THE PRESIDENT: He just carried out the orders which came from the Personnel Main Office?
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Yes, quite; And that becomes clear from the connection between the documents. That is why I think these special transfers should not be submitted separately.
THE PRESIDENT: We have noted on the exhibit that it is to be read in connection with Exhibit 88.
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Yes, and the same is also true with another one I've noted here. No, I'm sorry, that is about another document. Exhibit 88 is the one.
MR. ROBBINS: My recollection is. I don't have the reference to the transcript, that I asked the defendant Fanslau on cross examination if he signed the orders transferring the concentration camp commandants, and he denied that he did. The first one transfers the commandant Pauli of Stutthof to the concentration camp Neuengamme. It is 4560; and I offer it as Exhibit 716. The next one is 4559 and will be Exhibit 717. It is signed by the defendant Hans Loerner and deals with the salary of the same Max Pauli. The next document, 4511, is a recommendation for the promotion of Lauritz to Sachsenhausen. However, that has not been made ready in the English book, so it will not be offered.
The next document, 4510, will be Exhibit 718, and is the transfer order of Fritz Schuern, transferring him from Sachsenhausen to Ravensbruck. The next document, 4505, will be Prosecution Exhibit 720, and deals with the transfer of a Higher SS and Police Leader. The last book contains about six additional documents. The first exhibit, 721, is Document 3789, and is offered to rebut the testimony of the defendant Klein that he did not deal with all of the property of Prinz Max Lobkowitz but only dealt with one phase of it. This letter shows that he was concerned with the entire estate.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the exhibit number?
MR. ROBBINS: That is 721. I should like to point out on the sixth page of this document, which is signed by Klein, he says, "The above shows that it is unquestionably desirable to acquire the whole property." It is on the middle of the sixth page. And on the seventh page he discusses various ways and means to carry out the confiscation of the property.
The next document, 3786, is Exhibit 722, and is offered to show that Klein had an interest as late as December 1940 in this matter. And the next document, 3785, will be Exhibit 723. Hohberg writes to Klein that, "We have reached the point where the confiscation decree is ready to be sent out." If it please the Tribunal, we expect some time today to have word from the Czechoslovakian Government that this decree was finally sent out and that the property was confiscated. I trust that if that word does not come in today we may have permission to submit it before the 16th of the month.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. ROBBINS: The next document was included by mistake and will not be offered. That's 1949. The same applied to the next document, 1964. The next document, 3782. will be Exhibit 724, and is offered to show that W/VIII had requested the employment of prisoners for Kranichfeld, as the second sentence in the letter states. The memorandum is signed by Baier and by Klein.
DR. FICHT (for the defendant Klein): If the Tribunal please, I object to the admission of this document. According to the date, it come from a period of time when Klein no longer was Chief of Office W/VIII. Therefore, it cannot be of any probative value according to what the prosecution has just said.
MR. ROBBINS: I note that Klein has signed the document on the 27th of October 1944. Apparently this memorandum was written twentyseven days after the defendat Klein left the office. However, it does show that the Office W/VIII had requested prisoners; and I offer it to show that it was the function of W/VIII to request prisoner labor.
DR. FICHT: May I point out, your Honor, that defendant Klein said on the witness stand that the people he received from Weimar were not inmates of concentration camps but they came from a training camp.
MR. ROBBINS: The first word in the document is "Haftlinge" employed at Office W/VIII, inmates.
DR. FICHT: Inmates is an expression which could apply to both of them.
THE PRESIDENT: What about prisoners? The prison camp Weimar has released prisoners for Kranichfeld.
MR. ROBBINS: Weimar is the Weimar-Buchenwald, is it not?
DR. FICHT: No, it is not. That's just the point. It is not Weimar-Buchenwald. It has absolutely nothing to do with the concentration camp as becomes quite clear from Klein's testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: What is meant by a prison camp? Is that a labor camp?
DR. FICHT: This was a training camp, Your Honors, an educational establishment for such workers who, because of offenses against the labor decrees, were sent into an educational work camp in order to make them work. After a period of time, I believe nine weeks, they were released from there again. It has nothing to do with concentration camps.
THE PRESIDENT: In view of the date on the letter the exhibit will not be admitted.
MR. ROBBINS: I will cancel the Exhibit 724. I next offer the document 3780 as Exhibit 724. And this clearly comes from a date subsequent to Klein's departure. However, it is offered to show, on the second page, that Bartels was under Office W/VIII; that he was subordinated immediately to Himmler and did not go through W/VIII in his channel of authority.
THE PRESIDENT: Where is he mentioned?
MR. ROBBINS: In the top line on the second page as head of one of the branch offices of Department 1 of Office W/VIII.
DR. FICHT: Your Honors, I object to the admission of this document for the same reason, as I did concerning the other document because it is dated 2nd January 1945, considerably later than even the previous document. Might I say something about the point just mentioned by the prosecution? If the Court looks further down on the page, where it says "King Henry memorial Foundation," it says also "Quedlinburg, Lord Mayor Selig." It should be obvious that the Mayor of Quedlingburg could scarcely have been part of Office W/VIII. If, however, the successor of Klein, Oberfuehrer Salpeter, drew up a chart, in this manner it shows that he wanted to show is sphere of task as large as possible; but it says nothing about the channel of command.
MR. ROBBINS: We were not able to find the table of organization for the period during which Klein was in charge. It is offered simply to show that Bartels at a later date was under W/VIII and that, therefore, it was possible for him to be subordinate to W/VIII. It doesn't show, except circumstantially, that he was not immediately subordinate to Himmler in January 1945 but went through W/VIII in his channels.
THE PRESIDENT: When did Klein leave W/VIII?
DR. GICHT: At the end of September 1944.
THE PRESIDENT: This is three months later. I think our ruling on the previous exhibit controls; and this exhibit will be excluded.
MR. ROBBINS: The next document, 4551, I offer as Exhibit 724. This is offered to rebut the testimony of the defendant Pook that he was not attached to the SE Main Office. The document states that he was assigned to the medical department of the SD Main Office.
THE PRESIDENT: Did he deny that?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor. There was a document that was put to him on cross examination, and it contained just the letters SD. He said it was his belief that the letters SD did not stand for SD Main Office and that he had never been attached to the SD Main Office. The last document in this book, 4795, will be Prosecution Exhibit 725. It is a letter from defendant Baier to Klein regarding the allocation of prisoners. And the word in the German original is "Haftlinge", allocation of inmates. It is offered to rebut the testimony of the defendant Klein that he was not concerned with the allocation of inmates labor. Baier writes to Klein that he has "discussed the allocation of inmates for your office with Obersturmbannfuehrer Hauer. I have one other document that I would like to insert at the end of this document book.
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Your Honor, may I just make use of this opportunity to say something about Exhibit 720, the last document in Book 31. It is NO 4505, and it concerns the transfer of Obersturmbannfurhrer Schellin. That decree is closely connected with Prosecution Exhibit No. 331. It is contained in Book 12 and also in Book 18. This is a fairly extensive exhibit, and I would like to refer to Page 13 of the German version. There it says expressly that Himmler reserved the right personally to appoint his SS economists, and on Page 14. Pohl makes the suggestion to Himmler for the transfer of Obersturmbannfuehrer Schellin, with the result that here again this transfer decree signed by Fanslau, was merely an order he carried out.
MR. ROBBINS: Since I have just distributed this document to the Defense Counsel, I'll not offer it until some time later so that they will have a chance to read it.
THE PRESIDENT: Let's mark it, Mr. Robbins, and offer it subject to objections.
MR. ROBBINS: This is Document 1951 and will be Exhibit. 726.
I should like to ask the Tribunal, in winding up my rebuttal material, to take judicial notice of the decision of this Court in United States against Milch, and the concurring opinion in that case, and the judgment of the International Military Tribunal, and the judgment of Military Tribunal I in United States against Karl Brandt and other defendants.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean the entire judgments in those cases?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we, of course, would do that. Those are adjudicated cases , and we would consider them as available for our own use.
MR ROBBINS: There were five exhibits that were not contained in the document books that were put in on cross examination after the do cument books were introduced.
They are Exhibits 635 through 639, and I would like to offer those at this time. 639 was the magazine "Subhuman", which was just marked for identification. I would like to offer that in evidence. 638 is the affidavit of Mr. Jahn, summarizing the death books at Wewelsburg. I have copies for the Defense Counsel here.
637 was Document NO 4123, the large diagram of the VerwaltungsamtSS, that was signed by a number of officials of that office and that the witness Hubert Karl was examined upon.
And Exhibit 636 was Hubert Karl's second affidavit, NO 4154, and the last exhibit, 635, was the affidavit of Helga Wagner, who was the stenographer at the interrogation of the witness Schwarz, where Larry Wolfe took the interrogation. I would like to offer those in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: They are not in the document book?
MR. ROBBINS: They are not in the document book. They have been distributed to the Defense Counsel and to the Court, with the exception of the affidavit of the stenographer, which Counsel for the defendant Klein has and which I assume other Counsel are not interested in.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: We have it.
MR. ROBBINS: You have that affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Does that conclude your proof, Mr. Robbins?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Stakelberg, what is the news of the witness Meier?
DR. VON STAKELBERG: If the Tribunal please, I saw Miss Bendford last night, and she told me that she thought that the witness Meier should arrive here at any moment now. I have not yet had an opportunity this morning to see Miss Bendford again. In the recess now, I shall go upstairs and find out.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. We'll recess at this time so that you can find that out.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for about fifteen minutes.
( A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. HIEM: Dr. Heim, deputizing Dr. Ratz for Defendant Pook.
Your Honors, I want to object to Prosecution Document NO4551 in Document Book No. XXXII. That is the last but one Document. It received Exhibit No. 724. If I only object to this document at this time, then this is done for the reason that only during the recess I had the opportunity to take a look at the original. The original which was presented by the Prosecution is not signed, and if it should be a copy then on this document the word "Copy" is lacking, as well as the certificate which is customary.
I furthermore would like to point out that apparently this must be a draft because this document is from the 23rd of August, 1939, so that as a result of the outbreak of war on the 1st of September, 1939, it was not pur into execution any more. I therefore request that the document be not admitted in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: What is it you say about the war breaking out?
DR. HEIM: On the 1st of September, 1939, the war broke out in Germany. The document bears the date of the 23rd of August, 1939. It can be assumed that this document is only a draft and that as a result of the outbreak of war which occurred nine days later this transfer was not put into effect any more.
THE PRESIDENT: How can we assume that? Why could the outbreak of war got to do with it?
DR. HIEM: It can be assumed that this is simply a draft for transfer and that since the SS agencies had so much work to do as a result of the outbreak of war this matter was forgotten.
THE PRESIDENT: That is a wild suspicion. I can't assume that it is true. Apparently the document was distributed.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, however this document should at least be provided with a certificate. There would be some certificate on it or at least above the document the word "Copy" would have been written, but both of those things are lacking.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that does not make any difference. If it was a message from one person to another and was distributed, it could have been written on the back of an envelope and need not have been typewritten. What difference does that make? It is dignod in typewriter and it did carry the message to at least three offices, P-4, P-7, and P-11. So they wouldn't be distibuting a draft, would they?
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, it could only have been a suggestion which was not carried out because a transfer after all- had to be dignod by the Chief of Officer of Personnel office personally; and among those documents there certainly would be a better document which was signed and from which the transfer of the Defendant Pook becomes evident.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps because of the outbreak of the war they were too busy to get a better document. Maybe this is the best they had at the time. Tho objection is overruled, and your objection will be consedered in connection with the weight, the value of the document, but it will be admitted as it stands.
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Your Honor, unfortunately I have not received any final notification yet about the witness Maier. Up to now he has not arrived here in the preson, and Miss Benford is right now trying by telephone to make some additional inquiries. Miss Benford has told me she will notify me about it immediately.
THE PRESIDENT: There is nothing we can do except wait. If he does not come this afternoon we will give you a chance to be heard on Monday, the 15th.
DR. SEIDL: Dr. Seidl for the Defendant Oswald Pohl.
Your Honor, I have been told that now Volume I of the Pohl document book has reached the hands of the Tribunal. I therefore would like to use the opportunity to submit the documents contained in this document book to the Tribunal.
MR. ROBBINS: May I inquire of Defense Counsel how many other document books will be presented so that I can bring all of them up?
DR. SIEDL: The document book which I have now is Volume I, then two smaller supplement volumes will be submitted, and there will be two independent documents as an addition to that which were found in one of the boxes which were put at our disposal by the Prosecution. Altogether there are approximately thirtyfive documents, and their presentation will not take up very much time.
THE PRESIDENT: You were beginning inquiring of other counsel Mr. Robbins. How many other counsel have document books ready to present?
DR. GAWLIK: Dr. Gawlik for Defendants Volk and Bobermin.
Your Honor, there is some unclarity whether you are only referring to today or whether you are referring to the entire time. I hove only three more document books for the Defendant Bobermin and one more for the Defendant Polk however, they have not yet been translated up to today, although the first books were already turned into the Translation Department six weeks ago.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you any that are ready now? Are any of your books ready now?
DR. GAWLIK: Your Honor, I have not received the English Transition yet. I don't know whether they have reached the handes of the Tribunal. I have just discovered that the Prosecution hasn't received the English translation of my document books yet either.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, if you will all listen I will tell you the books that we now have, that I have before me, and then you can determine how many are missing. There is Pohl Document Book No. II; Pook No. I; Tschentscher No. I; Klein Supplement, three documents and Klein Main Document Book; Volk No. I; Vogt Supplement No. III; Fanslau I and II; Geog Loerner I; Scheide I; Schiede II; Scheide Supplement, Supplement II; Frank; Scheide Supplement No. I; Brier Book No. II; Hans Loerner No. I; Eirenschmalz No. I Pook No, III; Sommer No. II; Somner Supplement II and III; Baier No. I; Kiefer Supplement No. I; Mummenthey Document Book I; Mummenthey Document Book II; Mummenthey III; Mummenthey, Supplement I, that I have.
DR. SEIDL: Dr. Siedl for the defendant Oswald Pohl.
The General Secretary had informed me that Volume I of the Pohl Document Book must also be in the hands of the Tribunal in several volumes.
THE PRESIDENT: We have it.
DR. SEIDL: May it please the Tribunal, could I begin now?
THE PRESIDENT: We have No. II
DR. SEIDL: However, according to what the Secretary General told me you must also have Document Book No. I.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, all right, we will look for it. We will find out. Well, all right , we have got to find Pohl Book No. I then. He will find out and tell you this afternoon Whether we have it or not.
DR. SEIDL: Well, could I begin immediately with the presentation of the documents?
THE PRESIDENT: In a minute, as soon as we find out what books are missing. I am trying to find out what document books are together now. What other counsel have document books that I did not read here of that I did not speak of?
DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for defendant Mummenthey): Document Book IV is still missing, and the Supplements II and III.
THE PRESIDENT: Now we have Books I, II, III and Supplement I. Now, what's missing?
DR. FROESCHMANN: Document Book No. IV is missing and Supplements II and III.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. We will try to find them.
DR. VON STEIN ( Counsel for Defendant Eirenschmal): Your Honors, for Eirenschmal, Document Book No. II is missing.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
DR. SCHMIDT (Counsel for Defendant Vogt); Your Honors, in the case of Vogt, the translation of Supplement II and IV is still missing
DR. BELFER (Counsel for Defendant Sommer): Supplement No. IV is missing which consists of one document. In this connection I would like to state, Your Honors, that my Supplement II which I mentioned before, had already been presented.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. It's here.
DR. BELFER: Then I only have to present Supplement No. III which I have and, therefore only No. IV is still lacking.
DR. HAENSEL (Counsel for Defendant Georg Loerner): Document Book No. II is missing and a very small supplement.
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't hear you. Book II?
DR. HAENSEL: Document Book No. II and a very small supplement.
DR. RATZ (Counsel for Defendant Dr. Hermann Pook): Document Book No. II is still missing. Document Book III has been translated, however, I would like to present the documents together with those contained in Document Book No. II.
THE PRESIDENT: Which book is not here?
DR. RATZ: Document Book No. II.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, do you have Document Book III; too, also?
DR. RATZ: Yes, it has already been translated -- yes.
DR. GAWLIK (Counsel for Defendants Dr. Volk and Dr. Bobermin): For the Defendants Volk and Bobermin, Document Books I, II, III, are still missing.
THE PRESIDENT: Of both defendants?
DR. RATZ: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I, II, III.
DR. HEIM (Counsel for Defendant Hohberg): For the Defendant Hohberg; Document Book III and the Supplement to this document book consisting of one document are still missing, Document Book No. I, II, and the supplement to Document Book No. II have already been presented.
THE PRESIDENT: Only Book III and one document are missing.
DR. HEIM: And one supplement consisting of one document.
THE PRESIDENT: Anyone else?
DR. SEIDL (Counsel for defendant Pohl): For the Defendant Pohl, Document Books I, III, and the supplement are lacking.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH (Counsel for Defendant Frank): In the case of the Defendant Frank, Document Books No. II and III are still missing.
Your Honors, at this time I would like to make a suggestion. IN order to avoid wasting time of the Tribunal up until the various document books have been found which have just been mentioned, I request that I may examine the Defendant Frank with regard to the documents which have been presented today by the prosecution. For this reason I would like to call him to the witness stand at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: I want to finish what I am doing here. Are there any others -- any others now that are missing? Everybody has spoken?
Just a minute.
I don't find any additional document books so that the list that I have made is the true list of the missing document books.
DR. HAENSEL: I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that, unfortunately, not all of my colleagues are present and it seems to become evident from a notification that Dr. Pribilla has apparently another book to submit for the Defendant Tschentscher.
And Dr. Hoffman's has been completed? There is still somebody else. Fritsch? That is settled, too.
May it please the Tribunal, could I ask the defendants if there is still a document book missing?
THE PRESIDENT: Possibly Dr. Pribilla?
DR. HAENSEL: Probably there is one additional one.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, go ahead Dr. Seidl, with your document.
DR. SEIDL (Counsel for the defendant Oswald Pohl): Your Honors, Document Book Volume I, is not quite complete because the translation Department did not translate the index which was included in the German text. However, the documents have continuous numbers so that I will be able to present these document books without any difficulty. The first document is Pohl Document No, I and it is an extract from the transcript of the International Military Tribunal about the examination of the Witness Rudolph Hess, which took place on the 15th of April, 1946. In the German text, the examination --
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. You are talking about Document 1, Document No. 1?
DR. SEIDL: It is Document No. 1 It is a -
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't got it. The first document in your book is an affidavit of Maurer.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honors, it has unfortunately happened repeatedly that the Translation Department did not translate extracts which are contained in the record of the I.M.T. Consequently, it is very difficult for the defense to use the statements of witnesses in other trials.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, this is Document Book II you are reading from now.
DR. SEIDL: This is the Document Book No. I. The first document which is apparently contained in the book, Document Book I, is an affidavit by Gerhard Maurer.
THE PRESIDENT: But you told me that Pohl Books I and III are missing. Is that I?
DR. SEIDL: That is Document Book I.
THE PRESIDENT: Then Book No. I is not missing. What is the number of this book?
DR. SEIDL: That is Document Book No. I.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, what books are missing?
DR. SEIDL: Apparently, only Books II and III are missing.
THE PRESIDENT: You told me I and III.
DR. SEIDL: I said that, your Honor, because you told me before that the Tribunal had Book No. II in their hands. Apparently, this was caused by the fact that the first document in the book has been designated "Pohl Document No. 2."
THE PRESIDENT: That is right. That means it was my mistake and then you added a mistake so let's start all over again. Book No. I?
DR. SEIDL: Yes, your Honor. In this Document Book I, this book begins immediately with Document No. II, Pohl. This is done for the reason because the Translation Department did not translate the extract about the examination of Rudolph Hess before the I.M.T. This seems to be a generally prevailing difficulty. This is an examination which took place on the 15th of April 1946 and I suggest that the Tribunal should take judicial notice of this examination of Rudolph Hess.
THE PRESIDENT: All of this testimony or is there some part of it that you want to direct our attention to?
DR. SEIDL: I myself only included an extract of that in the German text. However, it would be recommendable if the Tribunal could study the entire testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: A nice job for next winter. What page have you quoted from? Have you got the transcript page?
DR. SEIDL: It is the examination of the 15th of April, 1946, that is in the German text. It is on page 7797. The examination took place in the morning session. This will make it more easy to find the excerpt.
DR. SEIDL: My quotation is 8 pages long.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. We will read it in English from the original transcript.
DR. SEIDL: I then want to present Pohl Document No. 2. This is an affidavit by SS-Standartenfuchrer Gerhard Maurer of the 11th of July, 1947. This will become Pohl Exhibit No. 1. This affidavit by Gerhard Maurer contains a comment with regard to two documents presented by the prosecution and this is Document 2327 which was presented by the prosecution as Exhibit No. 75.
The other document is Document NO-1201which was presented by the prosecution as Exhibit 146.
I am now comint to Pohl Document No. 3 which is located on page 26 of the document book. You can find the numbers of the pages on the right hand side. I submit this document as Pohl Exhibit No. 2. This is a decree by the Reich president for the protection of people in the State of the 28th of February, 1943. This is a fundamental decree which became the legal basis of the so-called "Protective Custody Orders" and this is immediately connected with the activities of the R.S.H.A. and it also touches the tasks of the defendant Pohl and those of the WVHA. It only touches these tasks very slightly.
I want to point out that this decree was issued by the Reich President von Hindenburg. This was done by Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution.
I an now coming to page 27 of the Document Book and I want to present Pohl Document No. 4 which will become Pohl Exhibit No. 3. The contents of this document are the laws concerning the Secret State Police of the 10th of February 1936. The Defendant Pohl has referred to this decree in the course of his examination in the witness stand.
Paragraph 3 of this document shows -- and so does paragraph 2 -that the execution of all State Police tasks was to be carried out by the Secret State Police in Berlin.
The next document I want to present is Pohl Document No. 3 which will become Pohl Exhibit No. 4. It is located on page 29 of the document book. This is decree for the carrying out of the law concerning the Secret State Police of the 10th of February, 1936.
I want to quote from paragraph 2 first; "The Secret State Police administrates all the concentration camps of the State." The Defendant Pohl, in the course of his examination in the witness stand, has also referred to his decree.
The next document which I want to submit to the Tribunal is an article of the Government Director in the office of the Secret State Police at Berlin, Dr. Werner Best, which is located on page 3 of the document book.
Pohl Document No. 6 I want to present as Pohl Exhibit No. 5, on page 35. I only want to read one sentence from the article. I quote: "The Secret State Police administers the concentration camps of the State through the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps which is affiliated with the office of the Secret State Police."
I am now coming to the Pohl Document No. 7 which is on page 36 of my document book. This is a decree concerning the treatment of property belonging to members of the former Polish State. It was signed by Reichs Marshal Goering in his capacity as a president of the Ministerial Council for Reich Defense and as a Commissioner of the Four Year Plan. I want to offer it as Pohl Exhibit No. 6. It is one of the document which are to show that the WVHA did not have the authority to carry out seizures but that the authority to carry out seizures was given to other authorities like, for example, the Minister's Council for the Defense of the Reich.
The same applies to Pohl Document No. 8, which is located on page 38 of the document book. I want to offer it as Pohl Exhibit No. 7. This document also refers to the question of what authorities and agencies had a right to carry out seizure measures in the occupied territories. This is a decree by the President of the Council of Ministers for the Defense of the Reich and Commissioner for the Four Year's Plan of the 12th of June, 1940, about the establishment of the Main Trustee agency in the East. The man in charge of this Main Trusteeship agency in the East was the Witness Winkler, who has appeared before this Tribunal. This document will become Pohl Exhibit No.7.
I am now coming to page 40 of my document book. Here we have a special dilivery letter of the Foreign Office of the 31st of July, 1942. This is a special devivery letter and it will become Pohl Document No. 9, which I offer as Exhibit Pohl No. 8. This document also meals with the question of the seizure of property in the occupied territories. In particular it deals with the treatment of the Jewish property abroad or foreign Jewish property in the Reich. This document is also to show that the WVHA was not in any way connected with these legal question. This becomes quite clear on page 41 of the Document Book where I want to quote from Paragraph 2. I quote:
"The Foreign Office, in agreement with the Reich Security Main office, therefore, consider it the only way to come to a quick and find settlement and to avoid limitless chain of difficulties and separate controversies-if the Reich and the foreign states renounce mutually, as a matter of principle, all claims to the sequestered fortunes of their respective Jews who live abroad."
From this letter nothing becomes evident to the effect which would lead to any participation of the WVHA, but it is rather shown quite clearly that all these questions were dealt with and settled by other agencies.