DR. VON STEIN: Document No. 3--
THE PRESIDENT: What was the exhibit number of Eirenschmalz's first affidavit?
DR. VON STEIN: I only have the number NO-2325. Document No. 3 will become Eirenschmalz Exhibit No. 3, and it is an affidavit given by OSWALD POHL in Document NO-2616, which was Exhibit No. 325, Pohl said in paragraphs 11, 12, 16, 17 and 18 and made statements on raw material quotas and control possibilities with regards to building enterprises by the Office C-6 connections between Office-C and the Building Constructions which were carried through at Auschwitz, and the accounts referring thereto. These statements have been corrected by Pohl in his new affidavit, and he expressed the thought that he did not make any observations of his own in these matters, and that he had based his earlier statement on assumption.
THE PRESIDENT: The translation of the exhibit number was incorrect. I think it is 523.
DR. VON STEIN: 325.
THE PRESIDENT: It is 523 in the affidavit.
DR. VON STEIN: 325, yes. Eirenschmalz Exhibit No. 4 will be Document No. 4. It is an affidavit of Hans Maibach. He was a colleague of Eirenschmalz in the WVHA from 1 February 1942 until the end of the war. He described in detail the work done by the Main Departments C-6 I-III. He particularly deals with the construction process concerning gas chambers and cremators, and he emphasizes that Office C-6 had no points of contact with gas chambers and cremators. As to Eirenschmalz's deputizing for Kammler, Maibach said that he did not know of a single instance where Eirenschmalz deputized for Kammler. He also makes statements about the unimportance of the so-called expert conferences with Kammler, and he expressed the opinion that Kammler was not interested in Office C-VI.
Document No. 5 will be Exhibit No. 5, and this is an affidavit of Frau Christl Baatz. She was a draftsman in the Eirenschmalz's office from February 1942 until the end of the war. She was obliged to go to the WVHA. She was once A Czech National, and is politically speaking without any incrimination. She is now living in Austria. On the basis of her own observations, she described these fair tasks of Office C-VI, in particular she comments on the question of construction and the maintenance of crematora, gas chambers and laboratories for experimental purposes, and said that C-VI never took any part in these things. She also comments on Eirenschmalz's deputizing for Kammler, and also makes it clear that no such deputizing was ever done in the period of time under review. As for Eirenschlz relationship to Kammler, and his participation in conferences of experts, and in particular as to Eirenschmalz's contact with his own subordinates, Frau Baatz gives detailed statements. Document No. 6 will be Exhibit No. 6, and it is an affidavit of Paul Kother. He was from 1936 with the garrison administration in Munich in 1940, he joined the SS Special Task Unit, and on February 1942 he was transferred to the WVHA, in particular to Office C-VI under Eirenschmalz. Kother said that Eirenschmalz in 1939 took care of the requirements of the SS Special Task Unit of the Reich Building Administration sofar as construction was concerned. He is indicating that Eirenschmalz was not concerned with the tasks of the Administration of buildings belonging to the SS Death head Units. Office C-VI sofar as to tasks of construction and maintenance is minutely described by Kother. He speaks about the obtaining of material through a competent official. He states that sofar as the maintenance of gas chambers and crematora was concerned, Office C-VI had nothing to do with it.
The Main Department C-VI-III which deal with accounting workers, was the department which covered the main field of tasks of Office C-VI. Eirenschmalz finally, it is stated, never deputized for Kemmler.
Eirenschmalz Document No. 7 will become Exhibit No. 7, and this is an affidavit by Emil Thiere, He Was from July 1944 until the end of the war in WVHA, and he was under Eirenschmalz in Office C-VI.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr Von Stein, we have got to read all of those documents, and it is very hard on you to have to read then for us. These affidavits we have to read them anyway.
DR VON STEIN: Mr President, I am endeavoring to give you only a very brief statement of the contents of the documents. I am not reading them.
THE PRESIDENT: Even so, we have to start at the beginning and read the while affidavit ourselves, and it seems that Dr Haensel would have said, "It is love labor lost." Don't you think so?
DR VON STEIN: Then I shall merely submit the document by their number and that will suffice.
THE PRESIDENT: I think so.
DR VON STEIN: Document Eirenschmalz No. 8 will be Exhibit No. 8. This is an affidavit of Hans Weber, who was also one of Eirenschmalz calleagues. I shall then submit Document No. 9, which shall be Exhibit No. 9. The document being affidavit of August Schaper, another employee of the WVHA. Document Eirenschmalz No. 10 will be Exhibit No. 10, which is the affidavit of Heinz Schuermann. He was working on the staff of Office Group-C. Document Eirenschmalz No. 11 will be Exhibit No. 11, which is an affidavit by Georg Braun. He also was one of Eirenschmalz colleagues. Document Eirenschmalz No. 12 will be Exhibit No. 12, and it is an affidavit of Amtsrat Haleck, in the Reich Fiscal Department (Ruchmumgshof) Document Eirenschmalz No. 13 is an excerpt from the relevant decree of the State Budget regulations.
Document Eirenschmalz No. 14 will be Exhibit No. 14 and this is an excerpt regarding the directives for preparation of construction projects. Document Eirenschmalz No. 15 will be Exhibit No. 15. It is again a copy of the official State Budget of the Waffen SS. Document Eirenschmalz No. 16 which will be Exhibit No. 16, is an affidavit of Konrad Schmidt. Document Eirenschmalz 17 will be Exhibit No. 17. It is an affidavit of Elizabeth Krausser, which is a character affidavit about Eirenschmalz's personality. Document Eirenschmalz No. 18 will be Exhibit No. 18, and it is an affidavit of Frau Erika Bergdte, once again mainly concerned with Eirenschmalz's personality. Document Eirenschmalz No. 19 will be Exhibit No. 19, and it is an affidavit of Ella Fiedler, and again an affidavit about Eirenschmalz's character. Eirenschmalz No. 20 will be Exhibit No. 20, and it is an affidavit of the defendant's sister, Elizabeth Eirenschmalz.
I am not in a position to submit documents of my Document Book No. 2, because they have not been translated. I shall now submit from Book No. 3 the last two documents. They are not available as yet?
THE PRESIDENT: No. We have not received them as yet.
DR. VON STEIN: Well, I only have another document book, and Book No. 3 consists of only two documents and they were sent to the Translation Department many weeks ago, and I can only submit them, of course, when they are translated.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it is plain that we cannot finish the introduction of documents and their proof tonight, so we are about to recess now until Monday morning, the 15th of September, Monday.
DR. LEIS: Dr. Leis for the defendant Kiefer. If the Tribunal please, the document book which I am about to offer only consists of two affidavits, and I shall not take up much time presenting them.
The first affidavit, which is Kiefer Document No. 1, I beg to offer as Exhibit No. 1, as an affidavit given by Kiefer's wife, and the document shows that the Defendant Kiefer was drafted into the Wehrmacht, and transferred to the Waffen-SS, and as such was attached to the Office of Budget and Buildings. The second affidavit, which is Kiefer's Document No. 2, I offer as Kiefer Exhibit No. 2, and it is an affidavit by Werner Corte of 20 June 1947, showing that Corte for more than a year was working in Dr. Kammler's Special Staff as an expert. The affidavit gives a clear description of the origin, the organization, and the tasks of the Special Staff. It furthermore gives a most interesting list of the various subsidiary posts held by Dr. Kammler in the course of time, besides the activity in Office Group-C. As far as the outer form is concerned, I wish to point out that the English translation of this affidavit by mistake does not give his signature. The original, of course, has been signed. That is all.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will recess then until Monday morning, September the 15th at 9:30, at which time we will hear the rest of the proof to be followed immediately by the arguments, a summing up.
MR. ROBBINS: I thought Your Honor said the 16th?
THE PRESIDENT: I mean following immediately. I did mean the arguments are to follow on Tuesday morning, provided we are through with the proof, which we should be. We are in recess then until September 15th at 9:30 o'clock.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until the 15th of September at 0930.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 15 September 1947 at 0930 hours).
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Oswald Pohl, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 15 September 1947, 1345-1630, Justice Toms, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal No. II.
Military Tribunal No. II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has before it the motion of Dr. Seidl for the Defendant Pohl, asking that he be allowed six hours in which to present his argument. The motion will be denied, but three hours will be allowed. Any argument which Dr. Seidl is unable to present orally may by submitted to the Tribunal in writing and will be read and considered as fully as if he had read it in open court.
The petition of Dr. Heim for two hours for the Defendant Hohbert will be denied. He will be allowed the hour and a half which other counsel are allowed.
Dr. Fritsch has petitioned the court for leave to present his argument last; by reason of his having been to Norway with another Tribunal he has not had sufficient time. Permission is granted to Dr. Fritsch to argue last among the defense counsel.
All right, Mr. Robbins.
MR. ROBBINS: I have only one or two matters to clear up. First I should like to offer in evidence the documents in Book XXXIII that concern three different matters. The first one, NO-4964, which will be Exhibit 727, and the second one, 4965, which will be Exhibit 728, are memoranda of conferences of all of the office chiefs of Amtsgruppe W, in which Pohl orders regular cooperation among the offices.
The next documents, the next three documents are affidavit -
DR. GAWLIK (Attorney for the Defendants Bobermin and Volk): Your Honor, I want to object to the presentation of these documents. The prosecution has had sufficient time to submit these documents before. We have now concluded our final arguments and it is necessary for us to comment on these documents. I therefore request -- and this is only with regard to the two documents that concern my client, 4964 and NO-4965 -- I request that they not be admitted, because they have been presented too late.
As far as I am informed, the High Tribunal has ruled that this afternoon's session is only to be used for the presentation of defense documents, because the defense, up to now, has not been able to present these documents, because of translation difficulties.
At this time, I would like to drew the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that we have documents here which were turned in on the 3rd of September. These documents have already been translated. Therefore, this shows to us that the documents are very quickly translated for the prosecution, while the defense has to wait for more than two months for its documents to be translated. I request that in future trials a rule should be made that the documents both for the defense and prosecution should be translated according to the time that they are turned in for translation.
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Tribunal, I have obtained permission of the defense counsel concerned for all of the documents in this book, except the first two. The first two I regard as highly important. We discovered them only two days ago, or three days ago, perhaps, and it shows that regular cooperation was ordered among the office chiefs, something that has been denied by all of the defendants.
THE PRESIDENT: The objections of defense counsel to these documents will be overruled and they will be admitted as proper rebuttal.
MR. ROBBINS: The next three documents are affidavits from the three defense witnesses, the Jehovah's Witnesses, who testified here, and Dr. Bergold has agreed that we may put them in. They were taken in the presence of the defense counsel. They are offered simply to point out that the deaths at Wewelsberg occurred during the course of the construction program at that concentration camp. They are 4977, which will be Exhibit 729, NO-4968, which will be Exhibit 730, and 4969, which will be Exhibit 731.
The last of the documents are offered simply to show that the confiscation of the Max Lobkowitz property was finally carried out. They are 4966, which will be Exhibit 732, 4942, which will be Exhibit 733, 4944, Exhibit 734, and 4943, which will be Exhibit 735.
I have a note from the Secretary General that two of our documents which were numbered for reference, the exhibit on those has been lost, so I will withdraw them, They are Exhibit 446A, Document NO-552, and Exhibit 492, Document NO-2186.
There are two other documents which were simply numbered for reference and marked for identification, which I failed to formally offer in evidence. They are 337, Exhibit 337, in Document Book XXII, NO-491, and Exhibit No. 379, Document No. NI-363, in Book XIII, which I should like to offer into evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: What about the first two documents in Document Book XIII? Were they given a number?
MR. ROBBINS: They are 727 and 728, Your Honor.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH (Attorney for the Defendants Frank and Hans Loerner): Your Honor, if the Tribunal please, I would now like to begin with my presentation of my document books for the defense.
THE PRESIDENT: Are they just these two documents?
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: This is Document Book No. II and Document Book No. III for Frank.
THE PRESIDENT: II for Loerner?
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: Yes, No. II for Loerner.
THE PRESIDENT: I think we have them.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: I have it once more. I brought it along.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: II for Hans Loerner and II and III for Frank?
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: That is quite right, Your Honor.
In Document Book II for Frank, we have Document No. 17, which I want to offer as Exhibit No. 16. This is an affidavit by Kurt Becher, which I have mentioned before. This affidavit shows that the Defendant Frank, when the negotiations took place with the non-aryan family of Oppenheim, observed all normal commerical rules and that he did not exert the pressure desired by Himmler.
The next document, No. 18, I shall not offer. This is an affidavit by Morgen and he has been heard here as a witness, and thus the whole matter has been settled.
Documents Nos. 19 to 23, these are Exhibits 17 to 21. Document No. 19 will receive the Exhibit No. 17, etc. These document deal with the organizational chart of the WVHA which the Prosecution presented as Document 4123. These affidavits show that this organizational chart of the Prosecution is not correct with regard to several details concerning Department I of which Frank was in charge. The last document is No. 24 which will become exhibit No. 22. This is a chart about the movement of funds in the Waffen-SS. This document is not contained in the document books, as I have been told, but I believe that the General Secretary can furnish us a copy. The movement of funds in the Waffen-SS is the subject of this document, and it becomes clearly evident from this document what was done with the income of the Waffen-SS or the income which the concentration camps had and in what way the funds for the expenses were requested and in what way they were turned over. Then we have an explanation here with regard to statements that Frank and Hans Loerner have given us on the witness stand, and I shall go into more detail in my final speech.
In Document Book III for the Defendant Frank I want to submit Document No. 25 which will become Exhibit No. 23. This is an affidavit by Ernst Ruff. This person, Ernst Ruff, had been an inmate in a concentration camp for many years. Towards the end of the war he worked at Bayrischzell in the Berghaus of the SS in a labor detachment. At this time an order had been issued to the effect that the inmates of the concentration camp Dachau who worked in the labor detachments were to go to Tyrol on foot so that they would not meet the American troops. The SS officers who were responsible for these inmates realized that this forced march with the inadequate food supplies probably would cause the death of a large number of inmates.
They they turned to the Defendant Frank who was not competent for this matter at all, because at that time he was chief of the Army Ordnance Office, and he had nothing to do any more with the SS administration. However, in these days he was staying at the Berghaus at Bayrischzell. Since he happened to pay a visit there and since he was the officer with the seniority rating of all persons concerned, the officers turned to him and asked him to issue an order that this forced march was not to be carried out but that the inmates were to be turned over to the American troops. This concentration-camp inmate, Ernst Ruff, confirms in this affidavit that Frank issued this order, and consequently he saved thousands of inmates from this starvation march and probably from suffering death.
The next document is Document No. 25-A. This will become Exhibit No. 24. It also is an affidavit by Ruff, and here he makes some additions to his previous affidavit, in order to clarify the fact just why such a large number of inmates was concerned here whose lives were saved through Frank's intervention. When the document books were printed a number was left out under the No. 2 and several dots were put into that particular spot. Apparently the copies of the affidavit were made before Ruff had filled in the figure in the original document. The figure is 20. Therefore it should read here: "The branch commando at the SS Berghaus consisted only of approximately 20 prisoners." Then it goes on to say, "Frank's order to stop the prisoner transports to Tyrol has, however, also had consequences concerning the other branch commandos of the camp Dachau so that a total of several thousand prisoners has been saved from the march to Tyrol and by this saved their lives."
Your Honor, I place particular emphasis on these two documents, and that is why I want to point out to the Prosecution that if they should have any doubts on the correctness of this affidavit or the credibility of the affiant, Ruff, they can call him into cross-examine at any time.
He is a resident of Furth which is near Nurnberg and he can be called at any time.
The next document is Document 27, Exhibit No. 26. I must correct myself here. It will be document No. 26, Exhibit No. 25. This is an extract from the list of service seniority of the SS. Here it becomes evident that Frank, on the 9th of November, 1933, became a Sturmfuehrer, and on the 20th of April, 1934, he was promoted to Obersturmfuehrer. It is not of very great importance, but I will mention this fact in my final argument.
The last document in this book is Document No. 27 which will become Exhibit No. 26. It is an affidavit by Gerhard Maurer, and I have only submitted it by the way of precaution because in Document Book No. 16 in the defense of Klein, Herr Maurer has also given an affidavit. From this it might be assumed that Frank had been competent for the requests for inmates to perform work in the Berghaus at Sudelfeld. Maurer confirms here that this was an assumption on his part and that this statement is not correct. It was just an assumption on his part.
This concludes my presentation of documents on behalf of the Defendant Frank.
I only want to present one more document for Hans Loerner. This is Document No. 8, Exhibit No. 8 for Hans Loerner. It is an extract from the law decreeing the Unity of Party and State and the Implementation Regulations of that. It shows that the SS did not own any property, that the SS could not be a legal person, but only the NSDAP, since the SS was a part of it.
The document is important in connection with the question whether the SS could enrich itself as an organization.
I have now reached the conclusion of my presentation of documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Rauschenbach, we have the chart of the last exhibit.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: That is in the second document book.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: How many more books do you have, Dr. Seidl?
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, before - before the court recess I presented documents which are contained in Document Book No. 1. It the Tribunal please, I would now like to present documents which are located in Document Books II and III and in the supplement to that. I have been told that the documents were translated in the meantime.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: II and III and a supplement.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, if the Tribunal please, I am now coming to Document Book II for the Defendant Oswald Pohl. The documents in this document book belong together. I think it is necessary for me to make a short statement before. In the course of this trial evidence has been presented which referred to acts committed in the occupied territories, above all in the territory of the former Polish State. In order to rebut the statement of the Prosecution, which has also been made in Case No. I, before Military Tribunal I, to wit, that the decrees issued there by the German authorities were not really legally effective because they were issued as a result of an aggressive war, that is exactly why I want to submit these documents.
My first document will be document No. 20, which is an affidavit by Dr. Fredrich Gaus of the 15th of March, 1946, which will become Exhibit No. 19.
The next five documents belong together, and I want to give them the letters A, B, C, D, and E. That is, Document No. 21 will become Exhibit No. 20-A; Document No. 22 will become No. 20-B: Document No. 23 will become Exhibit 20-C; Document No. 24 will become Exhibit 20-D and Document No. 25 will become Exhibit No. 20-E.
Document No. 26 is a statement by the German Reich Government and the Government of the U. S. S. R. of the 28th of September, 1939. I want to submit it as Exhibit No. 21.
The next two documents are not contained in the document book before the Tribunal because they were not translated. I therefore shall not present them here.
I shall now turn directly to Document No. 29. This is an extract from the Declaration of Yalta of the 12th of February 1945, which I offer as Exhibit No. 22. That will conclude my presentation of documents which are contained in Document Book No. II.
If the Tribunal please, I now come to Volume III of the document books for Oswald Pohl. The first document, which is Document No. 30, is an affidavit by the attorney Dr. Schmidt-Klevenow of the 8th of August 1947. I want to offer it as Pohl Exhibit No. 23. Document No. 31 deals with the same subject. This is an affidavit by Dr. Gerhard Hoffmann, which I want to offer as Pohl Exhibit No. 24. Document No. 32 deals with the same question, and this is an affidavit by the attorney Hermann Korshenrich, which I offer as Pohl Exhibit No. 25. Pohl Document No. 33 apparently has not been included in the English translation; it is an extract from the transcript of Military Tribunal I, and it refers to the testimony of the witness Dr. Kogon. In view of the fact that I have already put this testimony to the witness Dr. Morgen, it does not appear necessary for me to submit this document now, and I therefore withdraw it.
I am now coming to Pohl Document No. 34, which is an affidavit by Dr. Karl Seefeldt. I want to offer it as Pohl Exhibit No. 26. Pohl Document No. 35 is an affidavit by Katharina Katzmayr, which I offer as Pohl Exhibit No. 27. Pohl Exhibit No. 28 will be Document No. 36. This is an affidavit by the notary Hermann Koepfer of the 11th of August 1947.
Pohl Exhibit No. 29 will be Pohl Document No. 37. This is an extract from the Directive No. 38 of the Allied Control Council for Germany. This will complete my presentation of documents which are contained in Document Book III for the defendant Pohl.
I am now coming to the supplement for the document books of Oswald Pohl. This supplement consists of three documents. I want to present Pohl Document No. 38 as Pohl Exhibit No. 30, In view of the importance of this document I would like to read the entire text, also because it only consists of very few sentences. This is the text of an order by the Reichsfuehrer-SS, dated the 3rd of March 1942, which has been mentioned so frequently in the course of this trial.
Up to now the prosecution has not presented it. We found this order in one of the boxes which were made available to us by the prosecution as a result of a ruling by the Tribunal, and I quote:
"The Chief of the SS-WVHA, Berlin, 13 March 1942. Order No. 10.
"The Reichsfuehrer-SS under the date of 3 March 1942 has ordered the following:" And I quote within the quotation:
"'Of greatest importance besides the Armed Forces are today the labor forces. If we realize with full responsibility what it means that Germany is waging this war, then we must consistently grasp every possibility to utilize even the last hour of work that can be gotten out of any man whatsoever for the purpose of victory.
'"I therefore order SS-Brigadefuehrer Gluecks with his entire staff to leave the SS-Operational Main Office and to be subordinated to the SS-Main Economic and Administrative Office.'" End of quotation. The Reichsfuehrer-SS, and then this order was also signed by Pohl, after it was pointed out that this order would become effective on the 16th of March 1942.
The prosecution has alleged that the contents of this document confirm exactly what the defendant Pohl has stated on the witness stand.
I am now coming to the next document.
THE PRESIDENT: What do you claim that this document shows for the defendant Pohl - this order of 13 March?
DR. SEIDL; I claim that this order confirms precisely what the defendant Pohl has testified here on the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: What is that?
DR. SEIDL: That the purpose of subordinating Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks to the defendant Pohl was to control the labor allocation at the ministerial level - that is, that the defendant Pohl could direct it centrally. Therefore, the reason for this was labor allocation. However, in connection with the defendant Pohl his responsibility was to be limited to the central direction of labor allocation.
However, it also was the duty of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps and the other authorities to administer the concentration camps in a responsible manner, and that among the other authorities in particular there was the RSHA and the Secret State Police, the Gestapo.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the order also shows, does it not, that Gluecks, the Inspector of Concentration Camps, was by Pohl's order made subordinate to the WVHA?
DR. SEIDL: Yes, but only as far as the direction of labor allocation was concerned.
THE PRESIDENT: It doesn't say that in the order, does it? It doesn't say that?
DR. SEIDL: The defendant Pohl has testified to that in detail on the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I know. The order doesn't say that.
DR. SEIDL: However, the order can be interpreted in that way, especially if you look at the development.
THE PRESIDENT: Answer my question. The order doesn't say that, does it?
DR. SEIDL: The order mentions the direction of the labor forces. The order does not mention with any word that the defendant Pohl was to take over the entire responsibility for the administration of the concentration camps.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, that's a kind of an answer anyway. Go ahead.
DR. SEIDL: May I continue, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SEIDL: The next document is an order by the defendant Pohl which deals with the establishment of an SS and Police Court, ZBV. I offer this document as Pohl Exhibit Number 31.
The last document in the supplement is an affidavit by the former secretary of the defendant Pohl, Maria Fauler, of the 19th of August 1947, which I offer as Pohl Exhibit Number 33.
Your Honor, I have now concluded my presentation of documents on behalf of the defendant Oswald Pohl.
DR. VON STAKELBERG (for the defendant Fanslau): Your Honor, I have a supplement for Document Book Number II. I have the English translations with me if the Tribunal should not have received their copies yet.
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE PHILLIPS): Just one supplement?
DR. VON STAKELBERG: Yes. It is a supplement which contains six affidavits. The first affidavit in the German copy in my supplement, Your Honor, is an affidavit by Hans Moser. However, on looking at the English copy, I found out that this document was listed in the index but not contained in the document book itself.
I have asked the translation department what happened to this document, and I hope that I can submit it later on. I therefore request that Defense Exhibit Fanslau Number 24 be reserved for this document for the time being.
My next document will become Defense Exhibit Fanslau Number 25, an affidavit by Frau Emmy Egle. This affidavit deals with the attitude of the defendant Fanslau toward atrocities in enemy territory. It becomes evident from this affidavit that the defendant Fanslau, when informed about the atrocities which happened at Lemberg and Tarnopol, voiced his indignation about them and stated that the civilian population during war time should be protected whenever possible. He also said that he would never have tolerated any inhumane acts being committed by his units, had they been committed.
My next document will be Fanslau Defense Exhibit Number 26, which is an affidavit by Hauptsturmfuehrer Walter Braunagel, who has been mentioned here so often. The witness Saur, who appeared here for the prosecution, when he described the incident at Shitomir, where allegedly Oberscharfuehrer Sirth shot six Jews, stated that Hauptsturmfuehrer Braunagel at that time certainly was also present at Shitomir. From this affidavit it becomes evident that on the second or the third day after the outbreak of hostilities -- and that day was the 21st of June 1941 -- he broke his ankle and so until early September was not with this unit anymore but at a field hospital at Lublin and later on at Ulm, Germany.
As my next document, Fanslau Exhibit Number 27, I want to offer an affidavit by Walter Nickel, which was also sent to me by Braunagel, and which confirms Braunagel's statement. My next document will be Fanslau Defense Exhibit Number 28. This is an affidavit by Felix Steiner, who has appeared here as a witness. This deals with the question of uniforms which were worn by the Division Wiking. This problem become very acute only after his examination so that I was not able to ask him that question directly at the time. I here want to rebut the statements by the witness Dr. Jollek and the witness Goldstein.
Both of these witnesses talked about the SS atrocities at Zclotzow and Tarnopol, and especially Dr. Jollek described the uniforms in detail. From this affidavit of the witness Steiner it becomes evident that the Division Wiking from the beginning of the Russian campaign wore green-brown camouflage nets over their steel helmets. They wore green-brown camouflage jackets. All insignia of rank and divisional insignia were taken off and the stripe at the sleeve reserved for the Division Wiking was not worn at the time because it was only issued in the fall of 1942. In particular all SS insignia were taken off in order to make it more difficult for the enemy to recognize the division in enemy territory.
My last document will be Fanslau Defense Exhibit Number 29. This is an affidavit by Willy Schaefer, who was also examined here as a witness. In this affidavit he confirms the same statements.
With the exception of Fanslau Defense Exhibit Number 24, Your Honor, I have now reached the end of my presentation of documents. The witness Martin Meyer had been approved for me. However, since we waited for such a long time for the witness Meyer, I have covered all the additional points through additional documents and also through the previous examination of witnesses. I am, therefore, of the opinion that I could only examine the witness Meyer in a cumulative manner. So in order to speed up the trial, I am willing to do without the witness.
DR. SCHMIDT(for the defendant Vogt): Your Honor, today I should like to submit the remainder of my documents. They are located in Supplemental Books Numbers II, III, IV, and V. In this connection I should like to point out that Numbers IV and V consist only of one document each. As to Supplements Numbers 2 and 3 I assume that the Tribunal has received the translation of these books. In any event, I have received the English translations of them.
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE PHILLIPS): I have only Number II.