THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO: Well, she's at least alive.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, yes, thank goodness, she is.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, you've just described to us how you received orders for you and your father to write a letter with certain contents to your sister. Did you draw any conclusions from that order? Did you draw any conclusions from the fact that particular orders were given you to write such a letter?
A Yes, I concluded from that my father and I, too, were under suspicion. Therefore, through a deception, on the same day I gained insight into my sister's files. I went to the RSHA. I told them there that I hand orders from Mueller to look at the files. I was wearing a leather coat, and it was very difficult to see my rank. The deception succeeded, and I did get hold of the files. I skipped through them and saw from the files that Himmler had my father and myself under suspicion and that my assumptions were correct. I felt very much better about my sister after I had looked at the files because I saw again that special treatment had been ordered for her.
Q Witness, considering that your inspection of the files was illegal, were you warned by anybody?
A Yes. Obergruppenfuehrer Frank shortly afterwards asked me to go to see him. He told me that my inspection of the files had been discovered by the Gestapo. Mueller was extremely agitated and had told him that my inspection of the files was tantamount to having inspected command matters and therefore constituted high treason. The Gestapo was a Reich agency and I as a member of the General SS had nothing to do with it.
Q Concerning the arrest of your sister and her transfer to a concentration camp, did you make a report about that to Herr Pohl, and, if so, why?
A Yes, I did. I thought I was under an obligation to do so as his subordinate.
Q Is it correct that in February 1944 your sister was sent to Ravensbrueck?
A Yes.
Q How did your father react to that fate of your sister?
A My father had a stroke on account of the excitement and died on the 18th of March 1944. When I returned from his funeral, I received a telegram telling me that my brother-in-law had committed suicide. Three days later I heard that Dr. Bresser, a friend of our family, had also been arrested by the Gestapo.
Q In view of that plethora of evil news, what did you think?
A I was desperate and told myself that now my own danger had become increased. I concluded that from the warning which I had received from Frank and next from a warning by Volk, who told me that Pohl had made rather unfavorable statements about me.
He was afraid even at that time that the Gestapo would take steps against me.
Q When was Dr. Bresser sentences do death?
A Dr. Bresser was sentenced to death by the People's Court in the summer of 1944.
Q At the beginning of August 1944 you again went to the Gestapo on behalf of your sister?
A Yes. To do my mother a favor, I wanted to do everything I could. I didn't meet Mueller himself; but I spoke to an Oberfuehrer. I didn't got his name at the time. It was an Oberfuehrer, which is a senior colonel. I gave my name to that Oberfuehrer and told him that I was coming to see him on behalf of my sister. He immediately took me to account in very severe tones, that again on account of the fact that in January I had inspected her files. He again told me that had been High Treason and that High Treason did not become less serious a case because I was a member of the General Ss.
Q Were you warned again in August 1944 in Berlin?
A I August, Herr Steuer, a clerk, came to see me and told me that he himself had been warned that maneuvres had been started against me. Steuer had been warned by an old acquaintance, who had told him that he had better quickly leave my office so that he himself did not get involved.
Q Steuer has testified about the same matter; and in reading out of his affidavit I submitted this matter to you. What happened at the beginning of September concerning your person?
A Pohl suddenly informed me that as from 1st October I'd be transferred to the front.
Q To what unit? As a member of the armed forces or the Waffen SS?
A I was to report to the personnel office of the WVHAto hear there where I was going to be sent. Apparently the wanted me for the Waffen SS.
Q What rank did you have in your military service with the ordinary armed forces?
A Yes, I was a lieutenant in the reserve.
Q What did you think when you suddenly received that information?
A I assumed that the Gestapo had demanded that I leave the office.
Q What steps did you take then?
A I asked that I be relieved of my post as manager of the Home's Association because I was afraid that after I had left the Gestapo would look at my books so as to get a pretext to liquidate me without attracting much attention
Q Were you promised that your books would be audited?
A I had to overcome the greatest of difficulties before I could got my books audited.
Q When were the books audited and what was your impression?
A It was at the end of September that the books were audited. I realized immediately that it was the aim of the auditors to gather incriminating material against me. I never set eyes on the auditing report.
Q How did you come to gather that the auditors wanted to collect incriminating evidence against you?
A That tendency in the auditing became evident to me when Obersharfuehrer Pflueger came to see mo about two hours after they had started auditing and told me that one of the auditors had asked him about my offenses and about what critical remarks I had made about Pohl.
Steuer also told me something similar at midday.
Q As to such a question from the auditor, did that have anything to do with the auditing of the books as such?
A I believe that had nothing to do with checking the affairs of a manager.
Q On the 1st of October did you report to Herr Pohl what had happened there?
A Yes, I did report to him. Pohl received me very ungraciously. He reproached me with defeatism and political unreliability. He indicated to me that my life was in danger. Then he charged me with details from the auditors' report and told me I was under arrest.
Q What conclusions did you draw from that attitude on his part?
A I assumed that Herr Pohl was no longer able to cover me in the face of the Gestapo nor to protect me against the Gestapo. I had to stay under house arrest in Berlin. Then, under guard, Oberfuehrer Salpeter took me to Kranichfeld to hand over business to him there. Pohl told me that after my business had been handed over I was to return to Berlin together with Salpeter and I was to report to the court officer to have SS proceedings carried out. He also said that a detachment of the Waffen SS, which was already being held in readiness, would then take me to a very dangerous spot on the front.
Q During the interrogation with the court officer of the WVHA what did you hear? You had to report there, didn't you?
A The court officer interrogated me and asked me about the auditing report again. I wasn't shown that report. Afterwards the court officer told me that the report was legally untenable and had been manipulated.
Q When the Defendant Baier was examined, charges from that report were not specified by this Court; and I'd like to put those charges to you. It said there, first, that you had been charges with advances and fares for trips not having been entered in the books in time; that no accounts had been settled in time. What was all that about?
AAs far as I can recollect, what had happened was this. In January 1944 the bookkeeping, because of the end of the year work for the Homes' Association, was overburdened. That work at the end of the year amounted to a tremendous bulk of work because all the Homes had to send their reports every month to the central office. During that period, advances had been paid out to myself and other officials for going on essential trips. We returned our accounts to the bookkeeping department when w'd return from the trip; but those accounts had to be countersigned and examined by the bookkeeping department.
On account of the fact that they were overburdened with work, there had been a delay so that these advances, so that accounts were settled for those advances only approximately at the end of February. Until then those advances were not covered. The auditor, Dr. Spettstoesser, when he audited the book half way through the year, when in 1944 the six-months balance sheet was made out, had already stated that was so. He drew my attention to the fact that he did not consider it right to have an advance for the fares for official trips. It would be better if I passed a check to the bookkeeping department, and had the money paid out to me by check. From that moment onwards he ordered that procedure should be adopted. That must have been at the beginning of June.
Q At the time when the books were audited in September all those accounts had been settled?
A Oh, yes, they had been settled for a long time.
Q Is it not correct to say that in the summer of 1944 when there were discussions about making out balance sheets, Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl praised you for the way you had managed affairs?
A When the auditor, Dr. Spettstoesser, audited the books, Pohl and Oberfuehrer Baier praised my work.
Q Herr Baier then said that you had been charged with not having had any rent paid out, with not having paid any rent and similar things.
A That is a somewhat lengthy story.
THE PRESIDENT: This Tribunal does not propose to try Dr. Bobermin, or Dr. Klein for these charges that are made. I don't think you need to defend against them. It would make six or seven or eight more lawsuits, and I think we don't need that.
THE WITNESS: Very well, Your Honor. Perhaps I may say that at the time when the books were audited the rents had been paid with the exception of the rent which Obersturmfuehrer Mutmann had to pay.
DR. BERGOLD: You have just been told it isn't necessary to go into that.
THE PRESIDENT: Why don't you sum it all up by saying that none of the charges was true.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, did you at all consider that the WVHA was competent for the proceedings?
A No, the WVHA was not competent for the proceedings, and that is evident too by the testimony by the Court Officer, Dr. Schmidt-Levenow.
Anyhow, I did not consider it competent.
Q And to what end did this matter come for you?
AAfter the interrogation when I arrived at Kranichfeld from Berlin, I had a collapse, I had a nervous breakdown. I had heart attacks; I had pleurisy and pneumonia, and I also had something wrong with my insides, gastric fever.
Q Will you please make it brief?
A I was ill then, and I was in the hospital at Weimar. Afterwards I was in bed at home and under supervision. I was several times asked by the personnel office to report voluntarily for the Waffen-SS. I threw the piece of paper into the stove. In the middle of February I received orders drafting me, telling me to go to the Fuehrer Amt at Bad Saarow as Untersturmfuehrer of the Waffen-SS. I called on the personnel chief of the Waffen-SS.
Q Please be brief.
A I called on the personnel chief of the Waffen-SS and protested against being called up, and Obergruppenfuehrer von Herbst, the Chief of the Personnel Office, did let himself be persuaded that I was sent again as an officer to the OKW.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Court, I am pleased on your behalf and for myself to be able to inform you that I have now come to the end of my submission of evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: Cross-examination of this witness.
BY DR. HOFFMANN:
Q Witness, I was very interested in the fact
THE PRESIDENT: Will you identify yourself on the record, Dr. Hoffmann?
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Dr. Hoffmann for the Defendant Scheide.
Q (By Dr. Hoffmann): Witness, I was very interested in the account you gave about the proceedings which were adopted in the case of your sister. I would like to suggest that if you had been a convinced National Socialist in those days, or somebody who believed the propaganda, in that case would you have considered the transfer to a concentration camp to be a procedure without trial under law, and would you, in that case, have had the feeling that wrong had been done?
A No. Wrong within the meaning of the law had not been done to my sister. On the contrary, I saw from her files what she had said and what she had confessed to the Gestapo, what she had admitted to the Gestapo, and actually she had not left out criticism which in those days could have been leveled against the regime. I also saw from the files that the interrogations had been very thorough, a great deal more thorough than I liked. My parents' home had been searched. All the correspondence between my sister and my brother-in-law had been looked through. The denouncer, Frau Herdmann, in the Hague, had been interrogated as a witness. They had been very careful about these proceedings. It had been a police penal proceeding.
Q Can yon imagine, Witness, that under those conditions there were people in Germany who really believed that somebody had got into a Concentration camp for quite justified reasons?
A Yes, for the laws which had been issued were there, the laws according to which the steps could be taken and were taken.
DR. GAWLIK for the defendant Dr. Volk.
BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q Witness, was Dr. Volk the Chief of the W-staff?
A I never heard anything about that.
Q Was Dr. Volk ever chief of W?
A No, he certainly never was.
Q Could Dr. Volk as Chief of the Legal Department of the so-called W staff issue any directives to you for the so-called W-VIII office?
A In any case he never did issue any such instructions or directives to me.
Q Did Dr. Volk issue any instructions to your regular assistance?
A He did not issue any such instructions to my regular assistance.
DR. GAWLIK: Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR. MAYER: Dr. Mayer for the Defendant Kiefer.
BY DR. MAYER:
Q Witness, in connection with your work for the Homes, I would like to put a question to you. The Defendant Kiefer, during his examination, testified that in August 1942, he fell ill and became incapable of carrying out his work. Can you remember whether Kiefer around about that time made an application to be allowed to enter a Home?
A Yes.
Q A Rest Home?
A Yes, I remember that. Kiefer, in the autumn of 1942, made an application to be allowed to enter the SS-Berghaus.
Q And when was he sent there?
A He was only sent there at roughly the beginning of March. In between three times or four times the date was postponed.
Q Do you remember how long he stayed there for a rest?
A Yes, and when he had spent the usual three weeks there he made an application for an extended stay, and as far as I remember he stayed for six weeks at the Berghaus.
DR. MAYER: Thank you. I have no further questions.
THE WITNESS: May I add that I remember that for the reason that I was always damning Kiefer this whole time before. I always had to change my plans again and again, and I was very pleased when at last he got there.
Otherwise, I wouldn't remember any details. If I hadn't been cursing him all the time I wouldn't remember any details.
BY DR. MAYER:
Q Can you tell Us whether Kiefer had already left when the bombing raid on the WVHA was made?
AAs far as I remember that attack was made at the beginning of March. He must have left Berlin at that time, yes. He must have been at the Bergbau by that time.
DR. MAYER: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: We didn't understand why you were so angry at Kiefer.
THE WITNESS: The Berghaus only had ten rooms, and there were many people who wanted to go there. When I sent somebody to the Berghaus and he then changed his plans, I had to vacate a room for him for a different date. That meant that my plans would be changed again and again. That was why I was very angry with him.
THE PRESIDENT: Nothing very serious?
THE WITNESS: No, no. I have forgiven him in the meantime.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any cross-examination by other defense counsel?
(No response.)
THE PRESIDENT: If not, after the recess the Prosecutor may crossexamine.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: All persons will please take their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal requests that as many Defense Counsel can be present tomorrow morning at the opening of court at which time we will take up the procedure on the closing arguments, that is, the order in which the arguments will be made.
We propose to set up the plan tomorrow morning which will govern the closing arguments; That is, who will argue first, and so on. If you would be good enough to mention to your fellow counsel so that they will be here in the morning, if possible.
BY MR. HIGGINS:
Q. Witness, toward the end of the testimony on direct examination, you stated that the defendant Frank had interceded for you, for your sister. I would like to ask you how well did you know the defendant Frank?
A. I did not know Frank very well. Outside of occasional and very rare discussions, I did not have any personal relationship with him. At that time he had already left the WVHA, and he was the administrative chief of the Regular Police.
THE PRESIDENT: Let me interrupt just a second. Dr. Fichte. (Summons Dr. Fichte before bench.)
BY MR. HIGGINS:
Q. Isn't it true, witness, that the defendant Frank was the deputy Chief of the WVHA in the year 1943? At that time you were also Chief of W-8 in the WVHA.
A. That applies, as far as I can recall, up to approximately July or August of 1943. I can't give you the exact date any more, but at that time Frank left the WVHA and was transferred to the Regular Police.
Q. Yes, the point I am simply attempting to establish here is the fact that both you and he served in the WVHA at the same period of time; in other words simultaneously. In other words, you were the Chief of W-8 while he was Deputy Chief of the WVHA.
That is true, is it not?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. You know that the defendant frank was also chief of Amtsgruppe A, did you not?
A. As long as he was in the WVHA this applies, as far as I can recall.
Q. Did you -- First let me ask you this. How frequently did you see the defendant frank during the time you served in the WVHA?
A. I can't possibly give you that figure. I might have seen him occasionally at some place or other on the staircase or so. I might have talked to him occasionally. However, I can't tell you exactly when and where.
Q. Did you have any association whatsoever with him concerning the monies from the Reinhardt Fund?
A. No.
Q. He was the chief financial man in the WVHA, and from the testimony you have given you appear to have handled all the finances concerned with you office. It would seem likely that you had spoken to him on this matter. Are you certain that you never spoke to him on matters concerned with the Reinhardt Fund?
A. It is correct that, as far as I can recall, I had a conversation once with frank. However, we never discussed the Reinhardt Fund. On one occasion I received a loan from Party funds for the Wewelsburg, and that is also shown in my monthly report. And it is possible that in this connection I had a discussion with Frank.
Q. But there were no discussions beyond that?
A. It is impossible for me today to recall every word that I spoke during all these years. However, I cannot recall having had any other important discussions with him.
Q. Had you ever heard of the Reinhardt Fund during your term of office as Chief of Office W-8?
A. No, I can't recall ever having heard the designation "Reinhardt Fund".
Q. Did you have any contacts or relations with any of the other defendants who are now In the dock, with the exception of the defendant Pohl?
A. Yes, certainly; all of us worked in the same office, in the same agency. We would see each other in the halls or we would sometimes meet while we were having lunch. However, here we only had very brief contact with each other, sometimes we had come official matters to discuss. This extended over a number of years.
Q. I see. You would see the defendants who are now here and you would discuss whatever matters there was in relation with the administration of the WVHA. In other words, you got together, and talked together about official matters?
A. Could you repeat that please.
Q. I say that -- rather -- it is a fact then that during your tenure of office as Chief of Office 8 you saw all of the defendants who are now here in the dock; during these times you chatted with them concerning matters relative to the administration of the WVHA. That is true, is it not?
A. That is a very difficult and long Question. First of all, I have to take this question apart in order to be able to answer it accurately. First of all, I want to state that I believe that I have understood you to say that for ten years I had been chief of Office "W-8" I was the chief of Office W-8, as fur as I can recall, from the establishment of the WVHA on the first of February, 1942, until the first of October, 1944. I don't believe that this amounts to Quite ten years. And, if I may come back to my notes, then you allege that I talked to all the defendants in the WVHA -
Q. One moment, witness; let us correct one point. I believe the interpreter misunderstood me. I did not say "ten year", but I said "tenure of office as Chief of W-8". But proceed.
A. During my time in office, I did not see all the defendants either. For the first time I have seen Sommer and Pook here. I did know the other defendants personally. May I now come to the next point in your question. I don't precisely recall it anymore, but I believe you asked me whether all the defendants had anything to do with the administration of the Office W-8 or something of that sort.
Q. I think we can just drop the question. I had wanted to affirm the fact that you spoke to these people on matters concerned with the administration of the WVHA and you did, did you not?
A. About matters which concerned the administration of the WVHA? I may have talked with them. However, I did not discuss all the matters but I would discuss perhaps with one or the other person part of a special field, and I did not discuss administration questions with everybody either. To some of them I would only say "Good Morning," or "How are you" and so on.
Q. That is sufficient. Now, Witness, I would like to refer back to the very first part of your direct examination and direct your attention to the answers which you gave in reply to your counsel's questions concerning the Party Program. I believe you had declared that you had familiarized yourself with this program?
A. Yes.
Q. And at that time you realized, did you not, that the Program stated that the Jews were not qualified to be German citizens?
A. As far as I can recall, the Party Program stated that the Jes should be considered as being guests of the German people.
Q. No, I believe it was put a little more strongly. I have a wuotation here from the record of the Decision of the International Military Tribunal and there is set out part of Point 4 of the Party Program and it declared only a member of the rade can be a citizen. A member of the race can only be one who is of German blood, without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race. I believe that is the way that particular provision reads.
A. Yes, I believe it is similar to that. I believe the translation from the English to the German is not quite clear, because this issued order you have read has been translated into English and it has to be re-interpreted back into German.
Q. But it sounds correct, does it not?
A Yes, I assume that, yes.
Q. The platform also provides that Jews should be treated as foreigners and not be permitted to hold office, and you were familiar with that provision, also, were you not?
A. Well, one couldn't simply that assumption at all from that alone. Furthermore, I have already stated that the Party program I believe it was in 1918 or 1919, when the Party was founded had been set up by Feder and that this Party Program now seemed to have surpassed by the propaganda. As I have also stated the Party Program contained many points which made sense and others which did not. Therefore, one could not interpret this Program literally.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Well, witness, you know that the National Socialist Program was anti-Semitic, don't you?
A. I did not consider it to be purely anti-Semitic, but I considered it to mean that overwhelming influence which the Jews appeared to have in Germany should be limited to a percentage which amounted to their number in the population. That was the official propaganda at the time. I know that a similar regulation existed in Poland at the time. The General Physician Von Rouppert, I believe told me at the time, for example, that only a certain quota of Jews was admitted to the universities.
Q. Did you have the idea that the Nationalist Socialist Program permitted any representation to the Jews? You do know that they were not to be citizens, don't you?
A From the propaganda at the time, I can recall that this program was not to be carried out in all its severity.
The fact was that Feder, the author of the program had already left the public life as an unknown individual.
Q. Well, why don't you start with the program of Hitler. Was it in 1921? What do you know about that program?
A. I don't know what Your Honor is referring to right now.
Q. Well, when was the affair in Munich? Wasn't that in 1921 -- in '23? You never heard of it?
A. Oh, naturally, but I don't know for the moment whether it was 1921 or 1923. I believe it was 1923.
Q. All right, assume that it is 1923. What platform was announced at that time, what Party platform?
A. The platform actually was not changed at all, but through the propaganda we were told that this platform was not to be carried out in its original form. It was to be flexible.
Q. Well, how are you going to make a provision that says that no Jew can be a citizen, how can you make that flexible?
A. Your Honor, according to the propaganda at that time we could assume that this rule would be into be carried out correctly either--that is to say literally, as far as for instance the other directive regarding the breaking of the Rule Interest.
Q. Breaking of the Rule of Interest? What do you mean by that?
A. The Party Program contained one point which said that the bondage of the interest was to be broken. These were entirely wrong economic ideas which this author of the Party program Feder had maintained. It was clear that this point could not be carried out in accordance with the Party Platform. It meant that all interest was to be abolished.
Q. Well, you mean that that rule was relaxed? It wasn't enforced?
A. Yes, it was not enforced. It was clear that it couldn't be enforced.
Q. The rule which said that no Jew should be a citizen and should be barred from public offices, that wasn't relaxed, was it? That was enforced right up to the hilt, to the limit?
A. Unfortunately, it has been carried out. However, one could not see that from the platform alone, at the time for the reasons which I have just set forth.
BY MR. HIGGINS:
Q. Witness, can you tell me whether or not in accordance with this program, can you tell me whether the Jews were prohibited from publishing German newspapers? That was a Party Program. Was that carried out?
A. Excuse me please, I didn't hear your question just now.
(The interpreter repeated the question)
A. (Continued) I can't tell you that, I am not informed about that at all.
Q. You were familiar, were you not, with Streidher's newspaper which disseminated hatred for the Jews. That was speaking for the Party, wasn't it? That was an organ of the Party, was it not?
A. It was not an official publication of the Party, as far as I know. The official paper of the Party was only the so-called "Voelkische Beobachter " and of that a certain edition."The Stuermer" As far as I know,it was a newspaper which gave Streicher's personal views.
Q. But it did have the blessings of the Nazi Party, did it not?
A. What was that?
Q. It did have the blessings of the Nazi Party, did it not?
A. No, I don't think so. I even believe that it was prohibited on various occasions. However, residents of Nurnberg are better informed about that than I am, because in Westphalia not many people would read this journal. We had a better taste there.