A. No, at the time I didn't think about it.
Q. I mean '39 and '40?
A. No, I never did think that already when these people were arrested there were certain and systematic abuses of the people who were going to be sent to the concentration camps, and that the use of the inmates fundamentally speaking was not permitted as far as work was concerned. Furthermore, both institutions were organizations of the Reich.
Q. And how did it turn out later?
A. Also later on in the development of the situation I couldn't possibly have a fundamental misgiving against the compulsory labor on the part of the concentration-camp inmate in the concentration camps. The compulsory labor system which existed in Germany even before the war was extended more and more in the course of years during the war. There were certain conscriptions for labor which did not leave a free and open choce to the individual for the selection of his own place to work. Over ten million women at a time were working in the armament industry. The age limit was increased more and more. Women were also used for work. From the sixteenth year on the young people were already working normally.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. But they were getting paid for it, weren't they?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. Well, assuming that it was legal to make everybody work, did you also think it was legal to make them work without paying them?
A. Your Honor, may I come back to this at a later date, because I am going to speak about the entire complex of payment of wages to the inmates later on?
Q. Oh, yes. Before you leave the subject, you said that you assumed that anything that the Gestapo did was legal?
A. Yes.
Q. Well then, of course you assumed that anything that Hitler or Himmler did was legal?
A. According to my opinion at the time, yes.
Q. And that even included Himmler's project for the wholesale murder of the Jews?
A. I didn't know anything about it, your Honor.
Q. Well, are you going to talk about the Jewish problem, as you have called it, before you get through?
A. Yes, indeed. I shall come back to that, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. I will wait.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q. Now then, Herr Mummenthey, you wanted to say that if the entire population of Germany was submitted to compulsory labor, then you saw nothing wrong at least in the employment of the inmates, I shall come back to the payment of later on. You didn't see anything illegal in the employment of inmates, is that correct?
A. Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And don't overlook the employment of labor in the manufacture of munitions to be used against their own people. Be sure to talk about that.
Q. (By Dr. Froeschmann) Now then, Witness, you had been told early in your activity with the DEST of the categories of inmates they were employing. Now, what categories of inmates were being used there?
Court No. II, Case No. IV.
AAt the beginning I was told by the commanders and other agencies again and again that the inmates used for labor assignments were criminals and several anti-social elements, as I mentioned them before. Those were the professional criminals, BV's as they were called, the people who were in custody.
Q You stated all that before on yesterday, witness. Now, I would like to ask you, Mummenthey, did you at the time in your capacity as the man in charge of the legal department of DEST and later as business manager did you also deal with the question of labor assignment? Did you also deal with the legal point of view of the labor assignments?
A Yes, I did.
Q Who was the man that you charged with doing that?
A That was Dr. Schneider, who was a legal assistant at the time. That was in 1940 and 1941 that I gave him the order to study the entire complex of concentration camp inmates. First of all, from a legal point of view based on the regulations and laws prevailing at the time, and particularly by using the regulations issued by the Justice Department; and to check up on the whole thing. Dr. Schneider did that. As I can recall, he submitted a report to me from which the prerequisites could be seen for the commitments of persons to the concentration camp and the justification of the utilization for work in both official and private enterprises, and from which the legal justification could be derived. Dr. Schneider in the course of his study did not meet any doubtful points about the utilization of concentration camp inmate labor.
Q Now, then, you found out that there were also persons in the concentration camps, which persons did not quite fit in within the frame of professional criminals. You probably found out that there were also Jews in the concentration camp apart from those professional criminals. Maybe you also knew that members of other nations were there, is that correct?
A Yes, it is.
Q Therefore, you admit that. And also prisoners of war?
AAs far as foreign laborers were concerned, I would like to come Court No. II, Case No. IV.
back to Exhibit 436.
Q You already mentioned that one time, didn't you, witness, Exhibit 436?
A Yes, quite so.
DR. FROESCHMANN: That is Exhibit 436, your Honors, in Document Book 16, it is on page 39 of the English, NO-1049.
AAmongst the members there were also foreign workers. I would like to stress the point here that those were civilian workers who were indigenous people and who were not deported or conscripted for labor. The same applies to two foreign workers who were working for the Bohemia and who were foreign.
Q How was it with prisoners of war? What did you know about them?
A I can't remember having seen or heard of a report according to which prisoners of war were being used in DEST. All I know is that in the Bohemia and in the quarry of Mauthausen prisoners of war were being employed or were to be employed; and in the last case in order to educate them. Now, when the witness Bickel mentioned it was also Neuengamme in 1941 that concentration camp inmates were being used, I really didn't get any knowledge about it at the time. Of course, I would not want to deny the fact that it existed, but I would like to point out that these PW's were not used for armament purposes, and their activities were guided and permitted according to international treaties.
Q Witness, now remember, witness, a question which was put by one of the Judges on the occasion of the examination of a witness who came from the plant at Oranienburg; and the question was: Did not the defendant Mummenthey have the opportunity from his office to see the incoming transports of inmates early in the morning, in the afternoon, or the transports which were leaving; and didn't he also have the opportunity to see that PW's were amongst those inmates and to recognize them out of the whole group? That approximately, was the question at the time; I believe, unless I am very much mistaken, the witness answered that question by saying yes. Now, what do you have to say about the Court No. II, Case No. IV.
statement made by the witness?
A In 1944 I was in the Main Administrative Office in Oranienburg, and I was quite often in the plant itself. It never struck me that PW's were or should have been amongst the inmates working there because all the inmates who were working there were wearing the normal concentration camp inmates garb, and also those triangles of various colors, I didn't notice any particular insignia at the time.
Q It really didn't work out that way, that the PW's were working in their military uniforms or were included in the group of those inmates when they went to work and when they left work; but rather the people that you saw before you were all wearing concentration camp inmates garb, is that the way it was?
A Yes, that is the way it was. If they had been wearing another uniform, I would have noticed it immediately.
Q May I interpolate a question here. If you had seen prisoners of war at the time, what would you have done about it?
A Then I would have had to assume that it was on the basis of a special violation of some law, that they had lost their status as PW's for the period of time of their incarceration in the concentration camp, just as it was with some people who would lose their status during the period they were incarcerated in prison.
Q Now, however, if the prisoner would still be wearing the uniform, that is, not inmates' garbs, and if the PW's would have had the initials "S.U." painted on their back, which you saw quite often, I imagine, don't you think that you would have had Herr Dr. Schneider investigate the affair?
A It was my general attitude to have everything investigated which was some how doubtful. I imagine I would have done that.
THE PRESIDENT: Or would you have assumed that it was legal?
A Excuse me, I didn't get the beginning of the sentence.
THE PRESIDENT: Or would you have assumed that it was legal?
A I would have assumed that the PW's who had been sent to a concentration camp had been sent there due to a special violation, not Court No. II, Case No. IV.
as PW's.
THE PRESIDENT: If you saw a prisoner of war in a camp and you knew he was a prisoner of war, you wouldn't have questioned it, would you? You would have assumed that he was there legally?
A Your Honor, I didn't see all those things.
THE PRESIDENT: If you had seen a prisoner of war?
A Well, you can't say afterwards what you would have done in such a case.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think you can. You said that no matter what the Gestapo did you assumed that it was legal.
A That was my opinion at the time.
THE PRESIDENT: So that if you saw a prisoner of war working in a camp on munitions you would have assumed that it was legal, would you?
A Dr. Froeschmann, I didn't understand the question on the part of the president.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q The president would like to know if you had actually seen PW's in the camp would you also have assumed that those prisoners of war were there legally, and that they were being kept in the camp legally I am asking you three points, PW's, concentration camp inmates, and legal confinements there.
A Yes, I would have to assume that.
Q Why?
A Because there were PW camps where the PW's were being kept; therefore, if a PW was taken out of a PW camp, they must have had a special reason for doing so.
THE PRESIDENT: And if you saw prisoners of war working on war material, on munitions, you would have assumed that was legal?
A The moment somebody was committed to a concentration camp, according to my opinion, he would have lost his status as a PW for the period of time during which he was committed to the camp.
THE PRESIDENT: If you saw an inmate using a prisoner of war uniform designated as a prisoner of war, and working on munitions, you Court No. II, Case No. IV.
would have said: "Well, it must be all right, it is legal"?
AAt the time I'd have to assume that.
THE PRESIDENT: Sure. No matter what you saw, you assumed it was legal?
AAt the time I could have the possibility of knowing that a state or nation could do a thing which was illegal and which would not comply with the regulations at the time.
THE PRESIDENT: That's it exactly. The state could do no wrong. If the State did it, it was legal and therefore it was right.
AAt the time we had to assume that, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: And that was your attitude all the time that you were in charge of DEST, was it?
A I didn't approve of everything that was going on.
THE PRESIDENT: No, but you didn't raise any objection because you thought the state was doing it and therefore it was right.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
AAs far as I had any contact with things, yes.
Q Is that your attitude today?
A Not any more. The knowledge of today and the knowledge of the time absolutely differentiates; it is entirely different. There is a whole world between the two.
Q Have you come to believe that the State can be wrong?
A Yes, indeed.
Q Well-
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for Mummenthey):
Q His Honor asked how you got to believe that-
THE PRESIDENT: No, I didn't say that.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I must have understood wrong then.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
BY. DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q May I ask you that question witness: What is it that gave you the impression today that many of the things which at the time you considered correct were absolutely legal?
A That was due to the things which I learned now.
Q In these trials?
A Yes--and prior to that also.
Q Thank you.
Now then, let's come back to the point which caused this discussion. You were convinced, in other words, as far as inmates of every category were concerned, that he had been committed to a concentration camp based on a legal warrant of arrest. Now, how was it with the employment of the Jews in the enterprises of the DEST, witness. Did the DEST employ Jews at any time or in any place?
A I know that the DEST was employing Jewesses in their offices, and they were being used as typists in Auschwitz.
Q Were any more Jews employed in any other place?
A I can't recall that.
Q Weren't any Jews employed in the Bohemia?
A No-
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
MR. MC HANEY: I understood the witness to say that he knew that Jewesses were employed in the offices of DEST in Auschwitz. No mention of Auschwitz came through the translation that I heard. In other words, his answer was limited to Jews in the offices of Auschwitz. The translation leave the impression it was something general.
Q Did you understand that?
A Yes, it was in the office of Auschwitz.
Q Were children employed in the enterprises of the DEST?
A No.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I don't believe it is necessary for me to again speak about the small enterprise at Herzogenbusch. I believe that the witnesses Schwarz and the others have already clarified that point to as large an extent as possible.
THE PRESIDENT: About the diamond-cutting enterprises, it won't be necessary.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Very well, Your Honor.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Now, Mr. Mummenthey, you were taling about the fact that, as far as the criminal and anti-social elements were concerned amongst the inmates there was no reason whatsoever for you to believe that the labor assignment of these categories was not legal; but you also admitted that you did find out gradually that there were political inmates in the concentration camps also which were also being used for labor assignment.
Now, what was your attitude as far as this problem was concerned? What was your attitude as far as this problem was concerned?
A To put political prisoners together with anti-social elements into one camp did not only appear bad to me, but also I had certain misgivings about it because the influence of the anti-social elements was much stronger than that of the political inmates. Therefore, these people would cause damage around them. As far as the political prisoners opposed that, there was a struggle for the power--with the result which were described by the witness Kogon.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
To use political inmates and anti-social elements for work which had nothing to do with their professions before they were committed to a concentration camp-- That is to say, to use them for auxiliary work possibly, I did not only regard as entirely against their purpose, but I also regarded it as an indignity from the moral point of view which was entirely against my attitude and my ideas. At the time I was constantly of the opinion, as far as Dr. Salpeter was concerned I told him that, that such measures as the commitment of political prisoners in the concentration camps was concerned together with professional criminals, and also as far as labor assignment was concerned--I thought the whole thing was wrong. I was feeling sympathy for the political prisoners. Salpeter was of a different opinion, as far as that went. Even the political prisoners, according to him, were so-called criminals of the State. However, in the conversations which I had with Salpeter and in the conferences I had with the works managers, I realized one fact, the recognition of which refutes the statement made by the Prosecution according to which I was acting against humanity by arriving at the DEST and finding that these people were being used as labor, in labor assignments. Salpeter at the time told me in the conferences which I mentioned before, with reference to the reorganization of the enterprise, he had designated two problems as those problems, the solution of which were necessary in the interest of the enterprise.
One of them was the technical problem, and the other one was the commercial-financial problem. From the conferences with Dr. Salpeter and other collaborators, however, I did have to assume that those two problems were actually hiding the actual problem which the DEST was struggling with. That problem was the human being, and this actually brings me to the inmate problem which is the nucleus of the Prosecution's contention, as far as I am concerned. .
The basic problem in the DEST was not of the procurement of the best machines; it was not in the procurement of the best tools, either with which Schondorff or Guttchen respectively wanted to equip the plants; it was not with the foundry which was being built in Neuengamme Court No. II, Case No. 4.and in Oranienburg:
The basic problem could be found amongst the labor, amongst the workers.
The DEST was a plant which was using inmates, human beings who did not come voluntarily. Starting from that point of view, I didn't mind to sign Document 1276, Exhibit No. 428, in Document Book 16, on page 19 of the English, where this term is used. The works managers had told us about the work which was being done by those inmates, and comparing them with the work done by civilian workers. They described that done by the inmates as being insufficient. The whole thing varied between 5 and 55%. In this connection, I would like to point out Document NO-510, Exhibit No. 426, in Document Book 15, on Page 83. For the production of a free, civilian worker, therefore, you needed a considerable number of inmates. That was due to the fact that they were imprisoned, which lessened both the will-to-work and their possibility to work.
Work is a necessity which was given to us by God as is contained in the bible. It is by the sweat of the brow that you will earn your bread. However, work makes you feel cheerful, even though it is hard work--if the work is done with pleasure. It was such a pleasure that was missing the part of an inmate.
I realized that work which was being demanded from inmates as a whole was unproductive and it was not exactly fit to change the attitude of a human being. Fundamentally, I couldn't actually tell you when those ideas started drawing in my brain. It might have been in 1939 or 1940. In any case, thought, I simply couldn't get rid of the idea from that moment on how I could possibly help the inmate to become a free man again in the easiest manner. I looked upon this as a pioneer task in my life which arose my particular interest.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take the recess, Dr. Froeschmann. Just a minute.
MR. MC HANEY: If the Tribunal please, I wonder if the examination can't be made a little more pointed. Dr. Froeschmann makes usually a rather broad, general statement about problems in connection with in Court No. II, Case No. 4.mates, and then asks for a comment from the witness.
I don't know what the witness is going to say. I really don't know What question has been asked. I have no opportunity to make objections as to materiality. And also the witness is straying way off the point. He has been talking for seven minutes in response to the last question, and I gather all he is saying is that the inmates weren't very productive, and that his problem was to make them more productive. But it took him seven or eight minutes to bring that out, and it is not quite clear to me yet. He started talking about the basic problem being labor, and then he talked about five or six inmates--and I still don't know what the basic problem is.
So, if we could get a rather brief, sharp pointed question and a responsive answer it would certainly be more intelligible to me.
THE PRESIDENT: And to the Tribunal. But you see the witness has prepared, obviously, a statement from which he is reading, and all Dr. Froeschmann does is to introduce him to the document--and he goes on from there. We have tried to take a different course earlier in the session, but this is the plan that has been prepared and we are just submitting to it. It is taking too much time. It isn't directed at the point, but apparently, over months, this plan of presenting this case has been prepared.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Your Honor, with these statements, I simply wanted to give the defendant Mummenthey, as a witness, to explain to the Tribunal how he came to deal with the treatment of inmates. The witness would have told the Tribunal in a few minutes that he didn't want to use inmates in the DEST plants because he started out from that point of view which he had been describing all the time. It was for that reason that the defendant Mummenthey, as a witness in his own behalf, would have described the entire development of his ideas to this Tribunal We are almost through; it will take only about two or three sentences more.
THE PRESIDENT: How long are the sentences?
Well, you need not answer.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
DR. FROESCHMANN: No, the sentences will be very shorty.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
DR. FROESCHMANN: There will be short answers.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Witness, in order to shorten those questions, I am going to ask you the following. Is it correct that it was your aim to enable the prisoners to return soon as to status of a free-worker? You can answer that question by saying yes or no.
A Yes.
Q Is it furthermore correct that very few of the inmates were stone carvers or were experienced brickmakers?
A Yes, that is quite correct as far as the criminal and the anti-social elements were concerned. That does apply.
Q Is it correct that there was a lack of such experienced workers in the German brick industry?
AAround that time there was a great lack of such skilled workers in Germany, as could be seen from publications.
Q Don't you therefore think it economic nonsense to use political prisoners who were to be in the camp for only a short period of time, that they be used for work in that industry in order to use them at a later date?
A I looked upon those categories as not fit for work in the DEST, particularly due to the fact that they were to be released shortly.
Q And was it your endeavor to use a staff of skilled workers for the DEST?
A That was our task, yes.
Q Were the political inmates fit for that?
AAs I said before, no.
Q What categories of inmates did you actually want to use?
A I already referred to the categories of the anti-social and criminal elements.
Q Were these inmates to be taught to become stone carvers?
A In order to carry out that task, a large program was initiated.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q What was the aim of this instruction program?
A The idea was to again make free, human beings out of those inmates, to give them an opportunity to have a profession of their own and to earn their own bread--and not to commit the same crimes they had committed before.
Q Did you make any such suggestions while you were having conferences with Salpeter to change the DEST, namely, from using inmates and to possibly employ anti-social elements and professional criminals after they had been released?
A Yes, I did.
Q These inmates who were now trained, were they to receive special privileges?
A That large program did not limit itself to only stone carvers but also to skilled workers in stone quarries and brick workers. It had been provided, first of all, that practical and theoretical training in the enterprises of DEST would be given. They were to receive payments, depending on how much they worked and based on the wage scales which applied to the civilian workers. Furthermore, they were to be released after signing statements that they would work as free, civilian workers of the DEST. Inmates were to receive certain privileges of all kinds, even during this period of time when they were receiving their training, namely, when they wouldn't be carrying out work in the camp, they would have time off.
Q In a sense, did they start immediately with the training the way you described it?
A This program was put down in a special memorandum which was made available to the concentration camp inmates, whereupon a report was made.
Q Will you please repeat that, Herr Mummenthey? I asked you if that training was actually put into effect.
A The entire program was published in a memorandum and it was made available to the inmates of the concentration camps. A large number of people reported, volunteered, particularly professional criminals. I Court No. II, Case No. 4.couldn't tell you if there were any other categories amongst them.
Q Did you appoint a specialist or an expert as the man in charge of this training course for re-education?
AAn expert was employed for this purpose. His name was Kaiser; he was a stone carver, and he was the one who carried out this task in an exemplary manner.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Your Honor, I have an affidavit by this Kaiser, and I will introduce it to the Tribunal at a later date. Everything can be seen from that about this training program.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess until two o'clock.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess until 1400.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.
AFTERNOON SESSION KARL MUMMENTHEY - Resumed
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Herr Mummenthey, we stopped when you were formulating your ideas to Salpeter to take the inmate character away from DEST. Now, did you come to an agreement with Salpeter to the effect to submit this idea to Pohl?
A Yes, we did that.
Q Did you personally submit these ideas to your superior agency either in writing or orally?
A Yes, I did that both in writing and orally.
Q When was that?
A 1940 or 1941.
Q What was the attitude taken by Pohl toward this idea?
A He seemed to be in agreement.
Q Did Pohl discuss it with Eicke?
A Yes, he did. Eicke, however, was of a different opinion.
Q Witness, will you please look at Document NO-385 which is Exhibit 54. You will find it in Document Book III on page 43 of the English book. Reference is made there to a Himmler order of 5 December 194l which contains the training scheme. Is this document connected with the suggestions which you and Salpeter transmitted to Pohl?
A From this document I see that apparently it was based on the suggestions and reports to Pohl.
Q Himmler, in other words, agreed to your idea?
A Yes, I can say that particularly from paragraphs 1 to 4 on page 2 of the document.
Q Now, witness, we have a document on the other hand, Document PS-654, Exhibit 333, in Document Book XII, page 28 of the English edition. This is the notorious Thierack document. How is the rela tion between that document and Document 385?
I only want you to give your personal opinion.
A I saw this document for the first time in this trial and heard for the first time of the ideas it contains. It is in stark contrast to the document which is Exhibit 54 and it hits out against the ideals which we submitted.
Q Can you explain to the Court who was addressed by this document? Purely anti-social elements are being referred to here. Are they the same anti-social elements we spoke about yesterday?
A No, quite different categories are mentioned here.
Q What categories are mentioned here?
A Jews, Russians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Poles and Gypsies.
Q Were all of these categories named by you just now anti-social elements, in your opinion?
A Never.
Q Is it correct for me to say that the term here used by Thierack namely, anti-social elements is a particularly perverted part of the national socialistic ideology?
A Yes, you can say that.
Q You say that this was in stark contrast to your own opinion. On this occasion I want to ask you did the management of DEST and you, in particular, at any time toy with the idea or translate into action to have inmates destroyed by their work in the plants?
A That idea is so absurd and is in such contradiction to everything that we did and wanted to do -
Q Have you finished?
A Yes.
Q I waited because you said it was so absurd. I thought you wanted to finish the sentence.
Now, witness, you can see from his Honor's question this morning, namely, that you were reproached with that fact that these inmates when they had to work in your enterprise had to do their work without proper compensation.
What do you have to say about that problem? The problem, I mean of compensation for inmates, its motivation, its amount, and the way they were paid out.
A I took the attitude toward Dr. Salpeter and the managers that between BEST and the inmate no contract existed which is the reason DEST was not under obligation to pay wages. It was up to the Reich to pay some compensation to the inmates from what DEST paid to the Reich by way of compensation for inmates, and we regarded it as contribution to various expenses borne by the Reich.
Q What were the various contributions which the Reich had to incur for the inmates?
A This is what the Reich had in the way of expenses: billeting, feeding, clothing, medical care, and compensation to the inmate. These expenses had to be listed on the Reich budget but I don't know all the details here.
Q Do you know in what way the Reich or shall we say the Reich agency concerned, received the money necessary?
A No, I know nothing about that.
Q Was it your opinion that the Reich had to pay the inmates in the same manner as they did, for instance, for the wages for workers employed in Reich enterprises?
A Yes, roughly like that.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q Just a moment. Don't you know that the Reich paid 30 pfennigs a day for the services of the inmates of the camp, or 30 pfennigs was paid by DEST to the Reich?
A Yes, at the beginning.
Q Well, did they ever pay any more than that?
A Yes, it was increased currently until it reached in the end 4 to 6 marks.
Q Wasn't that just bookkeeping and actually never paid?
A The amount was actually paid out, Your Honor, a transfer was carried out from the bank to the administration of the concentration camp.
Q That's right - a transfer and the inmates never received any of it.
A I don't know the details here, Your Honor, as far as the bookkeeping of the Reich was concerned.
Q But you know what the inmates got?
AAll I know is that we paid a voluntary contribution to the inmates which we added to the amount paid to the Reich.
Q You mean that later on you allowed the inmates for extraordinary good work a bonus certificate which they could buy small items with in the PX of the concentration camp if there was anything there for them to buy?
A That so-called bonus, Your Honor, as I remember was given to every inmate who worked for us and the total amount of these bonuses reached as I remember about 1/3 or 1/4 of the total amount which we paid to the Reich. For instance, if we paid an annual amount of 300,000 marks to the Reich the inmates received from us about 100,000 marks.
Q In what form?
A The banks had to transfer this amount to the administration of the concentration camp and issue back so-called bonus vouchers. They were issued to the inmates in turn.
Q And they could buy nothing with this certificate if there was nothing in the PX for them be buy.
A If Your Honor please, we could not pay them cash because the administration of the concentration camp took the attitude that we must not give cash to inmates.
Q I am not bothered about why you couldn't pay it to them, I am just asking you for a fact, that you paid them no cash, that you gave them a bonus certificate with which they could buy small items in the PX if there happened to be anything there for them to buy. If there was nothing in the PX for them to buy the certificate was worthless. Now, is that right or not?
A I was not so familiar with the concentration camps for me to answer your question in precise detail. I can only give you one example from 1944 where a manager told me once that the inmates, instead of the vouchers, wanted us to buy goods for them, which we did.
Q What kind of goods?
A In that case the inmates wanted to have tobacco.
Q And where was the tobacco obtained from?
A We obtained a voucher from a Reich agency, tobacco.
Q. And for how much?
AAs I remember it a truckful of tobacco goods arrived.
Q For how many people?
A Some hundreds, I should think.
Q You mean some several thousand?
A In this case, as I remember it, some hundreds, Your Honor.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q There is nothing in any of the documents that confirms your state ment that an inmate received anything for his labor, that he could buy anything with, except if there was something in the commissary or PX that he could buy with a certificate.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q Witness, you stated that inmates could not receive cash because of certain security instructions. Wherein did security lie, in cash being paid to an inmate, wherein was security threatened?
A Your Honor, the camp explained it to us in this way, and I can only assume the explanation actually. Perhaps the camp wanted to prevent the inmate to use the cash when he wanted to escape, but that is my assumption.