A. Of course, I thought the matter over in the meantime and I must say that I did not cause him to compile this draft. For me this is a document which I actually cannot recall. But, I don't want to deny that perhaps I have seen it on some occasion.
Q. Witness, can it be in any connection with the business order which was compiled approximately one year later, I mean as far as setting it up is concerned?
A. Yes, and it could be connected with it in the following manner.
THE PRESIDENT: You don't mean one year later on, do you?
DR. FRITSCH: Oh, I beg your pardon, Your Honor. I just made a mistake with regard to the date. It was two months later.
Q. Witness, will you please give us your answer.
A. When I came to Staff W, I heard that the standard order of procedure was in existence. This also becomes apparent from the document about the uncompleted work. This standard order of procedure had become lost as the result of an air raid. Since I, as an official, was used to complying with business orders of course, I tried again to establish such a business order. At the time I myself could not give the necessary details which were needed in order to compile such a business order, because I was new in the staff and I didn't know the work yet. However, I believe that I once asked Pohl about such an order and I do not consider it impossible that Pohl at the time ordered Dr. Hoffmann to work on this matter. In any case, this report of Dr. Hoffmann never went into effect and it cannot be compared with the business order which was issued later on. As I have already stated in my cross-examination by the prosecution several points were also included in the business order later on. After all, this was also a program for the future.
Q. Witness, let us turn to a different series of questions. I want to go into the matter of the Osti once more very briefly. It has been clarified that the Osti is not mentioned in the order about the "uncompleted work" file note.
It has just been discussed here in detail. However, we have several documents in which Dr. Horn turns to you because of the questions of the liquidation of the enterprises. In this case are these tasks of the Auditing Department? In short, are they dealing here with auditing questions?
A. No, legal questions are concerned here. I have already explained that as far as I know the cloak of the G.M.B.H. was to remain in existence. Therefore, this was a matter which had to be handled by the Legal Department.
Q. Witness, I will have to show you another document, which is contained in Document Book XIX. I beg your pardon, just a moment please. This is Document 1270, Exhibit 482 on page 7 of the German text, and, unfortunately, I don't know what page it is in the English text. This is the file note of Dr. Horn after a conference with Pohl. Will you please tell us what date is stated on this file note?
A. The file note is dated the 13th of February, 1943.
Q. Witness, please read the last sentence to us.
A. "From todays conference with the Obergruppenfuehrer, the undersigned believes that the business manager of the Osti should have a free hand for decisions and measures which are necessary in connection with the Osti."
Q. In your opinion was this to show that the Osti could work independently from the machine in Amtsgruppe W, or was the Osti, in spite of everything, a DWB enterprise?
A. No, it was not a DWB enterprise.
Q. Witness, however, you kept files about the Osti, didn't you? Right?
A. Yes, however, it is only natural that we had the files because the fact that Horn wrote down at all about the liquidation, this matter had to be handled somewhere. Every letter which was addressed to Staff W had to be put in a certain file and, therefore, one could also speak of the files of the Osti.
Q. Were there any business matters of the Osti which belonged to you personally here which were handled by another department?
A. Yes, I understand from a letter that first intermediary reports about the status of the liquidation of the Osti were sent and passed on through Staff W.
Q. Witness, will you try to refer to the contents of Document 1264, Exhibit 598, which has been submitted here? Does this document show anything about the kind of activity?
A. I could not get any details at all from any of these reports, as far as production questions in the Osti, etc., were concerned. Of course, I saw that glass works and that machine parts were in existence. However, I was only interested in the funds which were available in that connection.
Q. In this connection, I would like to ask you the following: In the cross-examination, the, words "confiscation" and "seizure have again been confused. Now I want to ask you a very precise question. In order to clarify everything I would like you to remain with the Osti. You did see the balance sheets of the Osti on one occasion, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. What did these balance sheets show?
A. In the Osti balance sheets there was a certain figure listed for the properties and also the debts.
Q. In the case of the Osti or in the case of any other enterprises did you hear that values existed for which no counter value was given?
A. No, I didn't see anything of the kind.
Q. Witness, do you know anything about just how property belonging to the enemy nations was taken over by the Reich?
A. No, I don't know any details whatsoever about that. I only know that the Reich took over properties which belonged to enemy nations
Q. Was this property confiscated in Germany, that is to say, was it confiscated by the Reich without any compensation or was it only temporarily seized?
A. I don't know that. I never had anything to do with these things. However, I cannot imagine that it was confiscated, that is to say, just taken away without any compensation at all.
Q. Witness, I am now coming to another series of questions and this matter has also been discussed in the cross-examination. The prosecution was trying to prove in the cross-examination that you in some form had participated in the medical experiments. This is Document 5 -- I beg your pardon, these are Exhibit 599 and Exhibit 600. I am now referring first of all to the note which you took down when you met Dr. Vaernet. Witness, you didn't tell me anything about this matter either. Just what brought about this lapse of memory on your part, or didn't you tell me about that on purpose?
A. No. I only occupied myself briefly in this matter, and in this case I was to establish a liaison between Vaernet and the German Drugs, G.m.b.H., the Deutsche Heilmittel, G.m.b.H.
Q. Is that shown by document 2194, which was submitted as Exhibit 600, that was when you ordered certain rooms from Riecks and Gerke?
A. Yes, that is correct. Dr. Vaernet, I can remember, had informed Pohl of his (Dr. V's) visit. He probably had a conference with him, and, as his room had to be ordered he sent him to see me.
Q. Accordingly you were nothing but a better class messenger boy, is that right?
A. No. That, of course, is not correct. However, in order to use the military term, this could be called a detail.
Q. Witness as a result of the letter from Riecks, 7/8/44, you took some action. You have this document before you here, and you found out that inmates were concerned in this matter. However, unless I am mistaken, there is an interval of six months between the time you met up with Dr. Vaernet, and this letter?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Before you received the letter from Riecks, did you know, as a result of your conversation with Loerner, any details about the matters pertaining to inmates?
A. No. I consider it impossible, because, otherwise, I certainly would have remembered this affair. However, in August Riecks wrote something about inmates.
Q. I beg your pardon, I did not hear your, last part of the answer?
A. In August Riecks did write something about experiments on inmates.
Q. Of experiments on inmates?
A. Yes.
Q. I intend showing you the testimony of the Czech physician, Dr. Horn, who testified in the medical trial.
Dr. Horn was an inmate at Buchenwald, and he was examined in detail about all these matters in the medical case. Here we have the transcript of the morning session of Tribunal I, dated 1 April 1947. Here I have very short excerpts from pages 5340 to 5344; and, I quote:
"Q. Witness, can you recall from your activity in the inmates hospital at Buchenwald a Danish physician who carried out treatments with hormones on inmates?
"A. Yes. It was all at the time when Dr. Schiedlauski was there, when the latter said on one occasion that several inmates were given a treatment of hormones. I pointed out that we had very little space available. After all we already had inmates who had been injured in the course of air raids. Dr. Schiedlauski saw my point, but declared that there were only a few inmates concerned in this matter, and that male crystal hormones were to be applied in the case of inmates who had been castrated by virtue of German law, concerning homosexuals. I was rather interested in the matter. A short time after that, or immediately after this discussion, I believe I read in a Swiss Medical Journal a description of the application of this crystal hormone by a Swiss physician.
"Q. The Camp Physician, Dr. Schiedlauski in his affidavit, which has been presented here, it is document NO 508, Prosecution's Exhibit 244, does not mention any fatalities which could have occurred here. The witness, Dr. Kogon, however, has stated that he had heard from a third party, that two persons had died in connection with this treatment. What is your opinion about that?
"A. The first group of six inmates and other numbers were brought into the barracks, after six days they were released; their hands had healed and that is to say, that they had healed very well. From this it can be concluded that the drugs did not contain any bacteriae and that they were not poisonous. The inmates were released, and they were kept under further observation.
I can not report anything about any fatalities.
"Q. Therefore, in connection with those treatments through hormone tablets, we can not speak of that being an experiment at all. Would you consider this a method of treatment, or an experiment?
"A. I have seen these people for a period of three months. They came to see us occasionally, and, therefore, we can not call this an experiment. We can only talk about applications here just as I saw them as a group. We could only speak about an application of a drug which was known to us, even if we did not have the drugs in our hands. What the duties of Dr. Schiedlauski were he should know. What we assumed, was that the drugs were free of bacteriae, and that these people did not die as a result of the treatment." End of quotation.
From this testimony it becomes evident that we are not dealing with experiments. Did you know that, witness?
A. Yes. According to this testimony, we are not concerned with experiments here.
Q. But what did you know about that?
A. I did not know anything beyond what Riecks had wrote me in this letter. However, I would like to add in this connection that I have just remembered with regard to Dr. Vaernet, that we had discussed the matter, and that it was rumored that higher leaders were to receive these hormones in order to improve their potence, and I heard in this connection that these drugs usually were very expensive.
Q. Witness, did you see Dr. Vaernet again on any other occasion. Did you see him when he gave these hormones to inmates in usual tablet form?
A. No. So that it will not be said later on, that I kept this matter a secret, I would like to say now that I met Dr. Vaernet when we were at the Deutsche Heilmittel G.m.b.H. at Prague. I knew that he occupied himself there with the development of artificial glands. Since there were no inmates at Prague, he could not carry out any ex periments on inmates.
In any case, my official activity was completed, when I had reported him for technical work to Riecks.
Q. Did Reicks send you some notification about the matter a little later on, which was in August 1944?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Witness, I want to touch upon another question very briefly. In your cross-examination the matter of your transfer from the Navy to the Waffen-SS has been discussed. At the time could you have refused to join the SS-Verfuegungstruppe?
A. Yes, I could have refused but that would not have done me any good. Pohl would have succeeded in his plan inspite of my opposition, so that I could not have refused as an official, to get transferred.
Q. In 1939, I want to take the date of 1 September 1939, on your own desire, could you have left the Waffen-SS at that time?
A. No, I could not. At the time I was a soldier, and we were in war.
Q. Witness, upon questioning from me on direct examination, you stated that you had drawn the necessary consequences when you came from the school to the WVHA, if this had not been war time. Isn't that a certain contradiction?
A. I meant that in the following manner. I would have asked to be placed on pension. Whether I would have succeeded in doing so, of course, is another question.
DR. FRITSCH: I do not have any further questions, Your Honor.
RE-CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Witness, when you heard Dr. Kogon testify here at great length about the hormone experiments didn't you remember this correspondence in your connection?
A. I was not able to recall this correspondence at the time.
Q. You didn't remember then that you had ever heard about experiments with hormones?
A. I didn't hear anything about experiments but I only heard that an artificial gland had been developed which was a technical procedure and was not to lead to experiments but was to be applied just as had been done in the crystal treatment which had existed for hormones for years.
Q. And you didn't remember then these were to be applied to inmates in Buchenwald?
A. No, it was completely unknown to me.
Q. You didn't remember that they were to be applied to inmates of concentration camps somewhere or other?
A. It is possible that this matter was discussed on one occasion. It is possible that the intention existed to apply this to inmates. However, I don't know if it actually happened. I only heard of it in the course of this trial.
Q. Do you remember that Dr. Fritsch asked you the following very narrow question on his direct examination and told you to answer it with Yes or No: "Did you have anything to do with any of the medical experiments mentioned in the document books?" You answered, "No." Isn't it true that you told Dr. Fritsch to so limit his question to the document books and not to include the other proof in the case?
A. I did not consider the development of this artificial gland to be an experiment.
Q. You never mentioned anything at all about artificial glands to your counsel, is that right? Never mentioned the word to him?
A. I can't recall having mentioned it. I spoke a lot with him, but just don't know if I told him that.
Q. There is one last matter I would like to discuss with you and and that is your testimony concerning the defendant Klein. I read over the testimony you gave yesterday afternoon very carefully and you made several statements contradictory to each other. You told me on cross examination, first, that Klein was fired - that he was discharged. Second, the reason for his discharge was because of irregularities in his books. And, third, that his discharge was not because of any transfer to the front, And, then after a recess, you told Klein's counsel this, in answer to a question: "Do you know that Klein himself requested this auditing to be done?" You said, "Yes, Klein as a Lieutenant in the Reserve wanted to go to the front. I can remember that exactly. Before going to the front he wanted to be able to justify himself as an office chief of the auditing department because he was going to the front."
You had told me in answer to this question: "His discharge wasn't because he asked for a transfer to the front , was it?" You said, "That was something that had nothing to do with it." Now, your testimony in answer to my question is false or your testimony in answer to Kelin's counsel's questions were false. I want to get to the bottom of this and find out what you know about it. Tell me, is it true that Klein was discharged because of irregularities in his books?
A. That is correct. However, I must add the following.......
Q. Let me ask you this. His going to the front was the result of his being discharged, was it not?
A. No.
Q. You don't recall making that statement to me on my cross examination?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, the matter is as follows: It is correct that as a result of the auditing report he was dismissed. However, Klein in person suggested that this auditing work was to be carried out. That's Then the auditing was carried out.
After all Klein had a good conscience. Otherwise, he wouldn't have asked for that auditing to be done and he couldn't know that I would make certain findings which would result in his dismissal. After all, he was dismissed as a result of the report submitted later on - that is correct.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. What findings did you make that caused him to be dismissed?
A. I found irregularities in the administration of his office, as I said yesterday.
Q. I don't want generalities. I want to know what you found, not irregularities - but what did you find?
A. I can recall that the Party files were incorrectly kept in part. I can remember there had been a part that had not been accounted for that should have been listed on the balance and whenever construction work was carried and he approved, the budget funds were exceeded. These are the findings which were discovered by the auditor and I was informed about this as a result of the auditing report. All these matters were passed on to Pohl through the auditing report and then the question was decided, Your Honor, as to what should be done with Klein. This decision was entirely with Pohl. However, I would like to point out that the suggesting for auditing originated with Klein.
Q. You said that half a dozen of times. I didn't ask you about that. Did you find embezzlement?
A. I am not a lawyer and I cannot state that with decisive clarity. It was just ---
Q. Just answer my question and we will get along better. Did you find that there was a shortage of money?
A. Money wasn't lacking but money had been listed under loans which had been granted to collaborators and they should have been listed in the balance. That was the state of affairs.
Q. Were the loans ever paid back?
A. For a long time they were listed in the accounts and should have been balanced. In part there were advances for traveling expenses which should have been listed in the accounts. I don't know if this is an embezzlement!
Q. Please answer my question, witness. I didn't ask you anything about that. I asked you was the money listed as a loan was repaid?
A. At the time I was auditor not yet. That was taken care of later on.
Q. Why didn't you answer No. I didn't ask you anything else. Just answer my question. The money listed as a loan had not been repaid?
A. The loan had not been repaid.
Q. Were any misapplications of funds found in the audit?
A. The funds which had been approved for the construction work had been exceeded, more money had been spent than approved. That was the state of affairs. I cannot make any statement about the legal aspect. For example five thousand marks had been approved for construction and 10,000 marks had been spent and the funds were taken away from the business capital.
Q. That is all.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Then it was decided that Klein would go to the front after these irregularities were discovered, isn't that true?
A. I am not informed about the details. I knew Klein was to be assigned to front line duty. That was not part of my task.
Q. I din't ask you if he would be assigned, I am asking you when it was decided he would leave the WVHA and go on active duty. Only after these irregularities were discovered?
A. I didn't have anything to do with the decision. I don't know who made it. I was not informed at all.
Q. I am asking you when, not who? You know when the irregularities were discovered. You know when the decision for his leaving the office was made. Nobody was in a better position then you to know about it.
A. After the auditing report was submitted to him Pohl called Klein to him and told him about the decision ---- just what he had been told I don't know.
Q. Then it was decided that he would go on active duty, isn't that right, only then and not before?
A. That he wanted to go to the front and that he wanted the auditing to be done, that is correct. He wanted to become a soldier. However when, I don't know.
Q. Did you tell an interrogator on the 13 January 1947 in Nurnberg that it was decided that Klein would go to the front only after these irregularities were discovered? Did you make that statement?
A. I can't recall having made that statement. I don't know too much about these things. Maybe I made a mistake in that thing.
Q. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Before you start, counsel, I am suggesting that we are not trying Klein for embezzlement or for wrong conduct in office.
Is any further inquiry into this particular matter important, Mr. Robbins?
MR. ROBBINS: I think it possibly is, Your Honor. From the opening statement of defense counsel I believe that the motive for Klein's leaving, the reasons why he left, are important. I think he is going to claim that was because he was unpopular in the office and was persecuted somewhat the same defense as the defendant Hohberg has.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we are not trying to justify his discharge from the office and we really don't care whether his collaborators liked him or not. This seems to be outside of the framework of the Indictment, as the phrase is.
MR. ROBBINS: It is hard for me to predict what the defense Klein is going to say but if his decision for leaving was because of opposition to National Socialism and because of his principles against the SS --I think it would become important.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, don't you think we had better wait until he makes such a claim, rather than anticipating it. I mean, for any further inquiry.
MR. ROBBINS: I suggest, your Honor, that it possibly won't take defense counsel very long to finish up. Probably would take less time now than to call the defendant back.
THE PRESIDENT: I presume I should have raised the question some time ago more properly. Go ahead, sir.
DR. FICHT FOR THE DEFENDANT KLEIN:
Q. Witness, you have told us yesterday that Klein himself requested the auditing to be done and first of all there were difficulties in carrying out such an auditing at all. For that reason at that time a longer discussion took place about this matter and just how the auditing was to be carried out. Didn't Klein tell you specifically at that time just why he wanted this auditing to be carried out?
A. I believe I answered that already yesterday.
Q. However, I believe since the details have been mentioned here that it would be appropriate if you could tell us some details about the matter.
A. I only know, and I believe I have stated that literally yesterday that Klein wanted to go to the front or was to go to the front. I think that's how I expressed myself yesterday however they were of no interest to me because they were not part of my auditing...
THE PRESIDENT: What did Klein tell you as for his reason for wanting the audit made?
A. Klein told me that when he went into combat he wanted to have a confirmation from his business management that he had conducted the business properly.
Q. And, therefore, he mentioned the fact that he was to go to the front?
A. Yes, but when, where, or how, I don't know.
Q. Witness, please excuse me, I didn't ask you that. However, it wasn't a fact that an office chief could come at any time at all and ask for work to be audited?
A. We would not have carried out the auditing work if it hadn't been requested and Klein himself initiated that request for that work. It was connected with his assignment to the front which already may have been planned at any time. That is quite natural because when he left somebody had to become his deputy. He wanted to have a confirmation that he had conducted his business properly. That's the usual wish of any business manager.
Q. Well, let me ask a very precise question. Since apparently you are not quite informed about these things in any case you do not knot for certain whether at that time a discussion had already taken place between Pohl and Klein where Pohl told Klein he had to go to the front?
A. I can't recall anything of the sort. I don't know if Pohl spoke to Klein before. I just don't know that.
Q. Who carried out the auditing?
A. The auditing work was carried out as a general supervisory auditing ---
Q. I mean who carried out the auditing?
A. That was the auditor SS Dr. Flettstoesser in my opinion.
Q. And the man in charge of the auditing department also participated in that auditing work?
A. No, not at the beginning, only when Dr. Flettstoesser had made a report, as far as I recall.
Q. However, then he also took part in this auditing?
A. Yes, he took part in the final discussion before the final report was submitted.
Q. Witness, you have further stated in your answer to the Prosecutor's question that by virtue of this report the decision had been reached that Klein had to leave his office. How did this come to your knowledge? Did you have anything to do with his dismissal or did Pohl consult you in this matter or didn't you just hear about it?
A I submitted my auditing report in accordance with my duties. Pohl read it and then he reached his decision.
Q However, you did not participate in that?
A No, Pohl reached his decision all by himself. However, I was there when he announced his decision.
DR. FICHT: I have no further questions.
DR. FRITSCH: Your Honor, I do not want to have any further examination now. I request that the witness be excused from the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be removed from the witness stand by the Marshal.
DR. FRITSCH: (Counsel for the defendant Baier): Your Honor, I do not want to call the witness who has been approved for me since I have received an affidavit by him and I think that this is sufficient. I think that will make the procedure much more brief. I have concluded the presentation of my case, and I still reserve myself the right to submit the additional document book which permission was granted me.
THE PRESIDENT: You will have the right to furnish further document books in your defense at any time before the conclusion of the Trial. The next defendant?
DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for the Defendant Leo Volk): Your Honor, I shall now begin the presentation of evidence in the case of Dr. Volk, and I shall call the defendant as a witness in his own behalf. If the Tribunal please, I shall now call the defendant, Dr. Volk, to the witness stand.
LEO VOLK, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Raise your 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.
(Witness repeated the oath).
JUDGE PHILLIPS: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, your name is Leo Volk, isn't it?
A Yes, my name is Dr. Leo Narziss Bolk.
Q When and where were you born?
A I was born on the 2nd of May 1909 at Berlin.
Q Please describe to the Tribunal briefly your curriculum vitae until you began your studies.
AAfter I had attended three classes of the Lessing gymnasium, and after I had attended the gymnasium for 9 years, I metriculated in the year 1928 and I received my diploma which permitted me to enter the university.
Q What sciences did you study and where?
A I studied law. I studied at Grenoble in southern France, at Zurich , at Erlangen, at Greifswald, and at Berlin. I studied during vacations at the Sorbonne University in Paris.
Q And how did you complete your education?
A I passed the first state examination, and I passed the examination for the Referendar, that was at the end of the year 1932. I began a Referendar for 3 years, that is to say, I became an assistant in the German courts in order to complete my training there, without pay. In the meantime, I became a Doctor of Law, and I wrote a book about civil law. On the 4th of November, 1936, I took my second legal state examination. That was the so-called examination of an assessor.
Q What activity did you carry out then?
A I then became an administrator apprentice in September 1937, and I worked with the German Gemeindetag, the top level of the German municipalities. After 4 months, I became scientific assistant in that work, and after that I became a Referent on the table of organization, what can be compared with the position of counselor of the government, a Regierungsrat of the government service.
Q Please tell the Tribunal what organization the German Gemeindetag was.
A The German Gemeindetag is the communal top level, an organization of all municipalities and organizations. In our law, they are considered public legal authorities.
Q Did the German Gemeindetag belong to the NSDAP or did it belong to one of its affiliated organizations?
A No.
Q What were the tasks of the German Gemeindetag?
A The German Gemeindetag had the task to advise the German municipalities and affiliated organizations, and to exchange experiences between the cities and municipalities amongst each other.
Q How long did you stay with the German Gemeindetag?
A I remained with the Deutscher Gemeindetag until the time when I was conscripted into the Waffen SS, the third of January 1940.
Q For what reason did you terminate your activity with the Deutscher Gemeindetag?
A Because I was forced by the government, and because I was forced by conscription of the Army Corps Area into the Waffen SS, and I was assigned to the Administrative Office of the Waffen SS.
Q Does this mean that you volunteered into the Waffen SS, or was your conscription to the Waffen SS based on a legal order?
A I did not volunteer to serve in the Waffen SS. I was conscripted by virtue of law.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, in this connection, I want to submit Document Volk number 1, Volk Exhibit Number 1. Unfortunately, I haven't received the translation of this document as yet, and I therefore shall read only a few sentences from this affidavit. It is an affidavit by Dr. Kurt Kottenberg, and he stated before me: "In accordance with Law Number 52 of the Military Government: I have kept the files of the German Gemeindetag, the Section Rhineland; and Dr. Leo Volk was working from 1938 until 1940 as a Referent with this agency.
In the case of these files, we also have a statement of the 29th of December 1939, according to which, Dr. Leo Volk by order of the Civil Commander of the Wehrmacht was conscripted for service in the Armed Forces of the Waffen SS."
THE PRESIDENT: He was conscripted in 1939 or '40? He was conscripted into the Waffen SS on what date?
DR. GAWLIK: He was conscripted on 3 January 1940.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Could you have refused to comply with the conscription in the Waffen SS?
A No.
Q What would have happened if you had refused, or if you had not complied with the order to report for service in the Waffen SS?
A I would have been tried for desertion by a court martial, and probably, as it was Customary, and as it was prescribed by law, I would have been tried accordingly by virtue of the court martial manual and shot.
Q Where did you have to report, by virtue of this order of conscription?
A I had to report to the Administrative Office of the Waffen SS in Berlin.
Q When was that?
A That was on the 3rd of January 1940.
Q What rank did you receive when you entered the Waffen SS?
A I was just a plain private in the SS.
Q What was the highest rank which you reached in the Waffen SS?
A My highest rank in the Waffen SS was SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer in the Reserve. That rank corresponds to that of a Captain in the American Army.
Q When you reported to the Waffen SS, what assignment and what order did you receive?