Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (For Defendant Mummenthey):
Q Witness, I want to speak about the suggestion which was made by his Honor just now. You heard him say that it is important to the Court to hear from you your impressions you made when you inspected various enterprises; for instance, whether the work done by the inmates was slave labor; and the way they were being employed; whether their wages were paid; whether the work they did was regarded as inhumane and unworthy. My question is what were your impressions:
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Counsel-- Oh, I am sorry.
Q (By Dr. Froeschmann) What were the impressions you made, you gained when you made your inspections?
THE PRESIDENT: You see, this witness has already answered that question at considerable length, both on examination by his own counsel, or rather his examination in chief, and the Tribunal questioned him. I don't see the necessity of doing it all over again, Dr. Froeschmann.
DR. FROESCHMANN: From what Judge Musmanno said, it was my impression that he regarded it as important to hear from the witness how Mummenthey regarded the whole question of inmate labor, and whether he had gained the conviction that inmate labor was involved here. That is how I understood Judge Musmanno.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you misunderstood Judge Musmanno's question, and I think possibly you were not here yesterday when this entire subject was covered in great detail.
Q (By Dr. Froeschmann) Witness, did Mummenthey discuss with you his ideas anyhow about the way he himself regarded inmate labor? What ideas did he follow there?
A I can recall only one discussion to that effect on the occasion of an inspection of some of the W enterprises in Oranienburg. This was the first enterprise employing inmates which I had ever seen, and I asked Mummenthey whether he was satisfied with the work done by the inmates. He said that on the whole he was satisfied, and he said in that connection that he and the management of DEST were doing everything in order to have Court No. II, Case No. 4.the inmates treated decently, and if I may put it this way, to make them more and more keen to work, to keep them up to scratch, and in that connection he mentioned also the fact that DEST were giving additional food rations to the inmates, including tobacco.
I can therefore only repeat that when I inspected Oranienburg, and altogether throughout my nine months' membership to Staff W, I had not the slightest reason for the W enterprises to feel that labor was exploited inhumanely and unworthily without taking health, physical conditions into consideration. It is still my conviction that those inmates who worked in the W enterprises were better off than those inmates who did not because conditions in the W enterprises, as far as I can judge them, were orderly.
Q Do you know that Mummenthey repeatedly submitted written suggestions to his superior agencies in order to improve food and clothing of the inmates?
A No, I know nothing about that. These things were nothing to do with me. I merely talked to Mummenthey on that particular occasion of the visit, that is all.
Q Therefore, you probably also know nothing about the fact whether and in how far Mummenthey insisted on an increase of the wages and compensation paid out to the inmates?
A No, I know nothing about that.
DR. FROESCHMANN: No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Froeschmann, you don't mean the wages paid to the inmates, do you? You mean the wages paid for the inmates.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I am talking about the compensation by DEST and the payment made by DEST on behalf of the inmate labor to the Reich.
THE PRESIDENT: Which is entirely different than wages paid to the inmates. That is what the translation said.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I do not want to anticipate the presentation of evidence, but in order to prevent a misunderstanding, I would like to say already now that Mummenthey for DEST considered the compensation, if I may call it that, which was paid for the work done by the inmates, a sum of money to be paid to the Reich, that he on his part Court No. II, Case No. 4.had to take care of billeting and feeding of the inmates, and thus incurred expenses.
These expenses were to be paid back by DEST to the Reich, and DEST had no influence on the fact how in detail the Reich distributed the money paid by DEST.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Dr. Karoli, do I understand your testimony to be that Baier was Chief of Staff W and later Chief W, is that what you testified?
A Chief of W and Chief of Staff W are one and the same thing. It was merely a change of the official designation, and I don't think it entailed any real change in the authority or the tasks and duties of Herr Baier.
Q And you know that Baier occupied that position?
A Yes.
Q You know that from your experience in the office and as one of his subordinates?
A Yes.
Q Dr. Heim told you that the Defendant Pohl testified that Hohberg was not Chief of Staff W. I should like to tell you that Pohl also testified that Baier was not Chief of Staff W. Would that change your testimony any?
A No.
Q You testified, I believe, that it was the reputation in the office where you worked that Hohberg had exercised the functions as Chief of Staff W, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Was it also the reputation in the office that he had exercised any other functions?
A In what respect do you mean?
AAny other-- Did he hold any other position or exercise influence in any other way? I believe you said that he was also an economic expert.
A Yes.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q You also said that you had seen memoranda that had been written by him and had been correspondence. Can you give us from the correspondence and documents and memoranda that you saw in the office, and from conversations that you had with people in the office any idea about the extent of the influence that Dr. Hohberg exercised as an economic expert?
A Details I am afraid I can't give you. May I point out again that in that time, in Hohberg's time, I was not with Staff W?
Q I understand that.
AAnd you know that things you have not experienced, you yourself, you don't remember as well as you do the things you have experienced.
Q Did you learn in any way about his forming any companies, establishing any enterprises, or any of the SS concerns?
A In my opinion Pohl who had the initiative in these things, called him in as a consultant, but this is my assumption.
Q And you don't know, you can't tell us today any more about the extent of Hohberg's influence in the office from what you saw there or heard?
A There is one matter where I gained more insight, and this happened in Staff W in Hohberg's time. This is the May affair. If I remember correctly the negotiations with Dr. May -- with the people in Buczowicz who remained after May's arrest -- were carried out mainly by Dr. Hohberg. There he studied the conditions, namely, of the enterprise in Buczowicz on the spot. By that I mean he looked at the enterprise very carefully and reported to Pohl about it. Other details and other things I don't remember.
Q It was your impression, was it, as I understand your testimony, that Hohberg exercised a greater influence in the Amtsgruppe than Baier did after Baier succeeded him?
A Well, you know, to make up my mind about that question, there is one important fact to be considered: the business training and expert knowledge and, if I may put it that way, the personality. Baier was a civil servant and, above all, he was the head of an official agency. He was the "top man" in the agency, but he was not an expert. He was not a man with any initiative in economic matters. He had no ideas economically speaking. He was unable to plan ahead economically, for instance, and to produce any new ideas for the economic enterprises. He couldn't. He was unable to do it.
Q And from your knowledge of the documents and memoranda, and from participating in the conversations with the office, do you wish to contrast Hohberg in that respect with Baier? Did Hohberg occupy a different position?
A I think the fact that Hohberg was an expert -- and was regarded as such -- made him, in Pohl's eyes and those of the other office chiefs, indubitably more important when he was consulted in matters of general economic importance to give his opinion.
Q Did Hohberg have a wide reputation as an economic expert?
A I am afraid I can't tell you. But his reputation certainly was not a bad one, as an expert.
Q I mean was it a far-flung reputation? Did people in the trade know about his reputation generally as an export, or was it a very restricted reputation?
A Herr Hohberg, as far as German public life was concerned, was not one of the more prominent auditors.
Q You told us you were not a Party member. Is that because you opposed National Socialism?
A It was because I disagreed with certain principles of National Socialism.
Q Did you have contact and conversations with others who opposed National Socialism?
A Do you mean official members of the resistance movement?
Q Yes -
A Or do you mean just friends? One must remember that there were many people in Germany -- and perhaps I may say in my own circle who were not followers of National Socialism, and were yet not members of the resistance movement. I talked to people of the first group. I had quite a few relations with them and quite a few of my friends were among them.
Q Did you ever talk to anyone whom you considered to be a member of the resistance movement?
A No, I cannot recall any such occasion. I don't think so.
Q Did you hear at any time of a Passmann circle?
A No.
Q Did you hear at any time that Hohberg was a member of a resistance group?
A No.
Q You said you met Hohberg in 1944 again, at the WVHA offices. Do you know what his business at the WVHA offices was at that time?
A No, I don't know why he turned up. He came to the WVHA quite frequently at that time -
Q At the end of 1944?
A Yes, at the end of 1944; that period of time. I believe some how or other he had something to do with the duties of Office W-4, in connection with the Air Ministry because somehow I believe he worked for the Air Ministry at the time.
Q And you say he visited the WVHA offices many times during that period?
A Whether he visited the offices, I don't know, but I believe he repeatedly went to the WVHA.
Q You said you saw him there frequently, didn't you?
A I saw him twice or three times. He didn't come up. I believe that Dr. Hohberg also knew Frau Fauler personally and called on her once or twice.
Q Did you know, form seeing the documents in the office or from conversations in the office, that Volk held the position of Chief of Staff W for a short time between Hohberg and Baier?
A He did not hold the position of Chief of Staff W; certainly not. All I know is that Dr. Volk temporarily was in charge of Staff W, but in my opinion only as deputy, temporarily because there was nobody else there.
Q The order of business that you discussed yesterday -- I think it was Article 10 -- refers to a deputy chief W. Who occupied that position?
A Herr Loerner.
Q The article -- I believe, Article 10 -- deals with the Chief of Staff, and it refers to a deputy chief of Staff W. Loerner was deputy chief of the Amtsgruppen. Was there not a deputy chief of staff?
A I don't know. I really don't know.
Q What do you mean when you say that Volk was in charge of Staff W -- but just as deputy?
A Not as an office chief, in my opinion; that is to say, as Chief of Staff W.
Q But, as Pohl's deputy? Or whose deputy?
AAs the deputy, as the provisional and temporary head of Staff W.
But I was not in the office at the time. I only know that....
Q Dr. Karoli, were you in a position after you came to the office to see all of the orders and instructions which the defendant Baier received?
A No.
Q Then he could have performed tasks and received and carried out instructions without your knowledge?
A I was only in charge of the Reviewing Department, and all that Baier passed on to me was anything which was of interest to my department, questions connected with the auditing work.
Q Then the answer to my question is yes?
A May I ask you to repeat your question?
Q Baier could then have performed tasks and received and carried out instructions without your knowledge?
A Yes, certainly.
Q Did you see any memoranda in the office which set out the powers of the Chief of Staff?
A I saw the business order.
Q Did you see any other order or memoranda?
A. I believe there existed an order before, according to which Chief of W had to be informed of such investments beyond a certain limit before they were carried out.
Q. That was, investments of industries affiliated with the DVB?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you also know that all contracts of those industries had to be submitted to the Chief of the Main Office through Chief of Staff?
A. With the one reservation which comes from the business order that not all contracts were concerned here, only contracts with a certain tendency. For instance, Baier as Chief Staff W had certainly nothing to do with production programs or any technical points; that would not be part of his competence and nobody asked him about these things, nor do I believe that he was informed about these things.
Q. Do you know that he wasn't informed about details of production in the SS industries?
A. That was not part of his competence.
Q. I didn't ask you that. Do you know that he was not informed, that he did not regularly receive reports on production, or could he have received those without your knowing about it?
A. I believe that there were in the old days certain reports from the enterprises which from case to case were sent to the DWB, to the mother company, and Staff W, but I can't tell you what these reports said.
Q. They concerned details of production, didn't they?
A. Certainly not. I do not believe, at least, that there were any details of production in those reports, nor do I believe even that I ever saw a report of that sort myself, because these reports were not made use and because later on they were discontinued completely, I believe, as they proved to be irrelevant and insignificant and unnecessary work. That was all.
Q. These reports concerned the period 1943 and the first part of 1944?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know that the Chief of Staff received reports on requirements for personnel of the various industries?
A. As far as I know, the Chief of Staff W only handled the contracts for all employees. And about your previous question, incidentally, even if such reports were handed in, this happened, at the most, only for informative purposes without Baier or Chief of Staff W having to work on these reports and to say this is wrong and this must be done some other way, and so on.
Q. You say you do know that he had to check proposal on the acquiring of personnel for the industries, insofar as these reports concerned the higher echelons. Do you know exactly what personnel this concerned?
A. Proposals concerning the recruiting of such people were not part of his duties. All that happened was this: that employees of the DWB, that contracts of the DWB were handled by him which went beyond 600 or 800 marks per month, Staff W had to be informed about that.
Q. Witness, excuse me. I gather this from your testimony, that a good many things could have be handled by the Chief of Staff without your knowing about it, isn't that true?
A. All acts or work and all competences of Chief of W which did not take place within my department, but in the legal Department and the so-called Taxation Department, I had no knowledge about at all.
Q. Now, one of the three departments under Staff W was the Revision or Examination Department and you told us yesterday that it controlled the balance of the companies. Can you tell us very briefly what you meant by that?
A. I think I said yesterday the auditing work was concerned with the annual report, that is to say, the balance sheet, and the profit and loss account.
Q. Don't tell us again what your department did in detail. Just tell me what you mean by control of the balance of the companies.
A. These again are details of a professional nature. You have to find out in an auditing whether, for instance, the evaluation in the balance sheet is correct, whether the writing off is sufficiently high, whether the reserves are also correct, whether the balance has been correctly drawn up from the other books, whether the books themselves are in order, also whether or not the profits and loss accounts have been properly put down in order to shown the economic position of the enterprises, and whether the adjustment between loss and profit has been made in accordance with the law, You have to make a report and to pass judgment. Any deficiencies which strike you concerning the annual report and accounting, you have to point out. That, to put it generally, is the task of an auditor.
Q. And all of the elements of the cost of production are reflected in these balances, are they not?
A. As far as the profit and loss accounts are concerned, only expenses and profits appear which are concentrated together in certain groups for the entire enterprise. For instance, the salaries, appear, the interest, the writing off, the general expenses, income on interest, the profits appear.
Q. Do I understand your testimony to be that at no time did you hear about surgical or medical experiments?
A. Not during the war. I heard about them only in connection with the Nurnberg trials.
Q. You at no time, while you were working in Amtsgruppe W heard about them?
A. Never.
Q. During the course of your auditing work with the WVHA, did you learn of any property in the occupied territories that had been seized or confiscated which being used or operated by any of the industries affiliated with the WVHA?
A. I don't know whether the enterprises for instance in the Eastern Territories had been acquired by seizure or confiscation. I am unable to tell you, nor did I ever do any auditing there and I might point out that during my time a large part of those enterprises had been re occupied by the approaching Russians, always with the result that no auditing was carried out.
Q. You didn't hear at any time then about the nature of the property that the Osti operated, is that your testimony?
A. I am afraid I didn't quite follow.
Q. You didn't hear at any time about the nature the property which the Osti operated? You didn't know where it came from?
A. No, never. I don't know what tasks and duties Osti had.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Now, I would like for just a moment to direct your attention to the DEST industry. How many of the DEST plants did you visit?
A I accompanied Baier, and Mummenthey was there too, to Oranienburg, I mean, to Berlstedt, to Flossenbuerg, and the Bohemia, but I don't think it was part of this. I think that was a stock company.
Q Did you know Schondorf?
A I met him when I visited Oranienburg.
Q Do you know what position he held in the DEST?
A He was the technical manager of DEST. He was the colleague of Mummenthey in technical matters, and his responsibilities were production questions in their technical aspects.
Q Did you hear anything about Schondorf's reputation as to whether or not he was a brutal man - cruel?
A I heard nothing about that.
Q Can you tell us which of the following people had the primary responsibility for the operation of the DEST industry? We have Mummenthey, who was Chief of Office I, and also business manager; and we have Baier, who was Chief of Staff; we have Georg Loerner, who was deputy chief of the Amtsgruppe; and Pohl, who was Chief of the entire WVHA. Who had the immediate responsibility for operating this industry and its affiliated plants?
A You mean the way the plant was operated, in production?
Q Yes. To see that it was properly run. Whose responsibility was it, in other words, to see that the workers were not overworked, to see that the plant was properly run.
A I believe labor questions - that is to say, anything connected with production and manufacture which includes, of course, the workers, the technical expert Schondorf was responsible.
Q He was subordinate to Mummenthey, was he not?
A No.
Q He wasn't subordinate to Mummenthey as Chief of Office I? You told us yesterday that the Fuehrer Principle applied here, and that the Office Chief could give military commands... You mean to say that Mummenthey Court No. II, Case No. 4.could not give orders to Schondorf?
A I don't know what rank Schondorf had any more, nor do I know the channels between the two. Therefore, I am unable to say anything very much, but as far as the operation of the plant was concerned the military and civil servant regulations are not the decisive elements, but only the regulations under commercial law.
Q Now, now, come... you know very well that the Office Chief would control the operation of the plants... don't you know that? This has nothing to do with commercial law. This is another matter.
A But it has something to do with commercial law because that man became Office Chief for the reason that he was a manager, and therefore had functions under commercial law. I said yesterday that I never fully understood why you had to have, apart from the commercial law organization as a competitor -- I am tempted to say, an organization of the government department. The gentlemen who had definite duties and competencies under commercial law were now organized into a government department. I think the reason there was sort of a hobby of Pohl's.
Q It never occurred to you that it was so that a military command could be established and the Fuehrerprinzip applied. That idea never occurred to you?
A You cannot interpret the Fuehrerprinzip to the facts, in my opinion, that you establish a deliberate violation of commercial law thereby. I believe that the Office Chiefs, should this have happened, by Pohl, would have referred to their obligations under commercial law.
Q And one last question along this line, is it your belief that Mummenthey could not give orders to the people who worked immediately in the DEST industry? Is that your testimony?
A Mummenthey without doubt was, as far as the other people were concerned, the soldiers of a higher in rank and was regarded as the most superior officer. But as far as I know he had no disciplinary authority. The Chief of W, as I remember, had no disciplinary authority.
Q Did you say that an Office Chief had no disciplinary authority?
A In the military sense I don't think he had it. The military Court No. II, Case No. 4.disciplinary was vested in the company of those concerned, not in the Office Chief.
And that came about, in my opinion, because these Office Chiefs were, first of all, managers under commercial law. I think the other Office Chiefs of the WVHA had also disciplinary power. I heard something to the effect at some time.
Q Did you hear at any time about punitive work details in the DEST stone quarries, or in any of the DEST industries?
A You mean punishment companies?
Q Yes, punishment details, work details.
A No.
Q You didn't hear anything about that at any time during the war?
A I heard in the war that there were punishment companies, but I did not hear that punishment companies were employed by DEST.
Q Where did you hear that they were located?
AAt the front for example, I heard and saw that the company next to us was a punishment company of the SS.
Q No, I am talking about punishment companies, punishment details in the concentration camps. Do you mean to say you didn't hear anything about that?
A No, I heard nothing about that.
Q You at no time heard anything about punishment companies in concentration camps?
A No, not during the war.
Q And is it also your testimony that at no time during the war did you hear of any mistreatment of any kind of concentration camp inmates?
A Yes.
Q That you did not hear?
A Not during the war, no.
Q I believe you said that you joined the SS in 1940, became affiliated with the Reiter-SS. As a matter of fact, wasn't it much earlier than that you became affiliated with the Reitersturm?
A No.
Q It wasn't in 1933?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A No.
Q You didn't become a member of the Reitersturm Reserve of the SS before 1940?
A No.
MR. ROBBINS: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: No further questions by defense counsel?
DR. FRITSCH: May it please the Court, I only have two brief questions, so that there will be sufficient time.
BY DR. FRITSCH:
Q Dr. Karoli, the prosecution put approximately this question to you. Baier could carry out tasks and duties without you coming to know anything about them. Of course, that is quite obvious--nobody knows about somebody else. What I want to know is, what were Baier's main duties? Can you tell us that?
THE PRESIDENT: Hasn't he told us that two, three, four times? I know the answer.
DR. FRITSCH: Quite frankly, your Honor, I don't know it myself. I don't know what he is going to say.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, in that event I think you are entitled to find out. He may answer the question.
DR. FRITSCH: Did you hear my question, witness? The question is... or, let me put it... I want you to give us a positive statement in answer to the negative question what Baier actually did.
A I know that Baier as Chief of Staff was above the work done by the offices. He distributed the mail, tried to find out what was going on, he was to see that everybody turned up in the office, everybody had enough work to do. That is what I have to say, but I cannot give you any more details.
Q Witness, you said yesterday that Baier especially read all auditing reports... Did you say that?
A Yes.
Q From your statement I have to deduce that these were fairly considerable reports.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A Yes, he studied them, he did not only read them.
Q Would that take a long time, a study as you said?
A I think so. He worked very often on that.
Q Now, I must put this question to you: Would he have had the time to do many other duties, apart from that work -- special duties, for instance.
A No, nor did he do it.
DR. FRITSCH: Thank you very much. I have no further questions.
BY DR. HEIM (For Defendant Hohberg):
Q Dr. Karoli, to the question put to you by the Prosecution, what Dr. Hohberg's functions had been, you said that Dr. Hohberg had been an economic expert. The term "economic expert" - does it describe a function, or an official position?
A If you are an auditor you are usually also an economic expert.
Q Witness, you didn't answer my question.
A I didn't understand it, I am afraid.
Q Let me repeat it.
A I didn't understand it. I know what you said, but I don't know what you are talking about. Be a little more clear.
Q Witness, you can't tell me how to behave here, and besides my question was perfectly clear. You told the Prosecution that Hohberg also had the functions of an economic expert. In how far is the term "economic expert" a function?
A I am totally unable to follow you.
Q Witness, let me give you a small example. Somebody can be a university professor, and then, as I see it, he has the position of a university professor. But also in his capacity as university professor he can be an expert in history, for instance. As an expert as a historian, does he have a function? A function surely expresses itself somehow.
A Do you mean a professional task?
Q I mean function. This comes from the latin term "Fungere".
A That is what I knew.
DR. HEIM: May it please the Court, I have several questions to Court No. II, Case No. 4.ask.
I believe that perhaps the witness could think this over during lunch.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no. Eating dulls one's senses. Let's have him answer this while he is wide awake, and alert, and hungry. Frankly, I don't know what you mean either. Is a professor a function or a person; is an expert a function or a person; I don't know what you mean.
DR. HEIM: May it please the Court, the witness answered Mr. Robbins, when he was asked what Hohberg's functions were apart from Office Chief, that Hohberg was an economic expert. Now, I don't know that an economic expert in his capacity as an economic expert has the function at all... You can't regard that term as a function, in my opinion.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, oh... well... what you want to know is, what did he do as an economic expert?
DR. HEIM: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Ask him that. He was an economic expert. That is a person. Now, what did he do?
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, you said that Dr. Hohberg was an economic expert. What were the tasks he had as an economic expert?
A The tasks of an economic expert in an enterprise depend on individual conditions prevailing in that enterprise. That is what they depend on. They also depend on the people who were in charge of that enterprise. If I, as an auditor, am called into an enterprise in order to act there as an economic expert, then work, which I am doing there, will be entirely molded by the ability, knowledge and economic experience of the man who has called me in. If it is a managing director who calls me in who is a complete expert, knows all about law, balance sheets, commercial organization, and so forth, he will usually only put special questions to me. If that is not the case, if the head is a layman and an amateur, and I would like to call Pohl an amateur, then the tasks of an economic expert, if I have a task as a consultant, are bigger than in the case of an economic expert of high repute. Perhaps I have answered your question now. As I said before, I still don't quite know what you Court No. II, Case No. 4.mean.
Q I am terribly sorry; I shall put further questions to you after lunch.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q Witness, is there a contract which concerns an economic expert?
A There is a contract concerning consultants. Actually, you don't need a contract. It could be an agreement - which makes clear the fact that you have an economic expert who is an auditor.
Q Very nice. Dr. Karoli, you told me this morning that Dr. Hohberg could not have been Office Chief because at the same time he was an auditor; but to Mr. Robbins you said Hohberg had carried out the functions of Chief of Office W. Will you please enlighten me on that contradiction?
A Perhaps you don't remember precisely what I said before.
Q What did you say, witness, then, if I don't remember it?
A What you said that for an auditor to be independent, who was auditing an enterprise as a trustee, he must not become entangled, and I have answered you that was my opinion also. But I left the question open as to whether Dr. Hohberg did not take another view - in fact, the opposite view from mine and thereby in contradiction to professional regulations. And if I may continue, I gave you an indication in that respect by pointing out that in my opinion a complaint had reached the Reich Chamber of Auditors, which is the professional organization, that Dr. Hohberg, it would appear, had violated the principles of an auditor.
Q Do you know how this proceeding ended?
A I don't remember details. But no doubt that was the reason why the German Trusteeship A.G. (Deutsch Revision und Treuhand) was called in, because that question, as far as I know, has been submitted to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Ministry insisted on the Trusteeship Company to interfere.
Q All this is very interesting, witness. You said that an Office Chief could issue military orders. What military orders came from Dr. Court No. II, Case No. 4.Hohbert as an Office Chief, although he was not a soldier?