The defendant Sommer cooperated as a co-worker of the Office D II which managed labor allocation as executive agency, according to orders issued by General Plenipotentiary Pohl in the accomplishment of labor allocation of the concentration camp inmates. Sommer had, as already stated above, no authority whatsoever to make decisions. Everything he did was carried out according to orders given to him by his Chief of Office Maurer. Responsible for all that happened at the Office D II can be, aside from Pohl and Gluecks, only the Chiefs of Office Maurer and Moser. In the accomplishment of the concentration camp inmates labor allocation nothing happened at the directive or order of Sommer. Sommer could not, and he did not, give a directive or order of this kind. Due to his absolute subordinate position Sommer had neither the power, nor did he have the opportunity, to direct the labor allocation of the concentration camp inmates into different channels if he had recognized same as unjust, not to mention preventing same from taking place or preventing them all together. What he knew about the labor allocation could not, for moral reasons, cause him to try to get away from the Office D-II.
With reference to the remainder of my statements with regard to the questions of guilt, and in particular with regard to the statement to count 4 of the indictment, Membership in a Criminal Organization, I would like to refer to my defense speech and I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of that.
I am now coming to the conclusion of my final plea.
In the judgment against the former Field Marshal Milch this Tribunal has expressed the principle in its Findings in the following words, and Court No. II, Case No. 4.I quote:
"We must band every effort toward suggesting to the people of every nation that laws must be used for the protection of people and that every citizen shall forever have the right to a fair hearing before an impartial Tribunal, before which all men stand equal. We must never falter in maintaining, by practice as well as by preachment, the sanctity of what we have come to know as due process of law, civil and criminal, municipal and international. If the level of civilization is to be raised throughout the world, this must be the first step. Any other road leads but to tyranny and chaos. This Tribunal, before all others, must act in recognition of these self-evident principles. If it fails, its whole purpose is frustrated and this trial becomes a mockery. At the very foundation of these juridical concepts lie two important postulates: (1) Every person accused of crime is presumed to be innocent, and (2) that presumption abides with him until guilt has been established by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Unless the court which hears the proof is convinced of guilt to the point of moral certainty, the presumption of innocence must continue to protect the accused. If the facts as drawn from the evidence are equally consistent with guilt and innocence, they must be resolved on the side of innocence. Under American law neither life nor liberty is to be lightly taken away and, unless at the conclusion of the proof there is an abiding conviction of guilt in the mind of the court which sits in judgment, the accused may not be condemned."
I trust that the Honorable Court will also apply these guiding principles in the case of Sommer. The Finding can only be Not Guilty followed by the acquittal of the defendant Karl Sommer, and so I beg the Honorable Court to find.
THE PRESIDENT: We are going to take a ten-minute intermission and then we will hear the plea on behalf if Hohberg from Dr. Heim. We wish to serve notice on you now that we will start keeping clock keeping a time - and when you have actually used an hour and thirty Court No. II, Case No. 4.minutes the hammer will fall and the argument will be over.
Now, you can time it any way you like within one hour and thirty minutes.
We will take a short intermission.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess for ten minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: Now we have arranged a schedule here, and I am glad that so many of you are hear at the present time. This afternoon we will hear the final plea of Dr. Heim for the defendant Hohberg, and asmuch of the argument for Pook as we have time to hear up to five-thirty and then finish in the morning. The following are ready, or will be ready tomorrow; Pook, Tschentscher, Scheide and Eirenschmalz tomorrow. Now I have talked to Dr. Gawlik and suggested to them if they see fit that they submit their arguments in written form; neither of them are as yet translated, and I have assured than I want their clients to know that if the argument is submitted in writing instead of being delivered over the sound system, that it will be carefully and thoroughly read by the court, and can be done more deliberately, and we probably will get more out of it than from merely listening to the argument here. I think their clients are fully protected in every respect if that is done, and they have agreed to do it. I told them that I would explain to their clients that they lose nothing by the arrangement, and perhaps even gain something. Now this naturally leads to the suggestion to any of the other counsel that if they wish to follow the same procedure, with their closing arguments translated in English, and do not deliver them here, they will get careful and deliberate consideration and study. I am not urging you to do that, and please do as you think best, but if there are other counsel who wish to follow the same plan as Dr. Gawlik and Dr. Fritsche, the court will have no objection. Now, you can think it over. You don't have to decide now, because we are filled up for tomorrow, but if on Saturday morning any other counsel washes to follow that plan, there will be no objection by the Court. Now don't think that you are being forced to do it, because you may do whichever way you like.
DR. HAENSEL: May I venture to make one proposition. I am convinced that things which I have put down in my final speech are more easily read than heard, and I shall be entirely satisfied if the Court merely reads it, but I have another request to make.
It is only natural that in the course of the speech by the prosecution, as well as of my learned colleagues, one or the other problem has arisen which has not as yet, or perhaps could not be dealt with entirely exhaustively, and I would, therefore, ask that instead of a written speech, the perusal of which I leave to the Court, I could be given for discussion of these intricate problems about half or three-quarters of an hour; in that case I could do without the reading of my speech; and then all I think should be said in that period of time. I would speak freely and the interpreters would follow. If that were agreeable to the Court, I should be grateful if I could do it tomorrow sometime. Perhaps in the afternoon. If you could give me thirty minutes at any time, or perhaps tomorrow morning, if you prefer.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Haensel, the schedule for tomorrow has already been announced. Would you like to do that on a Saturday morning?
DR. HAENSEL: May I venture to remark this. As my colleagues have one hour and a half each, and four times an hour and a half make six hours, and coinciding with the day with recess, before that, we have the speeches tomorrow for an hour and a half each, the last would be unfortunately cut into two parts, because the time is not quite sufficient. Therefore, if three colleagues are speaking tomorrow one hour and a half each, that would make four and one-half hours, and as quarter of an hour recess in the morning, and quarter of an hour in the afternoon, we would have enough time for me if it would be agreeable both to the court and my colleagues.
THE PRESIDENT: I think we will slip you in tomorrow, Counsel for Pook will be finished tomorrow, and he won't finish unless I stop talking, and when he finishes then you can speak for thirty minutes.
DR. HAENSEL: Yes:
THE PRESIDENT: And then we will take three others, which will finish the day.
DR. HAENSEL: If I understand you correctly, after Pook's counsel has finished, Pook will last an hour and a half.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, because he has some this afternoon. You see, he has sometime this afternoon. Let's leave it this way. Hohberg finishes this afternoon.
DR. HAENSEL: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Pook partly finishes this afternoon and then completes tomorrow morning.
DR. HAENSEL: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, and then comes Dr. Haensel.
DR. MAYER: Dr. Mayer for the defendant Kiefer. May it please the court, I shall try tomorrow or Saturday morning to get my translation ready for my final plea, and to have the official translation, so I can put it at the disposal of the interpreter, and he can then follow me without difficulty. I should be grateful if the court would agree to this manner of delivering my final plea as soon us there will be time.
THE PRESIDENT: That will be on Saturday then.
DR. MAYER: Yes, quite.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Then after Haensel, it will be Pook, Haensel and Hoffman. All right, Dr. Heim.
DR. HEIM: Dr. Heim for the defendant Hohberg. May it please the Tribunal, before I shall deliver my final plea, I would like to draw the court's attention to the fact that because my request was turned down, namely, to be given more time than an hour and a half, it will be possible for me to read all of my plea. In the case of single paragraphs, which I shall, therefore, not read, I shall give a brief explanation of the contents, and I should ask the Tribunal to read the paragraphs and take notice of them.
The case of the defendant Dr. Hohberg is entirely different from the cases of the other defendants; different not only because he was never a member of the Party, or of the SS, but also and in the first place never belonged to the Economic and Administrative Main Office, and, as auditor of the DWB, resolutely opposed the aims of the SS, and did what he could do to break the economic power of the SS, and to contribute with all his strength to the overthrow of the national socialist system.
Since Count I of the indictment, the conspiracy has been dropped by decision of the Court, the indictment against the defendant Hohberg now rests only on Counts II and III - war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The forms of participation according to Control Council Law No. 10, the next paragraph, I shall not read for reasons mentioned. In fact , I have analyzed the form of participation under control Council Law No. 10, having been given in comments, inasmuch as it applies to this trial.
I shall continue on page 4 of the German Text. Before I shall evaluate these lines, will you please allow me to give you a fair summary of Hohberg's professional career, and give his attitude, his character, and ideology.
Born in Alsace as the son of a clergyman, the defendant received from childhood a strictly protestant and liberal education. His youth was influenced by the intensive work of his father for an understanding between the German and French peoples. His mother is of French nationality. The defendant was member of a Christian school-association and a Christian students union. His personal way of thinking was influenced in a way by his working during his vacation as a worker in factories and mines and by acquiring social and socialistic ideas in the course of his university studies.
On account of his education and professional attitude Hohberg was "from the beginning a pronounced adversary of National Socialism and always preserved these ideas of his". His political and economic ideas as well as his religious attitude made it impossible for him to join, inform or in fact, the NSDAP or one of its affiliated organizations, All the time he gladly put up with all the professional disadvantages resulting from the fact that he was not a Party member. It may be pointed out that among the Germans holding, during the Nazi period, any position of some importance there was only quite a small percentage of people who were not member of the NSDAP.
After passing his university examinations Hohberg worked as an auditor with various firms and auditing companies and finally as a tax expert with the Reich Finance Administration in Berlin. When his name was put forward there for admission into the Party so that he might be taken over as a Regierungsrat, he resolutely declined the invitation. This setback suffered in his professional career caused Hohberg to leave the service of the Reich Finance Administration, after having passed the examination as an auditor. Then the defendant was an official examiner of accounts and leader of the Koenigsberg branch of the Wirtschaftsberatung A.G. Berlin; this was an accounting firm that was generally known for its antinational socialistic attitude and as a refuse for Jewish members of that profession. In Koenigsberg Hohberg was repeatedly called up by an old friend named Weiffenbach. This man asked him, as well as his colleague on the Vorstand, the SS Fuehrer Moeckel, to establish himself in Berlin as an independent auditor with the aid of a large auditing job.
Next, Hohberg undertook to audit the Reichverein fuer Volkspflege und Siedelerhilfe e.V. as a trial case. During the final discussions in connection with the audit he met Oswald Pohl who was a Gruppenfuehrer at that time. Pohl proposed to Hohberg, through Moeckel, that he should take over, as the official examiner of accounts, all the auditing that the law required for the enterprises that Herr Pohl controlled.
Hohberg accepted the offer after a long period of hesitation, when Herr Pohl assured him that he did not require Hohberg to join the Party, leave the Church or limit his professional independence.
A contract was made between Pohl and Hohberg on 10 May 1940; this was an auditing and counselling contract. This contract provided that (1) Hohberg should carry out the audits that were required by law, for Pohls enterprises, (2) Hohberg was to counsel the management on business questions dealing with commercial law, taxes, and laws concerning prices and foreign exchange, and to see to it that these affairs were handled according to law. Besides this, the contract provided for salary, accounting assistants to be provided by Pohl, the office space and also the limit for the property bond of Hohberg.
Hohberg also made the usual public accountants agreement with Pohl, that is, a contract agreement and not and employee agreement. According to German law Hohberg was not obligated by his contract agreement to perform certain services, but solely to make the audits required by law and give business advice to the companies. Hohberg's agreement did not place him in the position of an employee of the WVHA in any way. As a certified public accountant he would have been prohibited by law from having such a position, because he would have automatically lost his qualifications for being a certified public accountant.
Hohberg did not remain an independent C.P.A. The auditing job he got from Pohl was not the only work he did between 1940 and 1943. Pohl's account was one among several; to be sure it was the largest. This is why he had two offices; one, his own accounting office at Darmstatterstr. 2, Berlin W 15, and another in the rooms of the DWB for the audits of Pohls' enterprises.
The fact that Hohberg took private auditing jobs during this time, besides auditing Pohl's enterprises, is also evidence that he was not an employee of Pohl's, but rather remained an independent C.P.A.
It may seem peculiar that the defendant, who was and remained an outspoken opponent of national socialism, accepted a far reaching auditing job for SS enterprises. However, the conclusion can in no way be made, from this fact, that Hohberg concurred with the business goals of the SS or that he adopted SS ethics as the basis for his own thinking. Hohberg was motivated by very different reasons to accept this auditing job. It enabled him to become an independent accountant and to return from the country to Berlin, where he later tried to be accepted as an unsalaried lecturer at the Technical Institute in Berlin, by writing a paper on international fiscal law. Furthermore, he had become very excited over auditing the Reichverein, because it was mere than interesting to him to find out what was done and planned in these radical national socialist circles of the SS, At that time there was no reason for moral or political objections, because Pohl had described the economic goals of the SS as purely social to Hohberg.
After the agreement had been signed, Hohberg began to make the audits as required by law. As agreed, civilian clerks from the WVHA were put at his disposal for these audits; later soldiers from the Waffen SS were also assigned as accountants. These persons, however, were not subordinate to him as far as discipline was concerned, but only in technical matters.
The mentality of the SS was already known at that time to be so selfish and unreliable that Hohberg would not have dared to hire the accountants at his own financial risk. A contract with the SS did not carry the same weight as the usual contract in civilian life.
But the defendant soon saw that the pre-requisities to carry out the legal audits were lacking, because the enterprises in part had made no tax returns for years, had an incomplete bookeeping system and were many months behind in their postings.
Hohberg had to place some of his examiners in the enterprises to create the conditions necessary for the audits required by law. There were enterprises that lacked the legal form of a leading company and had a corresponding lack of clarity in the entire conduct of their business, tax and accounting practices and almost every enterprise had to be altered and improved, some of the enterprises were too highly indebted, and many other such things.
There were in this economic chaos, two tasks of adjustment for Hohberg, besides his principle job of carrying out the legally prescribed examinations. These were: the centralization of control of the company stocks in one person and the reorganization of the over indebted companies. In order to untie this economic Gordian knot Hohberg proposed to Pohl should bring the shock of the various companies into a holding company and take over the stock of the Holding company as a trustee. Up to this time the origin of the capital of the various companies could not be determined because the numerous partners who became trustees had borrowed the money they invested from many different sources.
Another reason for this proposal was the fact that the managers of these companies had heretofore been able to do as they wished, without supervision, while they were brought, for the first time, under central control through the formation of a holding company. The managers offered considerable resistance to this plan because they justifiably feared this supervision.
As far as ownership was concerned, the NSDAP as well as the German Reich were proprietors of the holding company, DWB, and as a result of the various increases in the capital of DWB, at first the Party and later the Reich held a majority interest of the stock. After the last capital increase of DWB to 16 million RM, the Reich had a bare majority interest over the Party. In order to further strengthen the financial position of the German Reich, Hohberg recommended the 30 million Reich Credit from the so-called Reinhard fund.
The DWB company was founded at the end of 1940. Pohl, as fiduciary sole proprietor, appointed himself as chief manager and Georg Loerner as second manager. Hohberg helped, as his agreement stipulated, as an accountant and an economic advisor, to found the holding company. His agreement further required him to act in an advisory capacity until the specialists of the newly founded companies had fully taken over their duties.
Therefore a few of the accountants assigned to Dr. Hohberg helped, at first, to do the work at the DWB. They remained subordinate, as accountants, to Dr. Hohberg, until they were taken over by DWB as employees. Until that time they were either civilian employees of WVHA or attached members of the Waffen SS without an employment contract.
The stamp marking incoming mail dates from this period, when DWB was started and several accountants working for the defendant were temporarily turned over to DWB before they were permanently attached to DWB. The indictment falsely concludes from the letters "WL" on this stamp that the accountants turned over to DWB were still subordinate to Dr. Hohberg after their transfer as permanent employees of DWB. The letters "WL" indicated only persons who were active as accountants and were technically subordinate in that field. However, this technical subordination ceased the moment Pohl had decided that the accountants who had been transferred were no longer to work as Hohberg's accountants, but rather as employees of DWB. The basic reason, why the incoming mail stamp was left in its original form was that the largest part of the incoming mail pertained to tax matters, and the defendant participated in the common mail conferences, when he was in Berlin. But mainly only that part of the incoming mail was discussed that pertained to tax and accounting matters, and not the mail that touched on other legal questions or events of the DWB affiliates of plant group:
Staff G. Hohberg's interest for the incoming mail that referred to tax matters was due to his responsibility as tax advisor and the attendant property bond.
Apart from his collaborater in the founding of the holding company, the defendant Hohberg never, contrary to the unproved claims of the indictment, built up or managed any business enterprises.
Obviously the prosecution arrived at this conclusion because they evidently don't understand the actual position that Dr. Hohberg held as a certified public accountant with the DYB.
The officially appointed certified public accountant is a semiofficial supervisory organ which was created by the law prescribing examinations of municipal and commercial corporations. The certified public accountant acted as a supervisory organ under the Reich Ministry of Economy. The task of a certified public accountant is not to further and assist business enterprises to build up and develop, but rather to guide the organization and development of companies, in the public interest, along certain a legal course, so that in general any harm to the whole economy through conniving intrigues especially of a financial nature, can be prevented. In the certified accountant's profession it became customary to give economic advise to the firm being examined, in accordance with an advisory contract.
A prerequisite for any certified public accountant is his independence. He was subordinate to the Reich Ministry of Economy as well as the Institute of certified Public Accountants, which was the professional organization.
The defendant has no connection with the WVHA, because the DWB was a combination of a great many trading companies into a holding company, and not part of WVHA. There was a connection between DWB and WVHA in that fact that POHL was the chief of WVHA and at the same time the sole fiduciary trustee as well as chief manager of DWB.
The salary Dr. Hohberg received as certified public accountant came exclusively from the companies, and not from WVHA.
Herr Pohl, in accordance with his military background, gave military designations to the civil law structure of DWB, in order to provide a common denominator for all his business enterprises, the official-military as well as the legal-commercial ones, and to be able to show them together on a single plan of organization. This is how the distorted picture of the organization of the DWB arose, which is the basis for the charge against Dr. Hohberg, because DWB is incorrectly looked upon as an official agency. Neither the concern, nor the plants which were affiliated became official agencies or municipal corporations, but remained subject to civil law.
However, it was not the DWB or its employees who were subordinate to Dr. Hohberg, but only those accountants who had been put at his disposal by agreement, and these only in professional matter and not in discipline. This setup was not altered when the Prokurists were appointed, rather Hohberg was and remained solely a certified public accountant and exercised no other function. He never became their superior.
In his capacity as an auditor and economic advisor it was Hohberg's duty to advise the management on economic questions, but no could not exert an influence on this management as to whether they accepted and observed the advice. As Hohberg was liable for intentional or negligent acts in the auditing of any enterprise to the extent of 100,000 RM, and as he could be made responsible by the taxing authorities to the extent of his entire property for tax evasion, it was impossible for him to occupy himself superficially only with the auditing and advising of firms. This obligatorily intensive activity obviously caused the impression that Hohberg had directing authority over these firms. In reality he was only a semi-official supervisor appointed by the state, who was expressly prohibited by legal regulations from exerting influence on the management.
If Hohberg as an auditor of the DWB companies had found normal, well-ordered conditions, he would never have been obliged to care to such an extent for the creation of well-ordered conditions with respect to finance, commercial law and taxes. Only the great number of objections which Hohberg made as an auditor and his various reformpropositions inspired the Prosecution with the idea of a managing activity.
The following paragraphs headed "The Staff" and "Office Chief -W" I shall not read now. I think this is an instance where I can do without reading them, because the two steps mentioned deal or give minute details in the case, and my whole statement about the subject matter has gone into all of this. I shall ask the Tribunal to take note of these paragraphs without reading them.
May I just remark here that on the witness stand Pohl, when he was asked by the Tribunal about this, said that he had never appointed Hohberg Chief of Staff W or Amtschef W.
I shall continue on Page 27 of the German text. The paragraph is headed "Political Attitude of the Defendant as DWB auditor."
The defendant never made any secret of his hostile attitude to the SS so that his political attitude and principles were also known to the SS Fuehrer and resulted in enmity. Many affidavits submitted for the Defendant Hohberg, as well as the statement of the witnesses Dr. Wolf and Dr. Tenberged confirm unanimously that Hohberg since the introduction of the National Socialist way of thinking was an uncompromising enemy of National Socialism and its ideology and what he never changed his opinion. Not a single one of the co-defendants dared to assert that Hohberg adopted a loyal or even friendly attitude towards the SS and NSDAP.
What the defendant thought about the ethics of the SS as expressed in the publications of the Nordland press is evident from the statement of Dr. Tenberged. Hohberg in 1943 urgently dissuaded this book-seller who had been bombed-out more than once and who wanted to renew his stocks and acquire extensive stocks of books from the Nordland press, too, from taking into his book-shop any books whatever from the Nartland press for sale, if he valued the good name of his own enterprise.
The aims of Hohberg's activity for the DWB were in accordance, too. After he had gradually looked behind the scenes, one goal remained fixed for him; annihilation of the planned economic SS power. As auditor he exercised a certain control over Pohl's economic enterprises; this control function he used in so far as he was able to reach his goal. The defendant could not proceed with brutal force for that would have cost him his head at the very first attempt as evidenced by Himmler's Posen. speech. Rather, by using his position as an auditor he pursued his aims which were opposed to the interests of the SS unnoticed but all the more intensively.
How the defendant gave expression to his struggle against the economic strong position of the SS in particular, I shall deal later with that.
It now remains to be examined whether, on the basis of the evidence, the defendant Hohberg was involved with regard to his activity as an economic examiner (Wirtschaftspruefer) and economic counsel (Wirtschaftberater) of the DWB (German Economic Enterprises) with the criminal goals and happenings as asserted by the prosecution, and whether he participated in them in objective and subjective manner; or to put it differently, whether his activity conforms with his personal, contraryaims, just now described. I shall continue on the same page lower down under the heading, "Concentration Camps".
The prosecution asserted that the concentration-camps have been the principle tools through which the defendants carried out the acts with which they are charged. The WVHA (SS Main Economic Administrative Office) had been allegedly competent for all KL-matters beginning with the spring of 1942. it had been in charge not only of the establishment and the construction, but also of the management, maintenance and administration of the KL's. The leading men in the WVHA are therefore allegedly the responsible ones for the conditions and for all criminal happenings in the concentration-camps, as they were active for this task in close collaboration.
This assertion, of the prosecution was not supported by the evidence. It is true that on 1 February 1942, the inspection of the concentration camps was put under the supervision of Mr. Pohl, and as Division Group D integrated in the WVHA, established in the spring, in an organizational manner together with the other divisions A B C and W.
As testified by all witnesses, and as could not be refuted by the prosecution, the Division D, however, worked entirely independently and did not have any organizational connection with the other divisions.
As already stated, the DWV-Konzern exists as organization alongside the WVHA, and did not have any organizational connections either with the inspection of the concentration-camps or with the concentration-camps themselves, nor with the other divisions of the WVHA.
The attempt of the prosecution, to prove by documents that Hohberg had developed an activity dealing with the establishment and maintenance of concentration-camps, was bound to fail. The defendant visited several establishments of the DWB-Konzern, in which prisoners were employed. This was for him as certified public accountant a cogent necessity, if he was to get an opinion regarding the correctness of the economic conditions, which had to be expressed in the remark confirming the balance. His inspections of the plants therefore did not take place on account of the use and the allocation of concentration-camp inmates but were a professional necessity for the legally prescribed examination of the economic conditions of the companies.
In his capacity as certified public accountant Hohberg in the same way visited establishments which did not employ prisoners. In this connection it may be mentioned that only small part of the companies employed prisoners, namely, during the activity of Hohberg 6 of a total of 40 companies. The traveling report, presented by the prosecution, of the then manager of the firm group W IV regarding an inspection trip made together with Hohberg, to Butschewitz, Auschwitz, Lemberg, Lublin and Posen does not contradict these statements. It results from the report that Dr. May and Hohberg inspected the wood working establishments of the DWB-Konzern located in the mentioned places, and that the manager of the group of firms W IV paid visits to responsible persons, among them a concentration-camp commandant, foreman etc., in which Hohberg participated because he was interested, but without having a special duty. The Lublin establishment of the DAW was located in the midst of a labor camp, which at the time had no connection with a concentration camp.
Part of the inmates went in and out without being guarded. The conclusion and suspicion drawn, from this document, that concentration-camp matters were also discussed, has been credibly removed.
Hohberg's participation in this trip was not due to the necessity of a joint accomplishment of an assignment, Dr. May's trip had the purpose of acquainting him with the establishments under his supervision in the places mentioned, and to negotiate with the competent persons. Hohberg only seized the opportunity of the joint trip in order to visit his fellow-student Dr. Savelsberg, who had returned from India, in Auschwitz. Furthermore, some matters had to be attended to, which were connected with his activity as certified public accountant. At the discussions and visits described by Dr. May, Hohberg was present only partly and then only as a person not concerned and just as a listener, as that he would not have to wait in Dr. May's car like a servant. As far as results from the document of the Prosecution that Hohberg participated in discussions, they referred to his sphere of activities as certified public accountant, in the case of Dr. Savelsberg and Dr. Bobermin to purely personal interests. Neither on this trip nor at any other time did Hohberg visit a concentration camp, whereby concentration camp is to be interpreted basically as protective custody camp. He also would have needed a special permission to enter a concentration camp and he never applied for such.
Also the two communications of the Division D to Hohberg, presented by the Prosecution, regarding changes in the payment of compensation for expenditure to concentration camp commandants are not proof for establishing a criminal connection of the defendant Hohberg to the concentration camp matters. Both letters are only two of probably a hundred letters of similar contents. They are without doubt only addressed to Hohberg as a precautionary measure, because Maurer or Gluecks did in the beginning not know the competent referent of the DWB, Anserge. Hohberg could explain credibly and uncontestedly that the payments, to which the letters refer, were deleted, on account of a personal decree of Pohl, to a trust estate which was carried at the DWB and over which Mr. Pohl disposed exclusively.
As far as charges in personnel were concerned, Maurer had to inform the bookkeeping department of the DWB accordingly. Evidently Maurer, not knowing at the beginning who was competent for the current authorization of the payments, therefore, sent the two communications for simplicity's sake to Hohberg. It was hereby made certain that they were forwarded to the correct address.
Slave Labor Program.
If I now turn to the count of the indictment "Slave Labor Program," the following may be prefaced to the result of the evidence: It is uncontested that in a part of the enterprises included in the DWB, prisoners from the concentration-camps were employed. It is furthermore correct that the prisoners in the enterprises, against payment of a certain daily compensation to the Reich, were made available by the concentration-camps and that the prisoners, apart from work premiums, did not get any compensation for their work. The defendant did not know conclusion that the Reich as lesser of the prisoners at 30 Reichs plennige daily pay, hardly puts a part of this pay at the disposal of the prisoners as working wage. These conditions were the same at the economic enterprises of the MB which employe-, prisoners, as at other enterprises, for example the Messershmidt-Works, Junkers-Works, and hundreds of others private enterprises. But that the defendant did actively participate in this slave labor program, could not be proved by the Prosecution.
The Prosecution has claimed that Hohberg participated in a leading and influential way in the planning and execution of the slave labor program, that Hohberg had, as leader and chief of the staff W, built up and managed the economic enterprises in which prisoners were employed, The co-defendants Pohl and Loerner had allegedly been the managing directors of the DWB and therefore the responsible managers of the whole economic enterprises.