The SS could not issue the local administration any new material, and, if the War Economy Regulations did not specify any new material to be delivered, the SS could not give this permission, and, therefore, for the years, 1945 and 1946, these funds were not furnished anymore. The Inspectorate, that is, Office C-V, was competent for that and this material and these funds were not furnished anymore.
Q. In the years before, did the Office C-VI also receive any reports about the way those funds were used or didn't Office C-VI deal with that anymore, but another agency?
A. The funds were passed on from Office C-VI to the Budgetary Agency and they were handed over in such a manner that they were booked and spent on monthly accounts in contrast to construction bills where the accounts were only given for construction budget and construction maintenance on monthly accounts and the accounts were listed monthly. They were not listed separately and they were not examined by the Construction Office.
Q. What I want to know is where the monthly accounts were sent.
A. They were sent to the Auditing Office.
Q. What Office was that?
A. That was Office A. I don't know whether it was A-II or A-III. That was Vogt.
Q. A-IV?
A. Yes. It was Vogt, in any case.
Q. Witness, I am now coming to one of the most important questions in this trial. I would like to hear from you whether you know by what agency the crematoria and the gas chambers were built.
Who dealt with that matter?
A. The order for the construction of Barracks X at Dachau was issued by Office C-V. That is the office which issued all the construction orders.
Q. Was the Office C-VI concerned with that also?
A. According to administrative channels it was not concerned with it.
THE PRESIDENT: What is Barracks X? Is that the crematorium?
THE WITNESS: That was the crematorium at Dachau.
Q. (By Dr. Von Stein) Witness, when were the first crematoria constructed? In what year was that? When were the gas chambers constructed?
A. In the Area South in the Year 1943 in May and when I came to that area the Barracks X had already been constructed.
Q. Do you know when it was constructed, in what year?
A. I can't tell you that precisely. I came into that area accidently, when I was told that in Barracks X there was water in the cellar. I didn't know Barracks X and I was locking for it and here I discovered that the water had not been removed and that consequently there was water in the cellar and since the door to the cellar was open, I saw that there were urns, containers, there and consequently I realized that it was in some way connected with the crematorium.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: From whom did the order comt to C-V to construct crematoria at Dachau?
THE WITNESS: I saw later on that C-V- issued the construction order, C-V.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Who Told C-V to build it?
THE WITNESS: Well that was the Office Chief. I think his name was Lenzer.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Who told Lenzer to build it? <
THE WITNESS: I can't tell you that.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: You don't know what high authority gave lenzer the order?
THE WITNESS: No, I don't know that. I don't know just how these construction orders were issued, through what channel.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Who was Lenzer subordinated to at that time?
THE WITNESS: Lenzer was subordinated to Kammler. He was a Chief of the Office. His name was Kammler.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Is Lenzer dead?
THE WITNESS: Yes, he is dead.
Q. (By Dr. Von Stein) Witness, in your opinion was this constructtion work only carried out during war time?
A. It seemed to me that these buildings had been erected during the war, because a certain limitation was ordered in the construction of the building and channels on the roof as so on. I could see that this building had been constructed during the war.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, for the time being, I have no futher questions.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. There were two crematoria at Dachau. There's a small one and there's a Barracks X. Do you know who built the first one?
A. No, I can't tell you that either.
Q. That was already built when you went to Dachau?
A. Yes, the big one. Barracks X was already complete.
Q. And, of course, the small
A. The time this building was constructed must have been around 1941 or 1942.
Q. And then the small on was built long before that?
A. Yes, I don't know that, but I assume that it must have been built before the period of time. However, I can't make any statement about it, because I don't know it.
Q. Was the actual construction work done by one of the WVHA offices, or was it done by a private contractor?
A. The construction work was carried out by Office Group C. That was the Construction Service. Whether any private contractors were used, I can't say because at that I time I was not at Dachau.
THE PRESIDENT: Cross-examination, Mr. Robbins?
BY DR. RAUSCHENBACH (Attorney for August Frank and Hans Loerner)
Q. Witness, in what department of the Administrative SS were you working?
A. I always worked for the Construction Service, the Construction Department. Whether this department was moved or whether it was a subdepartment in V-IV-c or whether it was a Main Department in the sense, V-V or Office II, Main Office Construction and Economy of the WVHA Office Group, it was still the Construction service at all times.
Q. What did you officially have to do with the Department V-I, the Budgetary Department?
A. I had nothing to do with it officially.
Q. In you affidavit of the 3rd of July of this year, you have made the following statement at the beginning after the organizational chart had been put before you and after a detailed examination, "I consider this plan, according to the best of my knowledge and belief to be correct." In this chart, under Department V-I, Budget, we have the subdivisions of that. Please tell me now just how you obtained such precise knowledge about this sub-department. 6340 from Kaindl and that he was also transferred to Eicke later on and from that I conclude that Kaindl also had always dealt with these concentration camp construction matters.
I believe that Moser once received a certain recognition on some occasion. He was praised because the budget of the Special Duty Squards was functioning so smoothly.
A. Witness, you are speaking a little bit too quickly. whenever I have completed my question, please make a small pause so that the translation can come through. Now when this organization was completed, it was submitted to your in the interrogation.
A. Yes, in connection with Herr Kreis and Nerr Koeberlein, Inconstructed it.
Q. Did you yourself put the Department V-I, Budget, into this chart?
A. Yes. I still can recall how the organization was in general, V-I, V-II, V-III, V-IV, and V-V.
Q. You know that the Department V-I dealt with budgetary matters?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have just told me that the subdivision, for example, the box where Kaindl is mentioned, that you knew that organization from hearsay?
A. Yes, occasionally, I would always have something to do with one or the other of the departments, maybe in comradely manner. Then on the office dorrs there were signs, and, of course, I was able to observe these things in passing, but that is why it is easy for me to reconstruct this organizational chart.
Q. During your activity in the WVHA did you know what the individual departments were working on? I am now deferring to what we would have within the Budgetary Department.
A. No, I don't know that, amongst the sub-division in the WVHA. I only know in particular Office Group C. The other office groups I only know so slightly that I can't make any statements about them.
Q. However, in the Group VI you added more precisely, small a, SS Vorfuegungstruppe Moser; small b, the Death Head units in concentration camps Kaindl, and c, the General SS, Burger. Did you know that from your own knowledge, or did somebody tell you about that?
A. Of Moser and Kaindl I knew that from my own knowledge of Burger I did not - I believe because he himself looked at this chart before he himself added it, I did add in writing. That becomes ecident from the hand writing. However, I believe I do not know the name any more with regard to the SS.
Q. This organizational chart bears the title, "From 1936 to 1938." Therefore, it must have been in effect for three years continuously. Is that correct?
A. Yes, for the most part.
Q. When did Kaindl enter the inspectorate of the concentration camps?
A. I cannot give you the precise date. I believe it was when the inspectorate of the concentration camps was established. As far as I can recall that must have been in 1937.
Q. 1937? The chart however, goes on to 1938 and Kaindl is still listed.
A. Well, these are the directives of the Main Department. I don't know just when they left the office and when their position was transferred to somebody else. It just happened that the name of Kaindl was known to me. Just who worked on these matters later on I don't know.
Q. What kind of detail work went on?
A. I don't know what he did in detail, but he worked on detail matters.
Q. Witness, I am now going to put to you an affidavit which has been given by Moser, who has also been mentioned on this affidavit. I am now going to ask you a few questions about it in detail. In an affidavit Moser has stated--
Your Honor, this affidavit has not been submitted by the prosecution, nor has it been so far submitted by the defense. I have it in my Document Book No. 2. I am only going to use it now in order to ask several questions of the witness.
Moser has said the following:
"After the organizational chart was put before him, on the 1st of July 1936, I came into the administrative office of the SS. As far as I can recall the Main Department V-I, Budget, was organized in the following manner: There the budget of the General-SS was handled. This was the SS Verfuegungstruppe and the Death Head units. The budget of the Armed SS was dealt with by Kaindl. For the time being I was his assistant.
Approximately in August or September 1936 Kaindl was transferred to Berlin, to the inspectorate of the concentration camps, the department of Eicke. There he handled all the administrative matters of the concentration camps and the Death Head units. Whether Kaindl before he left the administrative office of the SS had already had something to do with the concentration camps I cannot say any more today."
Later on, in the same affidavit he goes on to say:
"The organizational chart NO-4123"--that is a chart which you compiled in part -- "is incorrect insofar as it refers to the time from 1936 to 1939. Kaindl, who has been mentioned in V-I-B- had, I have already mentioned, left already in August or September 1936 that part of his tasks. He left the office the, only the matters pertaining to the Verfuegungstruppe were taken over by me. As far as I know already prior to 1936 the budgetary matters for the concentration camps were dealt with on the Amtsrat Piefke in the inspectorate of the concentration camps."
Witness, did you have such close insight into the organization and department V-I that you can make any statement about this affidavit of Moser? Can you state anything from your own recollection?
A. I know that Kaindl worked in the budgetary section of the budgetary department, and that Moser worked there. Just what fields they worked in detail I don't know. I only know that they received some recognition for their work with regard to the budget of special task groups and that Kaindl was later transferred to the inspectorate of the concentration camps.
Q. In the organizational chart which you also helped to compile it is stated at the heading "Chief Pohl and the Deputy Frank." Do you have any precise information about that? Do you know whether Pohl at that time actually had a deputy who deputized for him in all mattes? Or only a staff officer especially during the time of 1938. I don't believe that he deputized in all fundamental questions, but in business matters. Frank, on a temporary basis at least, was his deputy. However, not in fundamental decisions but only in the execution of business matters.
Q. You have just stated that Frank was a staff officer.
A. Yes, I know that exactly. That was in June 1938.
Q. The staff officer of Pohl had a completely different name, I believe?
A. Yes. In any case he was located in the ante-room of Pohl and he took care of staff discussions. What his title was I don't know. But it was not Frank. -- Oh yes, it was Frank. He was located in the ante Chamber of Pohl. He was the manager of the ante chamber.
Q. And you were in the administrative office of the SS for a long period of time. Do you know how it was organized?
A. Yes, many changer were made.
Q. Who was usually located in the ante-chamber?
A. Usually a woman, or people who are not very important in any case.
Q. What rank did Frank have at the time?
A. I believe that Frank at the time was already Standartenfuehrer. His predecessor already also had the same rank. He was adjutant. I can remember Fulner, who was Hauptsturmfuehrer. His successor was -- I can't recall the name at the moment. However, later on when he left Frank took his place. I cannot recall the name at the moment. However, I believe he was an Obersturmbannfuehrer.
Q. And Frank was Chief of Department V-1, Budget?
A. Whether he still held that position at the time I cannot remember exactly. I cannot remember the time.
Q. You are referring to a period in 1939.
A. Yes; I cannot say that he was still in the ante-chamber of Pohl, and at the same time he was in charge of budgetary departments. I don't think so. However, I cannot say it for certain.
Q. Witness, in your affidavit under paragraph 4 on the first page you have made the following statement:
"The first economic enterprises were located in the concentration camp Dachau, and they were subordinated to the SS administration of that time. The SS economic enterprises at that time comprised the carpenter work shops, the locksmith work shops, and the shoemakers work shops, and the manager of these SS economic enterprises was the then Untersturmfuehrer August Frank. These economic enterprises which culminated in huge SS concern of Office Group W of the WVHA."
Now, were you able to observe the development of these economic enterprises, precisely?
A. I had nothing to do with economic enterprises in the sense. And the construction measures they carried out on their own. There were economic enterprises in all the concentration camps and from this I saw that a huge organization developed, but I myself in these W enterprises never had anything to do with the construction measures. It was an exception when occasionally the construction group had to carry out some construction work in the economic enterprises.
Q. However, in your affidavit you have made some connection between the original camp work shops at Dachau and the so-called big SS concerns.
A. They were not workshops in the camps but they were SS economic enterprises.
Q. And what was manufactured there?
A. I cannot give you any details about it. They had wall closets, and things of that sort, About the carpenter shops and the locksmith shops I am not very well informed, and I guess the shoemakers shops made shoes.
I only know they were subordinated to the administrative office. Frank at that time was probably not yet an Untersturmfuehrer. I believe he was promoted to the rank in November. Then he was transferred out of Dachau and sent to Munich. He was by Hauptsturmfuehrer -
Q. Witness, do you know just what the inside organization ***** concentration camps?
A. I don't know anything about the organization. I only know something about the political department. Here they had criminal commissioners, and so on. They were civilians.
Q. Do you know that the concentration camps, like every internment camp today, had workshops within the camps so the inmates could make their own requirements?
A. Yes.
Q. And for whom did these workshops work, which you mention here?
A. It is quite possible that at the same time they worked for the camp. However, I know that they manufactured certain closets and carpenters' products. Just what was does with them I don't know
Q. Why do you support the opinion which you express in the affidavit, namely, that from these enterprises at Dachau -- these enterprises developed into the big SS concerns?
A. I know that for a short time - my construction inspector was at Dachau for a short time - and these work enterprises at the time were now changed into the title DAW.
Q. That was in 1943?
A. Yes, in 1943.
Q. The workshops which we have discussed were started in what year?
A. That was 1933, 1934, and 1935. These were the same workshops. Nothing changed there.
Q. Did you observe the development in the next ten years?
A. No, I did not.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: I have no further questions.
DR. HOFFMANN (for defendant Scheide): Your Honor, I have talked to the witness Morgen and as I have said once before this morning it will take me at least one day to bring him here. Now, tomorrow the verdict will be announced in the medical case, and this will also go on through Wednesday. Since I am a defense counsel in the medical case, and since my colleague Dr. Seidl also has to defend a client there, but is interested also in the witness Morgen, it would be possible for me to bring the witness Morgen here on Thursday. However, in order to keep the trial going under the circumstances, without endangering the defense of my client, I would be willing to ask the witness for an affidavit and submit the affidavit instead of calling him here.
THE PRESIDENT: We have had too many affidavits. We've got the witness here. Let's have his testimony from the witness stand.
DR. SEIDL (for defendant Pohl): Your Honor, personally I am interested in the witness Morgen only insofar as my taking him under cross examination, if any other defense counsel or the prosecution want to interrogate this witness. I support the request of my colleague Hoffmann; I join in his request that the examination of this witness should be post poned, if it should not be possible that he bring an affidavit.
I myself am not directly interested in the witness because I already have a whole series of affidavits which are sufficient to prove what I want to prove. However, I would like to take the witness under cross examination if he appears before this Tribunal as a witness.
DR. HOFFMANN: Your Honor, may I request that the examination of the witness be postponed until Thursday because I have to be present when the verdict is announced in the medical case.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, what are you going to do this afternoon?
DR. HOFFMANN: In no case will the afternoon be sufficient in order to examine the witness and to handle the cross examination. Several colleagues of mine want to examine him, and also the prosecution. I will need an entire day for the witness. And since tomorrow morning at nine-thirty the verdict will be announced in the medical case I must request that I be permitted to call this witness on Thursday.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, we don't expect you to be in here tomorrow morning. You should be in Tribunal I. That is proper. And don't bring in affidavits. Let us get at this witness. Why can you not take him right now and ask him what you want to know? In five minutes? Could you not start in five minutes?
DR. HOFFMANN: I am prepared to start in five minutes, but then his examination will be interrupted on Tuesday and Wednesday because then I have to be present in Court I.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that won't bother us. We can pick it up again when you get back from the medical case. We are trying to finish the testimony in this case this week. There are certain urgent reasons why we have got to hurry and finish this case, and we don't want to throw away this afternoon, so we may call on you to start on Dr. Morgen this afternoon. You better be ready.
DR. HOFFMANN: Your Honor, I really don't like to do that. Then I would rather not call the witness at all.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all right with us.
DR. HOFFMANN: Very well, then I shall refrain from calling this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: No, I don't want to cheat you out of your witness that way. If you really need him, then you will have a chance to examine him. Do you really need him?
DR. HOFFMANN: I really do need him.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, all right.
DR. HOFFMANN: However, I don't like this interruption, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean you don't like to do it in two pieces?
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Wait, just a minute. Any news about Schwarz; just passed Ingolstadt?
MR. ROBBINS: I have nothing new, Your Honor. I was about to say that we might put on one of our rebuttal witnesses, the witness who was going to testify about Fanslau and Tschentscher.
THE PRESIDENT: That's all right. We don't want to lose this afternoon - or lose the time.
MR. ROBBINS: I believe we can get him here. He is not in jail but I am pretty sure we can get him here. He is in Nuernberg.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, if we are dealing with the question of utilizing the time reasonably this afternoon, then we could begin with submitting the documents of the defense. I have two document books and I know that they have already been translated, and perhaps in this manner we could utilize this afternoon's session - if the Secretary General is able to procure the translations of these document books for us.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is apparent, it is clear, that between the prosecution's rebuttal witness, and possibly Schwarz, if we can find him, and the defense document books, we can use this afternoon.
Dr. Hoffmann, Judge Musmanno just asked this very significant question. If you could put Dr. Morgen's testimony into an affidavit, why will it take you a full day to cross examine him on the same subject?
DR. HOFFMANN: If I submit an affidavit, then I would limit this affidavit to several points.
THE PRESIDENT: Why don't you limit the cross examination to the same points?
DR. HOFFMANN: Because I am convinced that once the cross examination begins the matter will last for quite a long period of time.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean you won't be able to let go of the witness?
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: In English we call that getting a bear by the tail. You don't dare let go.
DR. HOFFMANN: No.
MR. ROBBINS: May I announce what the prosecution proposes to do in the way of rebuttal. We have only four witnesses that I know of now. Two of them are on the Fanslau-Tschentscher episode. Their names are Otto and Sauer. A third witness whom I think will take maybe an hour, named Ebbers, and he will testify about the deaths at Wewelsburg. He was the man who kept the death books at Wewelsburg. And possibly a fourth witness, Camille Sachs, denazification minister from Nuernberg, who will testify about general knowledge in Germany of the criminal activities of the SS. Then we have two or three document books which will not take very long to put into evidence. I suppose about fifty documents.
THE PRESIDENT: How much of this proof is available -- I mean, that you can put your hands on it?
MR. ROBBINS: Otto and Ebbers are both available. Those are two of the witnesses I just mentioned. Sauer, a third witness, will be here tomorrow, I believe. And the fourth witness should also be here. Sachs is in Munich. He can be here tomorrow or Wednesday morning by the latest.
THE PRESIDENT: And then with Schwarz. That will fill today and tomorrow, won't it -- with some padding with documents, if necessary?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, Dr. Hoffmann, you win. Thursday. You will be ready Thursday morning.
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: We will hear from you as soon as we can on Thursday, then.
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
Are you going to cross-examine? (To Dr. von Stakelberg, counsel for defendant Fanslau)
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have only a minute. Would you start at the afternoon session, please?
Recess until one forty-five. Quarter of two. Not two o'clock. One forty-five.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 1345.
(The Tribunal recessed until 1345 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 18 August 1947) HUBERT KARL - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION - Continued BY DR. VON STAKELBERG for the defendant Fanslau:
Q Witness, I have a few questions about your chart, the organizational chart, with reference to Main Department V/I. You told us this morning that you had drawn that chart for the year 1936. Is that right?
A Yes, for roughly 1936 to 1938. Small details, of course, changed.
Q What do you call small details?
A For instance, personnel, the personnel of the Main Department.
Q Do you mean personnel?
A Yes, indeed, I do.
Q Can you from your own knowledge tell us that there were no factual changes?
A In the organizational chart? Well, as far as the construction services were concerned I am quite sure there weren't. As to the other departments I don't know.
Q I mean in Main Department V/I.
A I can't tell you anything about that.
Q You can't. This morning you told us that the chart was drawn basically on hearsay.
A Yes, hearsay and memory and my recollection because I had no relations with the other Main Departments with the exception of legal and personnel departments.
Q Therefore, you cannot tell us anything about the factual changes since 1936 nor the changes in personnel?
A I can't add anything to what I have said before.
Q What you told us as the only change in personnel was that the chief of Main Department after the defendant Frank became the defendant Fanslau but can you give us that date?
A No.
Q I see. I believe that it is probably correct if I say that you drew that chart not from your own knowledge?
A No from my recollection as far as I recall the things. It was done according to the best of my knowledge and belief and recollection.
Q I am quite prepared to believe you that but what I want to know is whether the facts were known to you from your own knowledge or whether they reached you through third parties?
A The experiences I met while present in the Administrative Staff and of which I had some recollection but not in official respect as far as the connection with V/I went. Orders reached our department always from the Administrative Chief.
Q Then it is important to me that you said what factual changes occurred since 1936?
A I must say the factual changes are unknown to me.
Q One more question. Regarding Paragraph 17 of your affidavit you say there that "as manager of the construction inspection of the Waffen-SS and the Police 'Reich South' I had occasional dealings with Amt A III of the W.V.H.A." When did you have these relations with A/III?
A In 1943 on the occasion when a closing depot was established in Grafenreuth negotiations about the purchase of land became necessary and thereupon A/III was charged with confiscating, purchasing, or buying this real estate. It was entirely up to A/III. What the details were I don't know.
Q From your own knowledge you only know one case from 1943?
A Yes.
Q When real estate was purchased for a closing depot?
A Yes, for the Closing depot in the second case was not necessary for this in Mauthausen for that site had been leased or purchased and, therefore, not necessary prior to 1938.
I know something about LinzKatsbach.
Q The WVHA did not exist at that time?
A No, it didn't but the legal department did.
Q Is it correct that the lease and purchase contract were transferred to you after a certain period of time?
A No.
Q Do you know that the purchase of site for the Reich after 1943 was discontinued altogether?
A No, I didn't know that. All I know is the business of Grafenreuth which fell under the Reich laws and it was leased for the duration of the War.
Q Anyway, from your own knowledge you cannot give us more details about the activities of A III in 1943 than you have already?
A What I know is that office looked after the legal aspect of the purchase of land, particularly prior to the establishment of a construction site.
DR. SCHMIDT(for Josef Vogt):
Q. Witness, in the organizational chart for the administrative Office of the SS which you drew up you said under V/II -Auditing that there were apart from Moeckl Vogt. You put those two names down on your chart. What significance is connected with that entry of yours?
A. All I can remember is that the Main Department Chief Moeckl for some reason was terminated from the Main Department and Vogt who had been there as an auditor for some time, as I remember it, was charged to take over the task which this terminated departmental chief had been in charge of.
Q. Witness, do you know when Vogt joined the Administrative Office of the SS?
A. Can't give you the precise date but I know 1936 we moved from Karl Strasse 8 to Karl Strasse 10. And, I believe, that it was around that time that Vogt joined us, that is to say the summer of 1936, perhaps.
Q. What were the relations between Vogt, I mean had he already been received in to the Administrative Service or was he still an employee?
A. I don't know the details of his position. I know he had been in civilian clothes for a long time.
Q. That means that at that time he was still an employee?
A. Yes, I don't think an SS member would not wear the uniform if the Main Office Chief as in the Main Office we had a number of civilians also.
Q. Do you believe, witness, that a civilian employee could be charged with taking over the task of the Main Department Chief of the Administrative Office of the SS? Was that possible even?
A. Well, I am afraid I can't say. All I know is that Herr Dinkel who was a civilian was in charge of a department. It wasn't entirely impossible in my opinion, as long as he has the qualifications.
Q. Do you know how many special experts were in the Main Department Auditing?
A. No, I don't know --- very many anyway. It was always well staffed, that department.
Q. Could it be true that if I put to you that, according to information supplied to me by the defendant Vogt, there were about 20 to 21 special experts at that time in the Main Department Auditing?
A. That can be well true. I think even it was perhaps the best staffed department in the whole office.
Q. Do you know whether among those experts there were some who were higher in rank than Vogt?
A. No, I don't know.
Q. Do you know any names among those experts?
A. From a later period of time I recall a few names but as far as that period of time is concerned, I don't remember anyone.
Q. Witness, you mentioned before that this organizational chart was drawn up by you and a man called Friedrich Koeberlein and another man called Weiss, I believe. I have interviewed Koeberlein about this and Koeberlein told me under oath that the entry under V/II-Auditing was incorrect in his opinion. Can you give us your comment on this?
A. Yes, the relationship between Vogt and the Main Department well, anyway, all I know is that Vogt deputized in that Main Department when Moeckl was no longer in service.
Q. When did Moeckl leave?
A. In the spring of 1938.
Q. How long and why?
A. I heard because of a personal difference of opinion -- misconduct. He drank too much.
Q. What happened at that time. Moeckl had left the office?
A. Yes, he had been terminated.