And I am positive as a result of my investigations that I was able to with concrete cases that the agents which were used for the bloody practices became absolutely criminals. Absolute putrid.
THE PRESIDENT: Don't let the witness get away from you. Go ahead with your question. Unless you ask him questions quickly, he starts on a ride of his own. So keep the questions "popping" at him.
Q. (By Dr. Hoffmann) Witness, in connection with the secrecy question, don't you think that the deportation of millions of people had to create suspicion somewhere?
A. You must think about the irregularity of things during the war. At the beginning of the war millions of racial Germans were brought back to Germany from the east. Millions of German citizens were engaged for the Organization Todt or for other construction projects. Then due to the bombardment of the cities, hundreds of thousands of people were on their way. This connection between those civilians and the Army was such a movement for weeks and months that the slow deportation of the Jews, of course, did not strike- did not stick out too far so that one could not actually notice it very easily.
Q. Witness, one did know in Germany though that concentration camps existed. The witnesses testified here again that they knew about the camps of Dachau and Oranienburg, and that is correct, isn't it? One also knew that people were being committed to concentration camps, and one knew that he concentration camp was a large limitation on personal freedom, and it was even more feared than a prison. Couldn't one see from those facts what was going on behind the concentration camps in reality, the way we know it today?
A. One hears again and again that the public knew that the concentration camp was not a sanatorium, but no factory, no prison, no Army is a sanatorium. There is nothing else in life which is like a sanatorium. If it is not a sanatorium this does not necessarily mean that a concentration camp must be a site where inhumane actions are committed. Those camps, in which people were being committed without judgment, without a sentence, simply because of their potential danger, existed even prior to the National Socialist Order, and even exist today. The internal conditions within the concentration camps are the reason for their inhumanity, hidden behind the word "concentration camp."
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Dr. Hoffmann, why don't you hold him to your question? Now, you ask one very simple question about the knowledge of the people of conditions in concentration camps. He proceeds to give us a lecture on what existed prior to the National Socialist regime, compare it to a sanatorium, which you didn't mention in your question. It seems to me you should hold him in line.
DR. HOFFMANN: All right, Your Honor, very well.
Q. (By Dr. Hoffman) Witness, if the public, as you said before, knew nothing about the inhumane acts of the concentration camps, then the question is still open whether the SS generally speaking knew anything about them. You were an SS member. Please make a statement about it.
A. The SS knew nothing about it because the large mas of the SS during this war was out in the front line, and I mean in those front lines which were the hottest ones to be in.
Q. Fine, witness. Now the next question. Now, somebody must have been responsible for those conditions. Who was responsible?
A. According to my opinion they were individuals, in other words, individuals who belonged to the inner staff of a concentration camp and who can be sought there, and also people who were in certain central offices who had something to do with administering those things. As far as the extermination of Jews was concerned, you had the organization Eichmann, E-i-c-h-m-a-n-n.
Q. You are speaking about central offices. Would you consider the WVHA as such a central office?
A. Not necessarily, because the WVHA, I mean from an institutional point of view, had to do with supplying the troops. The members of the guard personnel of the concentration camps also belonged to that troop.
I mentioned before, this amounted to thirty-five to forty thousand men. As compared to he mass of the other tasks, the supplying of this group alone only meant one-twentieth of the entire task.
Q. Witness, the Defendant Scheide, who is my client, had to take care of the transportation. As an administrative lawyer you are in a position to give us information about that, Judge Toms, during the examination of Defendant Scheide, asked him, "How did the concentration camp inmate get to the camp?" Now, can you give us some sort of statement about that?
A. He was sent to a concentration camp by a commitment order issued by the RSHA, the Reich Security Main Office. The commitment and the transportation of the inmates to the concentration camp was the task of the Gestapo and of no other agency.
Q. Witness, Judge Toms asked, "The inmate did not walk; he did not walk into the concentration camp; he was transported in come manner." How was that done?
A. The police did that with their own means, and they carried it on with special trucks. They used trucks and also special prisoners vans which were used on the German Reichsbahn, railroad carriages They had their regular schedules, and they delivered the concentration camp inmate into the concentration camps themselves.
Q. Now, if inmates came from abroad into the concentration camps abroad, that is to Poland, how did they get there?
A. A railroad transport had to be carried out for those inmates who were abroad. The man who organized these transports was a delegate of the Gestapo. Before the inmate was turned over at the gate of the concentration camp for a commitment order, he did not exist for the concentration camp, and for he concentration-camp administration either.
Q. Whom would the Gestapo use now, and by that I mean actually, for the railroad transports?
A. They carried out their negotiations with the Reichsbohn Agencies through their police offices, and when major transports were concerned, of course, then again they worked with the police for escort personnel.
Q. How was it now, witness with the commitments or the transports with trucks? Now, when the Gestapo sent inmates to the concentratration camp with trucks, did they use their own trucks, or did they get trucks from somewhere else?
A. The Gestapo had trucks of their own which had special security measures, which were used according to a schedule or depending on the cases. If those means were not sufficient then the Gestapo would apply for transports, and then they rented buses or trucks from private enterprises.
Q. Witness, it has been stated here that he Defendant Scheide was in charge of six hundred trucks for all concentration camps. Could any major transportation of human beings have been carried out with that number, or were those six hundred necessary for internal traffic? I am only thinking of supply and I am only talking from a supervision point of view.
A. I found out myself that the concentration camps had a definite lack of trucks. For instance, the concentration camp at Guchenwald, which contained approximately 80,000 inmates together with its outside camps, had two or three truck columns. Due to the large number of concentration camps with their outside camps, the number of six hundred trucks is absolutely insignificant. The internal traffice of the camp and such can probably be kept up in that case, for emergency, but I do know that the concentration-camp administration borrowed additional trucks from both the Army and the civilian sector.
Q. Witness, if civilian firms now used inmates for labor assignment, do you know anything about it, how those inmates were transported if they didn't walk; but if they were transported by trucks, who supplied the trucks?
A. Whenever there was a construction project or a work project by a civilian firm, then they also had to provide the necessary trucks and the necessary means for their transportation and the billeting of the inmates. As there were so many applicants of labor inmates, the administration could select a few of those applicants, and they used those applicants with whom they had as little work as possible, that is to say, such people who had all means in their hands.
Q. Witness, it has been stated here that the Defendant Sheide was also competent for arms and ammunitions, that this was already dealt with before, because the administration of arms and ammunition for guard personnel cannot be considered a crime. But amongst all the weapons in the concentration camps there were also two machine guns. Did you at any time hear that machine guns were used for executions?
A. I never heard that machine guns were used for executions. The executions were carried out either by hanging or by gassing in the extermination camps, and I believe that cases where shootings took place by a military unit were absolutely seldom, by the special shooting squads, and even the use of the ammunition at the time can only have been so small, that according to my opinion it was not very much anyway, and the central office could not learn about it.
Q. Now, Witness, you had a large insight on the entire conditions as far as they were in connection with the concentration camps. The Defendant Scheide was in the WVHA. He was in charge of the Agency B-V, Transportation, Arms and Ammunition. Do you believe that he had any knowledge or could have had any knowledge about internal conditions in the concentration camps, namely that one could assert that generally speaking?
A I do not know the Defendant Scheide, and therefore I don't know what he knows or does not know about concentration camps. However, I can say that based on his official position, namely from his sector, he could not know anything essential about the concentration camps.
DR. HOFFMANN: Your Honor, I herewith conclude my examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Other Defense Counsel?
BY DR. SEIDL (For Defendant Oswald Pohl):
Q Witness, you testified that the extermination camp at Auschwitz was the camp of Birkenau. Now, I can recall that you testified already before the International Military Tribunal that the extermination camp of Auschwitz was the camp of Monowitz. May I assume at the time when you gave your testimony before the I. M. T. it was a mistake?
A It was a mistake on my part. When I say Monowitz I mean Birkenau.
Q Witness, you also submitted quite a few affidavits which I would like to ask you about. Let me ask you about an affidavit which you gave on the 28th of January, 1947, which you signed on that date. This, your Honors, is Document NO-1900, which was introduced by the Prosecution as Exhibit No. 549.
THE INTERPRETER: 549, Your Honors, 1900. I am sorry, your Honor.
Q (Continuing) This is the case of Sauerzweig. Witness, I would like to ask you, who was it that found out about this corruption case? Do you remember any more about it?
A Yes, I was the one who took up that case.
THE PRESIDENT: He answered your question. Now go ahead with another one.
Q (By Dr. Seidl) Did that case of Albert Sauerzweig have anything to do with concentration camps?
A No.
Q Do you know that the Defendant, Oswald Pohl, had refused recommending the petition for pardon, which resulted in an early execution of the sentence?
A I didn't know that, but I think it possible.
Q Do you furthermore know that Pohl used that sentence as a pretext in order to inform all the administrative leaders of that sentence?
A Yes.
Q And to tell them to be absolutely clean?
A Yes, I know about it.
Q Do you also know that the Main Office SS courts, with reference to this order by Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, used it as an exemplary proof for the support of the SS justice in the Main Office SS court?
A Yes.
Q Witness, in your affidavit you assert that one or two trucks of those things which had been embezzled from Sauerzweig went directly to Pohl. Do you have any tangible reasons for reaching that assumption, or is that an assumption of your part? Or do you only know that from hearsay?
THE PRESIDENT: This has nothing to do with the indictment, Dr. Seidl. Pohl is not charged with embezzling trucks or property of any kind.
DR. SEIDL: However, it is contained in the document, your Honor, which the Prosecution introduced. This document exclusively deals with such corruption cases. In view of the fact that the Tribunal has accepted this document in evidence, I reached the conclusion that the Tribunal also attaches some probative value to that document, and that is the reason which made me ask the Witness a question about that.
THE PRESIDENT: We attach no probative value to a statement that is not connected with the indictment. There is no charge of corruption in the indictment.
DR.SEIDL: Then we will ask no further questions of this witness on the case of Sauerzweig.
THE PRESIDENT: A very commendable decision.
Q (By Dr. Seidl) In your affidavit which was introduced by the Prosecution as NO-1907 and in connection with the case of Leckebusch, you made some statements there. This is an affidavit by this witness dated the 29th of January, 1947. It is Document NO-1907. Witness, do you know that this case, Leckebusch, was taken up by the auditing office of the WVHA and that later on it turned out that Leckebusch was not at all a member of the WVHA but rather a member of the SS Main Office. Did you know anything about that?
A I assume with concentration camps?
THE PRESIDENT: I don't see any connection between this and concentration-camp matters.
Q Do you know that Leckenbusch committed suicide?
A Yes.
Q Can you tell me how this whole thing came about?
THE PRESIDENT: No, no; who in the world is Lieckenbusch?
DR. SEIDL (Counsel for defendant Pohl): Liechenbusch is the man who is described in the affidavit by Dr. Morgen, dated the 29th of January, 1947. The affidavit was introduced by the Prosecution as NO-1907.
THE PRESIDENT: What did Lieckenbusch do?
DR. SEIDL: According to the description given by the witness in his affidavit, this is a corruption case which is brought in connection with the defendant pohl.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, didn't you understand me, Dr. Seidl before?
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, it is very difficult for me to decide in individual cases if a case which is brought up by the Prosecution is in connection with the indictment itself, since the indictment only speaks about it in general terms. The document was accepted in evidence, and from the Defense point of view I consider it a duty to discuss matters of evidence which are introduced by the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: Even when it hasn't any relation to the indictment?
DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, I don't know what the Prosecution will make as its subject when it concludes the introduction of evidence, and I don't know what the conclusion will be on the part of the Tribunal. The reason being that the indictment has been compiled in a general way.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Prosecution is limited by the indictment. The Prosecution is limited by the charges in the indictment.
Now, how can they make any claim about Leickenbusch, or somebody, having been corrupt? That is not a war crime; it is not a crime against humanity; it has nothing to do with the indictment.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, may I suggest then that if those assertions have no probative value whatsoever that then the admission of these documents by discontinued; and as far as Document NO-1907 is concerned and Document 1900, if they are in no connection with the indictment, then I do not see any reason whatsoever in admitting these documents in evidence. And it would facilitate the task of the Defense if the Defense knows at this point what evidence can be used legally when making the judgment. I consider it my duty from the point of view of the Defense to take an attitude to every document which is introduced as evidence which was accepted by the Tribunal, because I have to start from the point that somehow they might be considered as having a probative value in some respects.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will use its recess for discussing this topic, among other things, and we will advise you at the end of the recess. We will be in recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: I would like to advise counsel that the Tribunal plans to recess at three o'clock this afternoon for the rest of the day. One of the members is obliged to be absent, so we will recess at three o'clock for the rest of the day.
I would like to advise you, Dr. Seidl, that your examination of this witness should be confined to matters which pertain to the indictment -- and not to collateral irregularities or offenses with which this Tribunal is not concerned.
DR. SEIDL: May I then maintain the point of view, your Honor, that the corrupting case of Sauerzweig, and similar corruption cases which were contained in the affidavit do not have any probative value, and the Defense does not have to deal with these questions as to just what legal conclusions can be drawn from it.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, in your affidavit you have further stated that Pohl worked together with Kaltenbrunner and Nebe so that they could exert some pressure on you. Was that an assumption on your part, or did you have any reasons which support this opinion on your part?
A That was not an assumption, but this was a fact.
Q On what is your claim based?
A The investigations had hardly led to any results. When Gruppenfuehrer Nebe, by order of Kaltenbrunner, approached me immediately afterwards with the instructions that the investigation was to be limited to certain points. Already in December or January, 1943, I was to depose a statement to the effect that the investigation had shown good results and that justice had been done now; and that I, myself, was of the opinion, that my activity in this respect had been concluded. On this occasion I was told that this position of Kaltenbrunner' s was maintained expressly by the wish of Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl. Later on, I also heard about a document which Pohl and Kaltenbrunner compiled together. This document contained the opinion of two people and it was submitted to him directly.
In this document Pohl stated that the continuation of the investigation had already led to disciplinary offenses on the part of the inmates. This report was submitted to Himmler.
The investigation was endangering the armament work of the concentration camp program. That is the reason why the investigation should be discontinued. Obersturmfuehrer Mittelstedt, my successor, told me that he himself was a witness to the fact that Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl had declared to the Reichsfuehrer that either I should be relieved of being in charge of the investigation or that Pohl would resign his position. That is what I heard about the activity of Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl with regard to the investigations in the concentration camps, whereupon my affidavit is founded.
Q May I understand your testimony to mean, Witness, that Pohl objected to the continuation of the investigation, because, in spite of the operation of a big machinery, it was not possible to reach any actual results?
A No, the results, to which the investigation led, were so clear that Pohl did not wish to accept the results.
Q What do you mean by results in this respect? Witness, when did this take place, which you have just mentioned, and what do you mean in this connection, when you say, "The results were so clear that Pohl did not want to accept them."
A I did not speak about one incident here, Mr. Attorney, but I spoke about innumerable cases. I spoke about a continued activity of Obergruppenfuehrer Poh. This activity was apparent to me already in the turn of the years '43. '44. This activity then continued until I was relieved of my position and then that became apparent to the broad public within the SS.
Q You have claimed, Witness, that by virtue of an order of August, 1944, the SS judges had to obtain the special permission of Pohl in order a concentration camp and I want to ask you, was Pohl able at all to issue such an order, after you consider the judges concerned in the investigation had received their assignments directly from Himmler?
A This order of Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl I have seen personally. It was not an order to the SS judges, but it was an order to the concentration camp commanders, who were subordinated to him. These concentration camp commanders were prohibited from admitting any SS judge to a concentration camp without Pohl's explicit written permission. This order, however, was still more monstrous. It was made the duty of the commanders to see to it that the investigations by the SS judges and the police authorities, who were also used in the investigation, could only adhere to the certain subject which was included in a written interrogation warrent. With that, practically all the investigations were actually paralyzed.
Every suspicion for which the evidence had to be accumulated, had to be submitted to Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl and his subordinate agencies also and also the camp commanders against whom the investigation was directed.
Q Witness --
A Of course, we objected with the Reichsfuehrer against this and also pointed out what was going on and that Pohl once again had acted completely arbitrary and autocratic. The order later on was changed or was completely rescinded. However, Pohl had achieved that my successor for several months could not carry out his work at all.
Q Witness, I am now going to put an order to you which I have in my hands. This is an order which is signed by Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl. In this order it is stated, "1, In order to remove any unclarities which have arisen through the activity of the Z.B.V. Court, the Reichsfuehrer SS has ordered, 'Reichsfuehrer of the 16th of May, 1944. In accordance with paragraph 188 of the War Time Manual, I order 1, Effective immediately with the Main Office SS Courts and SS and Police Courts, Z.B.V. is to be established.' "Then in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 and 6 there follow further regulations about this court. In paragraph 2, the Defendant Pohl then orders himself "Through the decree of the Reichsfuehrer-SS the following matter has been clarified." And then under paragraph 3, it is stated literally, "I expect from all the agencies which are subordinated to me that they will support the Z.B.V. court which will be called into life with the above order and that they will support it in its work, as far as possible. Officers and enlisted men who do not comply with my order I shall discipline myself." Witness, doesn't this order show quite clearly that the Defendant Pohl gave the direct instructions to all agencies under his command that they were to support the activity of this Z.B.V. Court wherever possible?
A In this connection, I must say I would be grateful to you, Counselor, if I could personally look at this order. However, for the time being, I want to say that it is one of the typical examples of the behavior of Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl that he used big words and so he would put on the veil of protection of law and discipline, although he, in reality, did exactly the opposite.
Q Witness, just how is it with your previous testimony that you stated that Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl did everything in order to improve conditions in the concentration camps and with regard to the food and food supplies he wanted to make conditions which were worthy of human beings?
A I did not say that he did everything what he could do, but I only said, and I think as a former judge it is my duty to say that, I have also stated the positive things he did. However, life does not consist of quarters and food. Quite apart from the purpose for which the inmates were given those things.
Q You further go on to say in the affidavit, Document NO-1907, "Pohl was a man of terrific influence, because all the agencies and the entire administration for the concentration camps he handled personally." What do you mean by making the statement with regard to the agencies, Witness?
A Well, he had the authority to give orders to all agencies under his command and that included the whole complex of the concentration camp. However, beyond that he used his influence against me with the RSHA and the RSHA for the most part he had included in his subordinate agencies, and I know the reason for that because from the foreign exchange profits of the concentration camps the Defendant Pohl contributed in order to have the many activities carried out.
Q How do you know that, Witness?
A I know that from the statements of the Witness Kaltenbrunner in the trial before the International Military Tribunal. However, I knew that already before that time.
Q Witness, to whom was Department VI subordinate in the concentration camps?
Were they subordinate to the WVHA or were they subordinate to the RSHA?
A The political departments of the concentrations camps were subordinate to the RSHA. At the same time, however, the members of the Political Department were members of the concentration camp staff and, consequently, they were strickly subordinate to the camp commander as far as the disciplinary measures were concerned. These people, therefore, were subordinated to different people. They had to cooperate with the camp commanders and they had to cooperate also with the RSHA, and I believe that the central agencies were not informed about these bad conditions which prevailed.
Q However, your factual instructions the political departments apparently received from the SS, is that correct?
A Yes, without any doubt.
Q Through what channels, just how did the concentration camps obtain their food supplies? Did you make any observations about that?
A The food rations were turned over by a Reich law. The new rations were set by Reich law and therefore they were turned over by the civilian agencies.
Q Witness, in the affidavit NO-1907 you have alleged, that people had been transferred by Pohl so that they could be taken away from your jurisdiction. As far as legal matters were concerned, was it a fact, Witness, that by virtue of your special assignment you were competent anywhere and you were not limited to one locality, and, therefore, a transfer for this reason could not have any factual motives.
A Just because I was constantly restricted by Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, and especially because of the transfers, the Z.B.V, Court was established. However, even then, he continued in his activity and, if somebody was transferred to a troop unit, with which he had not acted before, I could interrogate him and reach him, he was again transferred to another agency, and, in this way, our investigation of the case was delayed indefinitely.
And I ant to give you an example for it. That was the case in the proceedings against the Concentrattion Warsaw. Pohl had arrested the officer and commander and now he had the commandant and the two officers and he told the Z.B.V. court to go there immediately so that the three culprits could he hanged -
Q. Witness, I must interrupt your answer with regard to the case of the Concentration Camp Warsaw. I shall ask you several questions later on, and I think it is more expressive that this whole question is discussed at the same time. You will have the opportunity later on to give us your answer.
A. Well, However, since I have begun my answer already, I would lite to finish. Well, he maintained the officers-
Q. I told you already, witness, that I am going to ask you questions later on on this matter.
A. I beg your pardon. You asked me to give an example and I would like to give you this example right now.
THE PRESIDENT: He didn't ask you for the example. You said you would like to give him one. Dr. Seidl didn't ask you for an example. So ahead, Dr. Seidl with another question. You are wasting a lot of time on matters that don't mean thing to the Tribunal. I would like to tell you that.
Q. In your affidavit, you have also alleged that Pohl naturally was informed about the illegal matters going on in the concentration camps Do you now hes often Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl visited the concentration camps? I want to ask yon in particular how often was he at Buchenwald during the eight months when you were there?
A. During this time Pohl did not visit this concentration camp at all. However I know something else, positively.
THE PRESIDENT: Never mind. Never mind. Just answer questions. Go ahead Dr. Seidl, another question.
Q. Witness, in your affidavit you have commented on the corruption of the case of Englke. I now want to ask you, id this case have anything to do with the concentration camps?
A. No.
Q. In the affidavit NO-1907, you also made statements about the conditions at Dora. I now want to ask you, did you yourself ever visit Dora and do you know conditions which prevailed there from you own experiences?
A. I was not at Dora. I--
Q. That is sufficient for me. I only wanted you to tell me whether you were there or not. Witness, when was the decision made in the Main Office SS Courts that against certain SS officers a trail for corruption was to be instituted after the war? What officers of the Main Office SS Courts participated in this resolution, and why was this trial only to be started after the war?
THE PRESIDENT: And why do you talk about it?
DR. SEIDL: This question seems necessary to me, Your Honor, in order to clarify the question of the veracity of this witness. I just want to examine his veracity here. However, if the Tribunal thinks this question is unnecessary, that I will withdraw it.
THE PRESIDENT: We thought that twenty minutes ago, and told you so.
A. Witness, from October, 1946 until the 13th of January, 1947, were you here in Nurnberg in the so-called Witness Wing of the court prison here?
A. Could you give me the dates again please?
Q. From October, 1946, until the middle of January, 1947.
A. I believe from the 1st of July until today I was in the Witness Wing of the court prison.
Q. In November, 1946 did you have discussion with SS Oberfuehrer Reinecke about your investigation of the concentration camps and did Oberfuehrer Reinecke reproach you severely in that occasion, because the results of your investigation -- because you had exaggerated the results of your investigations and that your opinions in part you had based not on facts you found yourself, but which you had gained from hearsay?
A. Not a word is true, Every word you have stated is false. SS Oberfuehrere Reinecke is located in Garmish already many months and he has been interrogated there and for quite a long time.