
BY DR. HOFFMANN (Counsel for defendant G. Loerner):
Q. Witness, you mentioned the name of Georg Loerner. You called him a deputy, if I remember correctly.
I would like to ask you now, did he appear in that position, or was he only the second business manager? And did you negotiate with him?
A. No, I never negotiated with him, and as far as I know Loerner had this position as deputy in W, as second business manager, and this was only of a very formal nature.
Q. Thank you, that is all I wanted to hear.
BY DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for defendants Volk and Bobermin):
Q. Witness, do you know Dr. Volk?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know if Dr. Volk was the personal expert of Pohl?
A. Yes.
Q. Please tell the Tribunal of the activity which Volk carried out as the personal consultant of Pohl?
A. Of course I don't know any details about that activity. I only know that Dr. Volk, as chief of the legal department in Staff W, was very difficult to reach because most of the time he was active as the personal consultant of Pohl. As far as I know, as the personal consultant, he carried out office work for Pohl and he also dealt with many personal questions. For example, I know that Dr. Volk had to work out the tax declarations for Pohl. That is to say, he handled his personal matters. However, otherwise I don't know about any details.
Q. I understood you to mean that the activity as the personal consultant took up most of the time of Dr. Volk so that he couldn't deal with any other tasks?
A. He was a prokurist in the DWB. However, it was very difficult to reach him, as I have already said before.
Q. You stated that Dr. Volk was a prokurist in the DWB. What tasks did he carry out in that capacity?
A. Dr. Volk and Dr. Wenner were prokurists of the DWB, and they were the only prokurists in the DWB. Therefore, since both of them were working in that capacity they did not have as high a position as an individual prokurist, according to law. I believe they could only sign together with a business manager, and their competences and authorities resulted from the corporation charter.
Q. Did it have any practical effect--or could it have any practical effect? In order to refresh your memory, I would like to point out that the prokurists by themselves could represent the business managers and therefore it is correct to say that a business manager actually did not need a prokurist.
A. Yes, that is actually always the case.
Q. However, I want to know something else. What did Volk do with the DWB? What department was he in charge of?
A. He was not in charge of any department in the DWB. The commercial prokurist handled the bookkeeping, balance sheets, and things of that nature and that was Dr. Wenner. Dr. Volk was the legal person in that office, and therefore he had to deal in particular with legal questions. And since this was a holding company he had to deal with corporation law.
This probably covered his activity which he carried out in the legal department of Staff W.
Q. Therefore, it is correct to say that Dr. Volk dealt with the legal questions of the holding company?
A. Yes.
Q. Did the larger affiliated branches, for example, the DEST have their own legal departments?
A. Yes, the DEST had its own legal department.
Q. Therefore, it was not necessary for Dr. Volk to work in that particular field?
A. Yes, I must assume that.
Q. In the course of your examination you have also stated that "office chief" was only a title. Can you explain to us what you meant by making this statement?
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want him to explain this all over again?
DR. GAWLIK: No, I only want him to explain that definition.
That is a typically German expression, Your Honor, and I don't know whether the Tribunal realizes just what the witness was trying to say when he used that expression. I have just heard that the word was translated with "title". If that has been translated correctly of course my question is not necessary.
THE PRESIDENT: "Title" that is right.
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, that is what I understood.
BY DR. FROESCHAMNN (for Mummenthey):
Q. Witness, you have already mentioned Mummenthey's name yesterday during the cross examination. When did you meet Mummenthey for the first time, and on what occasion was that?
A. I met Mummenthey early in 1945. I met him on the occasion of a visit on which I accompanied Baier, and on that occasion I visited Mummenthey at his office at Oranienburg.
Q. Will you please tell us what brought about this visit?
A. Yes. The DEST had loaned considerable amounts from the German Gold Discount Bank. They had received certain loans which they used for the development of the construction of the Works and in order to cover the severe losses which they had sustained at the time when the plants began operation. In the course of the years the DEST had succeeded in accumulating funds, and at least they were able to pay back that debt; Mummenthey intended to repay the loans. Before that time they had taken care of the interest. He corresponded with Baier about that, and finally it was agreed that Baier and Mummenthey were to discuss this question personally in his office.
Q. Were these loans and losses already in existence before Mummenthey took over the business management of the DEST, or did this happen in the course of his management?
A. As far as I know, when these loans were granted, Mummenthey was not yet business manager, or, at least, he was not the business manager in charge.
Q. Witness, in your capacity as an auditor you have had frequent occasion to have detailed discussions with the partners in your contract, and from these conversations you could form a picture about the personality and character of your partners. Was it possible for you, in the case of Mummenthey, also from the negotiations which you had with him, to form a clear picture about his attitude in a commercial, financial and legal respect; and could you form a picture about his character.
Please make a statement about that.
A. Yes, I was able to do that in broad outlines.
Q. Will you please characterize the personality of Mummenthey according to the impressions which you, personally, gained?
A. I considered Mummenthey to be a very careful and very intelligent legal expert and business man. He had a very difficult task and he handled it very skilfully in the DEST, because the DEST, as I said before, had considerable debts from loans which it had taken up, and this resulted from bad investments. For example, they made bad technical estimates when they established now procedures for production. Mummenthey, as far as I know, had nothing to do with these bad investments. In any case, he was not responsible for them. On the other hand, it is almost exclusively his merit that in the course of the years the DEST succeeded in slowly developing itself and getting over the results of the bad investments, and the DEST became a sound economic enterprise. Mummenthey showed us the way the DEST was organized in commercial lines, that is to say, as far as bookkeeping was concerned, and he acquainted us with his staff of collaborators. It was together with his technical colleague Schondorf that we also made a short inspection through the plants. Everything I saw there gave me the impression that Mummenthey was a very efficient, cautious and serious man who succeeded in keeping the technical expert Schondorf, who had a tendency to carry out experiments, along his line.
Q. What plants of the DEST did you visit?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Counsel, may I make an observation here. I thought very carefully the witness's exposition of the character of Mummenthey.....what an able business man he was, how he took the DEST out of a very difficult situation and brought it to success, when, although it was in debt and he was able to make a successful business venture of it, that he inspected the plants, and so on. Now, just speaking for myself I am wondering how that is going to help me in determining whether Mummenthey knew about the atrocities committed in the DEST, whether slave labor was used, whether people were worked to death -- that, it seems to me, is the important thing, and not whether DEST was successful or not.
We must answer the indictment. Now, that is just an observation, of my own, and I am passing it on for what it may be worth.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Your Honor, immediately after my last question, just what plants he visited, I was going to come to the subject which you have just suggested.
THE PRESIDENT: We will reserve that until after recess, Dr. Froeschmann.
THE MARHSLA: The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken)