Q.- What were the agencies which were doing the deportation of Poles as workers, or the resettlement of Poles; what were the agencies tell me witness?
A.- The deportation of the Poles into the old Reich, as far as I can recall and according to my knowledge, was done by the Labor Office and the resettlement was done by the so-called resettlement commission. I would like to add that deportation to the old Reich was quite often not carried out under conventions, but quite a few Poles went to the Reich voluntarily because they were working there under certain conditions which were given by the armament distribution. We have already spoke about the latter program such as additional food was given to the Polish workers, etc.
Q.- I shall now come to a different point, witness, were those enterprises spolized?
A.- No.
Q.- Who were the brick workers when the big trustees took over those enterprises; the brick works I mean?
A.- I believe I stated that before, but continuing I would like to speak of a few points in detail. Old buildings and machines with very few exceptions needed repair and most enterprises, due to the war, had either been entirely or partly destroyed. Due to the economic condition of the brick industry in Poland, which was not very good, the persons who owned those enterprises prior to our arrival postponed certain jobs which had to be done currently. For instance, the accumulation of old iron or scrap iron and the current repair of both buildings and machines, etc., and similar things. All of this work had first to be caught up with. We had to repair all those things, I have to state I was in a happy condition that I did not have to be very careful with a nickel. After all I did not have a special order here to make money out of the enterprise, rather my order was to bring those big factories back into order. I be lieve that it is not very often that a somebody is in a better condition to carry out those things to such an extent and as far as the war permitted it, I availed myself of every opportunity to do that.
I furthermore rebuilt the work shops. I had hand tools installed, had transportation tools, thousands of kilometers of small tracks which were provided for western Germany used in the efforts to construct the Western wall, small push cars and similar things. In other words, technical things which did not at all exist prior to those enterprises before.
Then, of course, there were racks, the wooden boxes where the bricks were assembled before burning them, and they had to be repaired or installed again. In particular they even increased their efficiency. I believe that gives you the details.
Q.- Yes, yes, quite so. When the administration of the brick plants was taken over by the trustee general was there any working capital there?
A.- No, only to a very small extent. It is quite obvious that the moment the gormer owners left, they took everything along in cash. The equipment for the manufacturing of brick which was in the plants during the hard winter of 1939-40 suffered severely and they could only be used in part. That was the reason why I had some difficulties with money as Dr. Winkler stated yesterday.
Q.- What was the amount of the investment that occurred during your service with the trusteeship?
A.- I cannot give you the exact figures today, after all these many years, but it amounted to millions, I don't believe that eight million would be over estimating the whole thing.
Q.- How can you tell us about the extent of the investments?
A.- From the balances which are in the hands of the prosecution, I believe the figures can be seen from there quite clearly.
Q.- If the prosecution's contention would be correct that the enterprise had been exploited, now would this show in the balances of the East ern German Construction Material Company?
A.- The funds of the enterprise of course would have decreased year after year and it would have shown an exceptional balance. As far as that goes, if one receives an order to exploit an enterprise and if the order is carried out, I don't think anyone would set up balances or keep books.
Q.- Can you tell us examples of balances for investment in original plants?
A.- I could give you a large number of examples, Mr. Defense Counsel, I would like to give you a few examples here which might illustrate matters. A very large and good enterprise was the brick works at Alt-Krotoschin, which was in an area only ceded to Poland in 1920. In this brick work's we not only had an entirely new steam machine erected but we also installed a new power plant. We also installed a fire place which was working hourly automatically and we had an artificial drying plant. The boilers had an automatic firing installation.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Do you think all of these technical details are necessary, if he tells us in a few words that it was modernized might that no cover it? I am wondering if it is necessary to go into so much technical details. How do you suppose that will clarify in any way the issues of the indictment. I am merely offering that as a suggestion.
DR. GAWLIK: Well, if the Tribunal does not think this is very important, I will not bother about it. However, this is one of the points of the indictment as the defendant is charged with spoiliation in the brick works. Of course, I should like to hear him state what he did actually. That not one nail was taken, but that millions of marks were spent in enterprises. Perhaps the Prosecution will drop this point of spoiliation of the brick works then I will not have to go into detail.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I don't see where this involves spoiliation. What he describes and what he is telling us in details is what the works consisted of. He is not telling us whether he misappropriated the property or not.
He is merely giving us a great detailed inventory of certain factories.
DR. GAWLIK: Well, exploitation or exploitation by spoiliation means that certain things were moved from there, dismantled and large portions were sent to Germany in large amounts. Of course, I want the witness to tell us about that.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes, of course, that is most important, but that is not what he was talking about at least as far as I was able to get it. OK. very well proceed.
DR. GAWLIK: I also want to give the witness certain examples, so he can actually tell you all about it and he can give you the description of various points and similar things, also the names of the plants.
In this connection, I would like to show you document 1004, this is exhibit 445, in document book 16, which is contained on page 78 of the German and 80 of the English document book, information which deals with the brick works at Krubin which investments were made in this brick works at Krubin?
THE WITNESS: Regarding this brick factory we have to differentiate between the investment, which had been made with the old brick factories, not mentioned in this letter, and with the new construction of a new brick factory and the new brick factory is the one that is mentioned here. It is perhaps a very comprehensible example to show that I was not afraid of any expense in order to provide this plant with the new developments of technique, in order to make an exemplifying plant of it. In order to illustrate this for the laymen also, it might be helpful for me to say that in this brick factory we only needed three and a half workers for the manufacturing of one million brick, while the normal average in Germany would require ten or twelve workers and in the east from fifteen to twenty workers. This was therefore a point which was very intensive from a capital point of view and at the same time it was provided with all social installations which normally we can find in industry where a lot of money is being earned.
I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the following. For the first time here they are speaking of tunnel stoves which was not only a technical affair but was really a social progress. They were the best that existed in this field. It is a known fact that working in over-heated rooms is very, very tiring. It is also known that workers at so called ring-stoves, as they exist all over the world, is usually difficult work. The workers are working within the stove with a heat of 40 to 50 degree and when they come out of that room on their break they go into temperatures between 15 and 20 degrees. This cooling off of temperature brings certain sickness among human beings. Unless they are very healthy persons. The tunnel stove on the other hand does not make it necessary because the bricks are loaded into special cars and they load them outside of the stove and then they are pulled through the stove automatically. The worker therefore has nothing to do inside the stove.
I believe that is all you wanted to know, Mr. Defense Counsel, because this is the best example I can give you in order to show how the work was simplified from a technical point of view.
DR. GAWLIK: The Prosecution on Page 1028 of the German "The drying plants, with the exception furnished by the German Equipment Works, are completed."
The Prosecution further quoted the following paragraph, "The opening of the plant would possibly have to be carried out by SSObergruppenfuehrer Pohl due to the importance of the whole thing." Furthermore, the Prosecution quoted a small paragraph at the end of the letter, which is written in pencil, which reads: "I cannot participate in the opening celebration," and it is signed by Pohl. I do know from those quotations that the Prosecution thinks this document important, which importance is not quite obvious to me. However, the only way I can understand the whole thing is that the Prosecution understands from this word, which is the German word standing for "Reichtfest", which means in English an opening celebration, and the German word "Richtfest" which also stands for hanging that took place there. I can't understand this document at all under those circumstances.
THE PRESIDENT: Even the Prosecution couldn't be that wrong. I don't think they interpreted it in that way. They didn't translate it that way.
DR. GAWLIK: No, Your Honor. You see I wanted to ask the witness what "Richtfest" is, which according to the interpreter's opinion is an opening celebration, in order to eliminate mistakes, because I simply don't know what the participation in an opening celebration has to do with a war crime. I don't know if it is interpreted literally or read into the record. That's why I asked the witness to explain "Richtfest".
THE PRESIDENT: The Prosecution says it is an opening ceremony, so we will take that interpretation. It isn't a hanging.
Q. Which plant is this one in Krubin, this Brick works .... Krubin?
A. It is a brick works.
Q. During the construction of this brick plant in Krubin was any compulsory labor used or any inmates?
A. No. That can also be seen from Document NO 1292, as contained on page 51 of the Document Book No. 3, that is a letter by Kammler to the Inspector of the Concentration Camps, namely Brigade Leader, Brigadefuehrer Gluecks. This letter or the annex to this letter, mentioned under Point 2, the works at Krubin, and he marked that as an instruction project, completion of brick works. And the following column, in which he is stating the requirements of the number of Jews, inmates and P.W.s requested, no figures are contained. That proves that no such labor was to be requested. In this connection permit me to state how the whole thing came about, namely that Dr. Kammler mentioned this construction project in his list. My firm had their own construction department--
THE PRESIDENT: It isn't necessary to say that. The witness is quite right that no Jews or inmates were mentioned in this document. That is enough.
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, indeed, Your Honor. Do permit me to speak about it, Your Honor. This has been mentioned repeatedly by the Prosecution, referring to office groups, and I want to refute that statement. It may appear from this document as to the Amtsgruppe C if the establishment of this construction and plays a special part,-A.: That is not the case. I had my own construction department which carried out both the construction and the planning, and I also had the construction--- the enterprise in Krubin itself was constructed by a private firm in Berlin, a so-called Kera-Bedarf, which carried out the constructional supervision of this enterprise. The suppliers were exclusively private enterprises. In this letter now I mentioned that the doors and the air conditioning flaps were to be delivered by the DAW, German Equipment Works.
I did not give that order. The individual orders had already been sent out by me to the individual private firms, and Dr. Salpeter, as my superior at the time, however, transferred that order to the DAW, exclusively, German Equipment Works; Amtsgruppe C was not any use to me, however, when procuring the contingents, that is iron and wood. I made definite construction material and got it personally to the plant. Even that I did together with my collaborators. Dr. Kammler had at the time requested a report about a construction project the idea which I couldn't quite see, I believe he used it to make the whole instruction projects sook important, and to show what a large field of tasks he had.
Q. Was there even one single enterprise or plant which was a part of the Eastern German Construction Material Company dismantled or transported to Germany proper?
A. No, on the contrary. They received a large amount of material in order to extend the plant and to better the plant.
Q. Were any parts or parts of the plants at any time removed from the Eastern German Construction Material Enterprises, and transported to the Germany proper.
A. No, even that did not apply to this. Of course it would have been in contradiction with my production order. I can tell you here with absolute certainty that not one single screw was removed from the Eastern German Construction Material Company, in order to transport into the old Reich. Contrary to that we brought a whole large number of materials into those enterprises.
Q. Were those enterprises of the Eastern German Construction Material Company during that time when you were business manager, did they make any profits?
A. Yes, a few plants made profits, but a large number of those plants also had losses.
The total result of the first year, namely 1940, was a bad one, because at the time we had to carry out those repairs that were necessary due to the fact that they were not being taken care of, in the previous years, of course, we couldn't very well activate those things so they would balance, but had to write then off. In the later years the investments which we had didn't bear beyond their fruit. It can also be added that only part of the enterprises were working during those years, because we had difficulties with procuring the coal, and of course we only used the better enterprises and better plants. But according to my recollection even then the profits which occurred were not large enough to cover any of the losses of the first year. In this connection I want to add, Mr. Defense Counsel, that we had a special bookkeeping department for every plant, therefore we had a special result of the plant's production for each individual plant. Now if an enterprise ever were concluded to balance with a profit, this profit remained with the balance and the capital of the enterprise. One should not forget the fact that the money for those enterprises had to be earned by me slowly and slowly furthermore investments took place in the larger plants, which of course had to be paid from the profits. I believe this is sufficient, isn't it?
Q. Were there any profits of the Eastern German Construction Material Company transferred to the SS?
A. No.
Q. Were there any regulations issued according to which the profits of the Eastern German Construction Material Company were to be transferred to the SS?
A. No.
Q. I shall now come to another point.
THE PRESIDENT: We shall now come to lunch.
(Thereupon a recess was taken.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 13 50 hours, 8 August 1947).
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session DR. HANNS BOBERMIN - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. I have a few more questions about the problem of the Eastern German Construction Material factories. How were the owners compensated?
A. I should like to deal with the question first which would concern compensation for a possible sale of the works. It occurred that some factories were handed over to private parties. Those private parties were not appointed to be the owners but HTO appointed them as individual trustees with the obvious aim of making them owners of the factories in due course. I know only of one case when half of a brick works, that is to say half of the site on which the brick works was located, was sold to a Baltic German. That is to say it became his property. Special circumstances which I cannot judge applied here probably. The appraisal was always done through the HTO and by the HTO.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the HTO?
THE INTERPRETER: It is the Main Agency, Trustee Agency East, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh.
A. (Continuing) The usual problem was how can we compensate the owners for the fact that we used the brick works, or to speak more correctly, how can the owner avail himself of the results of the production of the brick works? As far as the owners were not residing at that location, which applied to most of the cases, the profit remained with the assets of the works. If the owner was among those present I insisted that the HTO would arrive at this regulation. The owner remained with the factory. He was allowed to run and operate the factory, but he had to operate if according to the regulation issued by the Trustee General.
He had to observe the regulations of the Trustee General also when there was an order to extend the factory. For his work or for the fact that the work existed at all he received his compensation, in that he was paid as though he was a paid employee and works manager. This payment was given him independent of the fact whether or not there were any profits. If there had been any profits over and above that payment, that profit would have remained with the assets of the works.
The third case which occurred was that the owner, although he was not present, he, as an individual had fled the country, the family was still living there. In those cases the HTO had given me permission to pay other members of the family a certain sum for their support, but only if and when the works made a profit; but I also made such payments, even if there were not profits at first. I believed I could answer for that action because the transitional period from one economy to the other, indubitably raised difficulties, particularly in the field of prick economy, and I did not wish that the family suffer from conditions of which they were innocent. Of course, these payments were made within certain limits. I believe this is the answer to your question.
Q. I shall now talk about the next set of problems, the Central Works of Bialystock. Did you administer that Central Administration?
A. No, I did not administer that Center. I was merely a technical expert supervisor.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the name of it?
INTERPRETER KURTZ: Bialystock, (spelling), B-i-a-l-y-st-o-c-k.
BY DR. GAWLICK:
Q. Who was in charge of the administration of that Central Works?
A. The manager of the Central Works.
Q. What was the difference between administration and supervision?
A. The administration of the Central Works and Bialystock, in commercial and technical aspects, was independent. I had the right to supervise them, of which I availed myself, of course, in order to prevent the wrong technical arrangements being made or that by negligence work would be handicapped.
THE PRESIDENT: Where was this located, in Poland?
A Bialystock is at a distance of about 200 kilometers northeast of Warsaw. That area was formerly Polish, and by the end of 1939 it was taken over by the Russians, and then when the Russian campaign started, it was reoccupied by German troops.
THE PRESIDENT: It started out Polish, it then was Russian, and then was German, and then was Russian again?
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, exactly. May I perhaps inform the Court of the fact that Poland, in 1939, was divided between Russia and Germany. The eastern part fell to Russia and the western part to Germany. That was laid down in the RussoGerman Pact of Friendship which we have mentioned before. Bialystock was in the area which in 1939 fell to Russia.
THE PRESIDENT: What was Mr. Bobermin doing administering a plant that went to Russia, or was that after Germany took it back?
DR. GAWLIK: It had been Russian until 1941 only, and when in 1941 the Germans occupied that area, Dr. Bobermin took over the supervision of that factory.
THE WITNESS: May I say something about the legal and political background of that area?
THE PRESIDENT: That would be 1941?
DR. GAWLIK: Yes, your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: And what kind of a plant was it, what did they manufacture or make?
A.- They were brick works, tiles, and potteries. May I say something about the legal and political background of this area, your Honors.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
A.- I do not wish to create the impression that area had been made part of the German Reich territory after the opening of the Russian campaign. That area was regarded as a special district, that is as occupied country. It was not made part of the government general, even. It was regarded simply as the Bialystock District which was under a Chief of the Civilian Administration, but it was not part of the Government General. The final solution was postponed until the end of the Russo-German War; and the basis of the Russo-German Treaty of Friendship was still regarded as the basis of the solution of the whole problem.
THE PRESIDENT: But you had to wait to see who held it last?
A.- Certainly, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: You could hardly settle its status until you found out who held it at the end of the war.
A.- Exactly, quite so.
THE PRESIDENT: Quite sensible.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q.- What happened to the Brick Works which were later coordinated to the Bialystock Central Works and which belonged to Polish citizens, after the occupation of that area by the Russians?
A.- Those Brick Works were disappropriated by the Russian State. They were declared to be state owned, and were put under the administration of the Stone and Earth Trust which is the official economic administration.
THE PRESIDENT: We are a little confused by the word "disappropriated". I don't think it is an accurate word. It means confiscated?
DR. GAWLIK: In this case, it is correct. The Russians confiscated those enterprises.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q.- What was the legal status after that area was occupied by Germany in 1941?
A.- The Works continued to belong to the Russian State.
Q.- What measures were taken by the German administration?
A.- The German administration, represented by the chief of the Civilian Administration, appointed trustees for all these enterprises. The exception again was made by the Construction Material factories. There a trustee general was appointed who administered all those enterprises with the exception of a concrete factory. That one had an individual trustee.
Q.- Who was the Trustee General?
A.- Herr Pohl.
Q.- What measures were taken by Pohl?
A.- Herr Pohl had a new central works formed, appointed a manager, and this man was put under my administrative and technical supervision.
Q.- Were the Brick Works, which were coordinated to the Bialystock center, looted?
A.- No, Those Works again were run with the care typical of a commercial expert. They were repaired, extended in some cases, and that, of course, could not be done on a scale which applied to the Eastern German Building Material factories, because meanwhile we had reached the end of 1941 and material had become considerably more scarce. In any case those factories were kept in a good condition and operated economically. Nothing was taken away from that factory to transfer it to another area. On the contrary, considerable quantities of material were taken there in order to improve the factory conditions.
Q.- Were forced labor or inmates used in those factories?
A.- No. Here again voluntary workers were employed who in most cases had worked there under the Polish system and during the Russian period.
Q.- What happened to the profits?
A.- The profits remained with the works.
Q.- Please take up Document NO-1021, which is Exhibit 448. It is in Document Book 16, on page 82. Did Office W-II run the Russian enterprises which are mentioned here in this report?
A.- No. W-II never operated factories in the old Russian territory.
Q.- Did you operate the Russian factories which are mentioned here, you yourself?
A.- Do you mean outside the task of W-II? No.
Q.- We are concerned here with the letter, I mean, only with a suggestion on your part which was not carried out as far as Office Group W was concerned?
A.- Quite. It was purely a suggestion caused by a questionnaire, it seems to me. Otherwise, I could hardly explain the fact that I am going into various points in detail.
Q.- What measures did you intend to take which were then not carried out by you, Office Group W, or Office W-II?
A.- One can only understand these suggestions if one knows anything about Russian Economy.
I only interested myself with these things theoretically, but especially after the beginning of the Russian campaign, I received reports about the situation in the industries there. Russia does not know private property in the commercial sector. Now, after the German front had penetrated deeply into Russia, the various commercial enterprises were without leaders. The reason for that was that the Russian factories were administered centrally by the Trusts in Moscow. Once connections were disrupted from their central agency, and after a large number of the leaders had been taken by the Russians, with them to the Hinterland, the factories were closed down and could be operated. For that reason, and that becomes also clear from other documents submitted here, a correspondence between Goering and Himmler which unless I am very much mistaken was not connected at all with the WVHA.
And this correspondence formed the basis, and there is one letter from Goering to Himmler among the documents for this questionnaire which I am here to answer and fill in. In the whole of my letter I have not mentioned one word of confiscation because the word would be completely out of place here because here we were not concerned with private property; nor have I spoken about seizure -- only of administration, or taking over, or operating, or looking after.
That was the tenor of my letter, and I can't say in how much these suggestions were ever realized. All I know is that, for instance, in the Ukraine the construction material factories were taken over by the Reich Commissioner himself, who operated them, and an expertly trained SS officer was assigned to him. But he did not work together with my office. That is all I can say about this document.
THE PRESIDENT: The former Russian territories mentioned in Exhibit 446, the document you were just talking about -this does not mean the same group, the central group, that you were talking about before in Bialystok?
DR. GAWLIK: No, it doesn't.
THE PRESIDENT: You said that these were factories in old Russian territory. It has nothing to do with the Polish factories?
DR. GAWLIK: No.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
THE WITNESS: May I just add one sentence, lest there is confusion? It is possible that the Reich Commissioner for the Ukrained, or his deputy in construction material matters, was given a few machines which I had bought for my own works, but if so they can only have been small in number. They were spare parts of machines probably which I had bought in Germany for my own factories which were in my depot in Posen and which were then discovered by the expert for the Reich Commissioner in the Ukraine, and he asked me for support -- which, of course, I gave him to a modest degree.
That may have been the only case when we collaborated for a brief period of time, but it did not lead to anything, because we were so separated in space.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q: Please tell the Court who the Reich Commissioner was? To what sort of agency he was subordinated? Whose orders he was under? How many Reich Commissioners did you have altogether in the Eastern Territory?
A: The Occupied Russian Territory had been placed under civilian administration. It was divided into two areas; each area was under the orders of a Reich Commissioner. In the north it was, as far as I know, Reich Commissioner Lohse; and in the south it was Reich Commissioner, the Gauleiter of Eastern Prussia, Gauleiter Koch. The Reich Commissioners had sub-divided their area into general districts, and they were administered by a commissioner general. All these commissioners were under the Reich Minister for the Occupied Territories. It was therefore part of the German Reich administration.
Q: Who was the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories?
A: Alfred Rosenberg.
Q: I shall now reach the next set of problems: Klinker Concrete, G.m.b.H. When was that company formed?
A: Early in 1942.
Q: Why was it formed?
A: The Klinker Concrete G.m.b.H. was erected in order to administer, take over, those works which were not under the trusteeship arrangements of the H.T.O.
Q: Where did the capital come from?
A: From the DWB.
Q: What did that capital amount to?
A: One hundred fifty thousand marks, when it was founded, and, later on, by the end of 1943, it was increased to two millions.
Q: Who were the partners?
A: After the foundation which had to be carried out by two partners, the shares were with DWB to a hundred percent.
Q: Who were its managers?
A: I was the manager.
Q: Did they have any Prokurists?
A: Yes.
Q: Who were they?
A: When it was founded, Dr. Vok was the Prokurist of the company, at first. A little later, I think by fall of 1942, Dr. Volk was relieved and two colleagues of my main administration were appointed Prokurists. In the course of '42 a third Prokurist was appointed.
Q: What was Dr. Volk's task as a Prokurist?
A: Dr. Volk, immediately after the foundation of the company helped in purchasing the majority of shares of the Golleschau Portland Cement factories from Swiss concessions. Furthermore, Dr. Volk, on some occasions, dealt with certain matters pertaining to civil law, but only for a brief period of time. I don't think he did anything else.
Q: Was that all Dr. Volk did as the Prokurist of the Klinker Cement G.m.b.H.?
A: Yes.
Q: What were the tasks of Klinker Cement G.m.b.H.?
A: It had two tasks. Once it was a holding company. It administered the share lot of the Golleschau concrete factory, and the shares of the Prago Construction A.g. Then it had leased about ten factories and operated them at their own expense. Then in the courst of 1943, the Klinker Concrete G.m.b.H. took over an administration on a trusteeship basis, This was the fireproof factory of Krejsa in Stankau near Pilsen. That trusteeship was carried out by agreement with the owner, to whom, for instance, had to be submitted all propositions for the extension of the works. A small brick works was also part of that plant, which I want to mention simply to be correct.
Q: Were the enterprises which were administered on a trusteeship basis by the Klinker Concrete G.m.b.H. confiscated?
A: No, if they were on a trusteeship basis, they were not. We only had this one factory of Krejsa.
Q: What about the others?
A: The others had been leased.
Q: Had they been confiscated?
A: Some of them, yes.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q: Were all the enterprises of the Klinker Cement works in one place?
A: No, your honors. They were dispersed between Eastern Galicia, as far as Pilsen.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, was there one central plant, the Klinker Cement Works?