My joining the Waffen SS took place for purely professional reasons and had nothing to do with the criminal aims of the SS. I beg you to appreciate that me membership in the SS has had to be paid for considerably by now. Let me draw your attention to the fact that I have lived through two years of imprisonment, one year of which was strict solitary confinement with all its physical and mental sufferings. I have lost my existence and my entire savings. The Russian occupational powers have deprived me of all my furniture and clothes; and my wife is forced in her old days to earn her living by working with her hands for strange people. I have nothing left but my honor and my body. You, your Honors, have the right to pass a decision on both. Please make your decision according to law and the legal situation; and if you make your decision on that basis, I believe that your judgment can only be to acquit me of guilt and crimes and punishment.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Georg Loerner.
DEFENDANT GEORG LOERNER: Mr. President, your Honors: All those of us who find ourselves in the dock today have been charged with the most horrible crimes which have been committed during Hitler's regime. As my defense counsel said in his opening speech, the one-sided character of the documents submitted by the prosecution has had to cause the impression that my entire thoughts centered around nothing but concentration camps. This complex was the least of all things I was concerned with during my work.
During the entire time when I was a member of the SS administration, it was my chief task to take care of supplying troops with clothing and food. This task occupied my entire time, particularly during the war. If this task had included the obtaining of clothes for the inmates of concentration camps, then this was the outcome of an essential centralization. I did my utmost to comply with the situation as far as the difficult raw material situation permitted. I never had anything to do with food supplies for prisoners. As far as the economic enter prises were concerned, they did not bring me into contact with concentration camps either because in Group W I was in fact nothing but the much-discussed "dummy."
Finally, as far as the so-called deputizing for Pohl as a main chief of office is concerned, that, I think, has been sufficiently clarified by the evidence. I never had the task of supervising the concentration camps; and the horrible crimes committed in them and in the extermination camps became known to me only after the collapse. I neither heard Himmler's speeches given at Posen, Cracow and Metz nor read them. It is with horror that I turn away from the perpetrators of these crimes; and I am filled with shame to hear that members of the SS not only soiled themselves but the entire organization.
As far as my true actions are concerned, I stand by them, just as I never refused to assume responsibilities which my activities in the WVHA brought to me. I believe that the High Tribunal will examine my case thoroughly and come to the truth and to just results in its findings. But we are here concerned not only with just sentences against us, the individuals; we are concerned also with the creation of a new international law which must form the basis for a lasting peace upon this earth, which humanity is longing for so much and which seems to he so far distant today.
I should like to end by using this opportunity to thank my defense counsel, Dr. Haensel, for his excellent conduct of my defense.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Tschentscher.
DEFENDANT HANS TSCHENTSCHER: If in this present moment and in this place I look back upon my life, I realize that all the efforts and all the work I have done so far were in vain. I was for National Socialism and for the SS because I believed that the high ideals of them which were always placed before our eyes were real, true, and good. It was thus that I believed; that I served; and that I obeyed. Even when my homeland had lost the war, I did not realize that the National Socialists' ideology was bad and criminal. It was only this trial which gave me full clarity to the effect that this system gave an uncontrollable power of command to a small number of people and that these people preached ideals, indeed, but acted badly and criminally.
It was thus that I also became involved in this trial, and now my life and work as a soldier and administrative official are being examined by this Tribunal. In this very difficult position I am given special strength by realizing that I personally never did anything which was considered to be a crime; and I know very well what can be considered a crime. Here in this Tribunal under oath false testimony was given against me. I believe and hope, however, that, God will not permit that this false testimony will hinder this Tribunal to pass a just sentence in my case. I have nothing further to add.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Scheide.
THE DEFENDANT RUDOLF SCHEIDE: Your Honor, I have obeyed an order which took me from the combat troops to the Economic and Administrative Main Office, the WVHA. It was not my view that my obedience and fulfillment of my duty represented a war crime, or a crime against humanity. I personally have never done any harm to anybody, nor committed a crime against humanity, or a war crime.
I was a member of the SS, and I considered my membership to be a service to my people, and my fatherland. I know today that my faith and my willingness to perform such service were misused. I rely upon a just sentence which will give me a possibility to place me within a democratic state. I think that with some leniency and understanding indefinite good things may be achieved much more so than with hatred and retaliation.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Kiefer.
THE DEFENDANT MAX KIEFER: Mr. President and Your Honors, I have nothing to add to the deliberation of my defense counsel. On the witness stand I have testified to my best knowledge and belief, and have spoken the truth, and there was no need for me to change the testimony of any kind, if I would have been given another opportunity to speak up in rebuttal. My work in Office Group-C was never of a nature such as described by the Prosecution in its final plea. Without going into detail of these charges once more, I would nevertheless like to express clearly that I would have had no reason to deny that I made drawings for a hospital building in a concentration camp, if this had been one of my tasks. If in this point appearances are against me, then I am ready to assume responsibility for whatever could have happened in my department, even if I had never had any knowledge of it. Even today I would without delay and unobjectionally use my professional experience in the creation of institutions for the sick, no matter what social or political group of people are concerned. And the poorer and more suffering one of those groups might be, the more I would consider my professional work, which would be essential for the creation of an institution for the alleviation of human suffering, to be my duty.
During my entire life I have not committed, to reproach myself, any action which could be objected to from a legal or moral point of view. The fact that I was working in Office Group-C does not change these facts. I never came into contact with matters which were stated during the course of this trial here before this Tribunal; therefore, I had no cause to consider myself to be a member of an authority the activity of which was trying to serve criminal ends.
With this knowledge I am looking forward to the finding of this High Tribunal in peace of mind of one who knows that he is free of guilt.
THE PRESIDENT: Before taking the statements of the other defendants the Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Eirenschmalz.
DEFENDANT EIRENSCHMALZ: May it please Your Honors, during my examination I tried to give you a description of my professional, political and SS career in such a way that this Tribunal could understand and draw the necessary deductions. However, I am not quite clear about the fact whether I realized and succeeded in doing this clearly. Due to the construction of technical terms and due to the manifoldness and constant change of the organization it was very difficult to understand my arguments. The difficulties of translation and the construction of technical terms also contributed to this. That is why I would appreciate it if this Tribunal would give a thorough examination of both the final plea of my defense counsel and also my rebuttal documents.
My honorable parents at all times taught me decency, honesty and humanity. This for me was my guidance and my life. These high ideals were also used by me in the education of my children at all times. During my time I always held to the only right and correct way, and I always helped any human being who was in trouble as far as this was within my power.
During the long months of my arrest and during the entire period of my trial I thought about it quite a bit. I thought about whether I had deviated from the right track. After due examination I dare say on the basis of my humanitarian understanding that I do not feel guilty. It is thus that I am looking forward to the verdict, trusting in true justice.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Sommer.
DEFENDANT SOMMER: Your Honors, the Prosecution in its final statement, as well as the indictment and its opening speech attributed a significance to my position and activities in the Department D-II which it does not in any way deserve. The Prosecution has far departed from the correct conception as given to me during the preliminary interrogations.
Whereas the indictment retroactively promoted me Sturmbannfuehrer and Deputy Department Chief, in the final speech it was actually said that I had been the basis of the entire labor allocation program. It was asserted that I had detailed prioners to penal companies, and that I had been the one who had made the selection of prisoners, labor allocations on one side, extermination on the other. The fact is that during my entire activity in Department D-II I did not as much as send one single prisoner anywhere since I simply did not have the power to do so, and it is a further fact that I had nothing whatever to do with the selection of prisoners in concentration camps.
My task in connection with the watch repair shop in the concentration camp of Sachsenhausen was limited merely to the supervisional duties. With regard to the assertion of the Prosecution that watches coming from the Reinhardt Action had been repaired by me, I should like to state that watches were repaired before I had supervision of the work shops, and that watches were further repaired at a time when the supervision had already been taken away from me. The assertion of the Prosecution that no SS man could be found today who knew anything and who was talking cannot be applied to me. The Prosecution would never have learned that I ever entered a concentration camp, it would never have heard of my supervision over the watch repair shop, and would have never heard anything of the information of Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks to me in June 1934 if I had not spoken about all this frankly and openly myself. Just as I did not in any way protect myself I would have had no cause to cover one of my fellow defendants by telling untruths. But I cannot, just to please the Prosecution, say something which to my knowledge is not true, or say something which I do not even know.
I cannot be accused that the responsibility applicable to me was put off on dead people by me.
The responsible people for concentration camp prisoners are all alive with one exception of Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks. In particular the department chiefs of D-II are alive.
My defense counsel has submitted to this Tribunal statements made by these men in affidavit form. They have confirmed my representations regarding my activities and responsibilities in Department I-II in their entirety. These men could have had an opportunity to speak here in Nurnberg, as I know well today, if I had passed my responsibility on to them, if this had been the case.
With regard to the assertion of the Prosecution that the defendants here had all been old members of the NSDAP I would like to draw your attention to my affidavit and to my testimony under oath on the witness stand that I have never been a member of the Party. Not one of the crimes that have been charged here has been committed after an order or instruction given by me. I have never been conscious of a dishonest or criminal act, and with the one exception of the liquidation of Hungarian Jews in Auschwitz in the summer of 1944, I have never, during the entire time when I acted in Department D-II, heard of crimes committed in a concentration camp.
If the Prosecution believes that monthly statistics would have shown to me the disappearance of human beings, then this is in contradiction to the actual evidence. The statistics show a monthly increase in the number of prisoners, not a decrease. Apart from this I should like to concur with the statements of my defense counsel, and my defense counsel, Dr. Belzer, I should like to thank for his endless efforts and untiring efforts in my behalf.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Pook.
DEFENDANT POOK: May it please Your Honors, I would only like to add a few words to the arguments of my counsel. I was not a member of the WVHA for many years, but it was only toward the end of 1943 that I was transferred to the WVHA by military order as a dentist. Even during my membership in the WVHA I was absolutely unknown to the Main Office Chief and to most of his collaborators.
I was not an office chief, Amtschef, nor did I have any authority of any kind in the dental field. Neither did I work on economic matters, nor in the administration of concentration camps. I was transferred by military order from the dental medical office of the Operational Main Office, namely Office XIV, to the WVHA. What I did there in my function as a dentist and what I didn't do; what I knew and what I didn't know; what I was responsible for and what I was not responsible for; what the authorities were which I had and which I did not have, that I believe has been put clearly to this Tribunal. First of all it has been clarified that I was a dentist and nothing but a dentist, and one cannot charge me of having been closely connected with the concentration camp system. I would like to repeat one thing explicitly, that I never deviated from the old medical principle to help at all times and never to harm, and also that it is absolutely incorrect and unjust to possibly charge me with cruel treatment of the concentration camp inmates on the dental field or any other point of view and consider me criminal in any way.
As far as removal of dental gold is concerned, I want to stress the fact that various city crematories in Germany, before cremating the bodies, on principle, demand the removal of all precious metals, including metal gold. The removal of dental gold from deceased concentration camp inmates was nothing but an administrative matter due to an order by Himmler dated 1940 and was not a matter of the Dental Health Service.
During the entire period of my transfer to the WVHA, which was rather short, as a dentist I had no possibility whatsoever to interfere in those administrative matters, not did that concern any dentist, because a dentist only had to deal with treating inmates who were still alive.
The Prosecution failed to introduce one single document which con tains my name, and that could bring me into connection with the removal of dental gold from the deceased inmates or with the Reinhardt Action.
I was a member of the Reiter-SS, and it was towards the end of 1940 that I was conscripted into the Waffen-SS by a military conscription order, and personally I never did participate in any criminal deeds nor did I know of any criminal activities for which I could possibly be held responsible because above all no one could possibly charge me with having been in a position to stop certain crimes and having had to stop certain crimes.
In the course of this trial it has been shown that in all my testimonies and in all points and in all details I only told the truth. I feel free of all guilt before God and my conscience, and I beg this Tribunal to acquit me of all guilt and punishment.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Hohberg.
DEFENDANT HOHBERG: Your Honors, permit me to add something to the plea put forward by my defense counsel and draw your attention to some points which appear important to me.
1. The evidence has shown that the DWB-Konzern was definitely transformed into a Reich concern only in March, 1943, when the capital was increased. Up to that time the DWB-Konzern had been a party concern administered by SS leaders. This transformation, unnoticed in its consequences, into an enterprise of the Reich, and the elimination of the financial hopes and economic power plans of the SS are considered by me as an exclusive merit of mine. I therefore did not see to it that the DWB-Konzern produced funds for the SS, but saw to it that the SS lost power over the funds of the DWB-Konzern. This is the very opposite of what the Prosecution has asserted.
2. In its final plea, the Prosecution, lacking the knowledge of legal rules and regulations appertaining to Reich concerns, adopted the view that this transformation of an SS enterprise to one of the German Reich was entirely irrelevant; the Reich ministries were just as criminal as the SS. The IMT, it is true, passed a different finding, and the serious consequences which arise from a transfer of an SS-enterprise to the Reich have been illustrated by my defense counsel. But apart from this I must say here that I myself have never met anyone who might have pointed out to me: You must first of all, when opposing the National Socialist State, not tackle this task first but that; compared with other more important tasks the crushing of power of the SS has only a secondary significance. It is easy to talk about these things afterwards. It is still my view that my work was not only as dangerous, but even more valuable than if, for instance, I had distributed antiNational Socialist pamphlets. If I had done the latter, then, the Prosecution, no doubt, wouldn't have introduced me as a defendant into this defaming trial. In reality it was less important what was done in order to oppose National Socialism but that one fulfilled any task of that nature at all. It remains incomprehensible to me that the Prosecution expected from me the fulfillment of tasks, for instance, involving the lot of the prisoners, which, due to lack of professional possibilities, could not be fulfilled by me.
3. It is a peculiarity of this trial that the Prosecution is partly using the same arguments in order to establish close connections with the WVHA which were used by the SS at the time; but the SS used them without success trying to get power over me at the time. It will probably be a unique case that several SS leaders, amongst them two who are today still free, were interested in the negative progress of my fate, and used affidavits which proved that they made an official agreement which would implicate me in Nurnberg. They are deliberate, untrue representations of the facts. For instance, that the Reich Ministry of Economics and not the SS had in 1943 forced the end of my activities as an accountant was greated with pleasure by the Prosecution, which was in a statement of Pohl's, that the very opposite was the case, is intentionally kept out by the Prosecution. This says explicitly that my transfer to the troops corresponded to an old scheme, and that no other reasons existed for my leaving my position as an accountant. Something similar applies to testimonies given under oath during the trial which were deliberate untruths told by an SS leader to the effect that I had been a superior to the employees of the DWB. The exact contrary staled by the Chief Pohl and all other available non-SS employees of the DWB was unfortunately not recognized and appreciated by the Prosecution.
4. There is one thing that the Prosecution cannot accuse me of, and that is that at any time I had any sympathies for National Socialism or the SS, formally or factually. Every other man who had been working against the Party would no doubt have been given the benefit of a certain amount of camouflage by the Prosecution. Yet I am asked to use a form of expression in my written statements which would show my opposition to the SS in all clarity. They asked me as a natural consequence of this to subject myself to the risks of prosecution and arrest.
They asked me for more than they would ask from themselves under similar circumstances. The fact that with much luck I escaped the fate of extermination by the SS appears a sort of guilt in the eyes of the Prosecution.
5. The tragicness of my case is contained in the fact that the aim not achieved by the SS at the time has now been achieved with the assistance of the American prosecutors in any case, no matter whether I am condemned or not. Whoever has faced a military tribunal in Nurnberg is a branded man in Germany, and that applies particularly to my profession.
6. Up to now I had been convinced that I had made a more than inconsiderable contribution to the combatting of National Socialist power. That was no treason against Germany. After I had heard from Auschwitz, it was my natural duty as a responsible German. My contribution consisted in the opposing of the plans of the SS regarding an economic enterprise owned by the SS. My contribution furthermore consists in the uniformation of important anti-Fascist circles regarding the events at Auschwitz. I raised a warning voice to the threatened anti-church propaganda of the Nordland Publishing firm. I warned against the danger of further measures to be introduced by Himmler against certain anti-National Socialist sections of the population, and pointed out that the crematories in Auschwitz had certainly not been built in order to come to a standstill too soon. This type of activity was doubly dangerous to me as a non-Party member, since I was twice as suspicious and under twice as much observation as other people. The fact alone that the Prosecution considers the death sentence as the only just punishment shows that they did not succeed to enter into the train of thoughts, possibilities and dangers of those who during the war carried out deliberate activities in opposition to the SS. Otherwise such a request would have been impossible.
This high tribunal will therefore understand my attitude of resigna tion, since without feeling guilty at any time I lived through this trial.
May I merely request this high tribunal to at least put me on that level with those Germans during the pronouncement of these findings, who, during the National Socialist regime, contrary to me, showed political lethargy and inactivity.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Baier.
DEFENDANT BAIER: Mr. President, Your Honors, I am quite sure this Tribunal knows that contrary to the promises given me I was torn from my profession as a teacher. Within the framework of the war measures I was transferred into the WVHA as a soldier. It has been my intent in the course of this trial to beautify nothing, to always tell nothing but the truth. I have at all times tried to fulfill my duty towards my country, and I have always dealt with all jobs assigned to me correctly.
Looking back at my life, I have no reproaches to make myself. Never did I intentionally harm a human being, regardless of nation, race or religion. I can make this statement in good conscience before God. That things of tremendous wretchedness occurred in the concentration camps is a shaking realization that arose during the course of this trial. I had no part in them, and this is my honest conviction I need not mention that I be acquitted of these crimes.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Volk.
DEFENDANT VOLK: Your Honors, after a hundred days of trial have passed, the guilty men responsible for soiling Germany's honor with tyranny and murder are to be brought to justice. These high tribunals are to mete out judgment to the worst war criminals. The Prosecution counts me amongst those persons since they put me in this dock.
Until the outbreak of this war I was not a member of the WVHA. A military order of the supreme command of the armed forces put me into a position against my will for which I have now to face responsibility, as a captain in the Waffen-SS and a legal man. The files of my work have been at the disposal of the Prosecution in twelve crates which have not been handed over by me, and there are no gaps.
The officials of the Prosecution have submitted from this material, covering a period of four years, about ten documents on which I had worked as a legal expert in the civil legal sphere or which I had written after having taken down the minutes. Your Honors, know this material in detail. None of the witnesses for the Prosecution knew me, nor could any of them report a crime supposedly committed by me.
Sine ira et studio, I have spent many a sleepless night during this trial, asking myself as a jurist and a man: "Are you really a war criminal?" In application of the controversial existing laws, I could neither answer this question in the affirmative, morally nor legally, but from my conscience I feel clean.
Like millions of other young Germans I followed the military order and obeyed my oath of allegiance. In spite of the greatest qualms with regard to the political system. I trusted the leaders which came into power without my will and without my assistance, and I followed them, and I have been immeasurably disappointed and deceived. When fulfilling my tasks as a legal man, I followed truthfully the teaching of my teachers and considered the fate of those concerned as important as my own. It was in keeping with those principles that I acted. Therefore my actions could have been nothing but humane. As a jurist I know no collective judgment of human beings. I valued everyone according to his actions, because in my view only individual judgment will lead to just findings with regard to a man. I have told you the truth because as a jurist an oath is particularly holy to me, nor did I have to be afraid of the truth.
Your Honors, I know that you are facing a very difficult task, that you are passing judgment in a foreign country, the language of which you do not understand and the authoritarian government administration and economy of which you have not experienced yourselves. You come from a happy country, the people of which had no worries about food, not even during war.
Your towns were not bombed night after night. Your women and children did not tremble day and night in fear of their lives. In your country, and contrary to Germany, free exchange of view has been possible even since Thomas Jefferson, and has been the basic pillar of your constitution.
I have correctly told you though my belief in political leadership has been deeply shaken, I still believe in the justice of judges, even if they belong to a country which has not yet signed a peace with my Fatherland. I do not consider the judge a servant of the law; I consider him a servant of justice. It is for that reason that I, as a German, place my fate and that of my family calmly into your hands.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Mummenthey.
DEFENDANT MUMMENTHEY: Mr. President, Your Honors, I have nothing to add to the arguments of my counsel, Dr. Froeschman, as to the individual counts of the indictment in this trial.
If I, nevertheless, may use of this privilege to deliver a personal statement, I will do so in the following respects:
I am here before this High American Court as a German. I trust that what I have done will be locked upon and judged according to the conditions prevailing then in Germany and not as nowadays - ex nunc - they are expected to have been. I could neither minimize nor exaggerate my position within the German Earth and Stone Works, DEST, G.m.b.H., and the WVHA, but I could only present it the way it really was. The picture which the prosecution gives of my position does not correspond with the facts, in spite of a few features which seem to support the assertions of the prosecution.
My activities with the DEST from 1939 to 1945, took place at a time of a generally stormy development and almost exclusively during war. These facts can only be fully appreciated by those who experienced them themselves. The DEST was not an enterprise for the exploitation of defenseless human beings nor a slave labor enterprise. I must object to this with all my heart, not only for my own sake, but also for the sake of my collaborators. What we regarded our goal was the fulfillment of an economic task in the field of the stone and earth industry, connected with an attempt to solve a social problem. This social problem, the rehabilitation of criminal and anti-social elements within human society still remains unsolved.
This fact is very clearly shown in the essay by Herbert Blank with the title, "Behind the Lattice", in the Northwest German Magazine, issue 9 of 1946. If it does not contradict the rules of this high Tribunal, I should like to submit a copy of this essay.
Out of almost 11 years of custody in the Third Reich for high treason, the author spent four years in penitentiaries of the Administration of Justice. From his experiences and observations of that time, he proposes a reform of the system of infliction of punishment, according to which, instead of penitentiaries, camps should be established. He continues, and I quote, "One should not be scared by the fact that during the Hitler time the camp was corrupted.
All this speaks against Hitler, but nothing speaks against the camp, against the possibility, to reconvert in the open air psychologically sick people to useful and healthy fellow-creatures." Bland calls this problem "one of the most important for our future" and he states: "Not only the money, but first of all the security of every individual is in danger, if we do not succeed in finding a reasonable form of the infliction of punishment for the days to come."
The single proposals of Blank - is this an irony of fate?- correspond exactly to the then plan of the DEST. If a former inmate of concentration camps and a prisoner of prisons of the Administration of Justice, arrives himself at such a proposal, I conclude, that what the DEST planned and carried out within the range of possibilities could not be wrong and never could have been something damnable.
I have never had a criminal intent, let alone practiced such. My economic activity was filled with social ideas, born out of my nature.
That we could not reach our aim in the DEST is the tragedy of my own life and that of my collaborators. However, it is no proof that the ways and ends were blameworthy, or even criminal.
Since in this trial, a special problem, namely the treatment of the Jews, plays a special part, I want to add something in connection with this point. Though I don't think I have any Jewish relations, I nevertheless, never regarded them as human beings to be treated in an inhuman way or even to be killed. The loyal attitude towards the Jews in my family may be illustrated by the fact that my father, up to the end, in the banking house managed by him, employed a half-Jew in a leading position though the Kreisleiter of the NSDAP under threat had ordered his dismissal. I have an affidavit dealing with this fact. The only reason why my counsel did not submit it was that this did not have anything to do with my activity in the DEST.
A Jew, Leopold Goldschmidt, recently in public said this: "The Jewish obligation being that of a minority, should consist in reserve and adaption, while the Christian obligation should consist in patience and indulgence." May the present and future realize what the past has missed. May finally take the place of hate, what two thousand years ago from the Orient came as a light into the darkness of the world.
My fate is put into your hands, Mr. President, and Your Honors. May God help you find the just verdict.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant Bobermin.
THE DEFENDANT BOBERMIN: Your Honors, the trial has come to an end, the Jurist becomes silent; the accused man has the word. Man speaks, but will he be understood? Those who lovingly occupy themselves with foreign languages, know how difficult it is often to find a word, a sentence of one language for the word, the sentence of another, which must have the same meaning and the same touch.
Even greater than the difficulties of language are the difficulties of human understanding. Romain Rolland, who became one of the best Europeans, and yet remained a good Frenchman, fifty years ago wrote the following:
"Knowledge can only be obtained at the price of many errors, much suffering, and unfortunate experiences."
However, are suffering, errors, and unfortunate experiences not different for all the nations? And knowledge and understanding are not the same in the case of all the nations. Only those who knew the conditions in Germany during the war can rightly understand the actions and behavior of individual Germans. Yet beyond all understanding, even for us Germans, there remains the murder of human beings in and outside concentration camps, beyond all events of war. They fill me with the same horror and fright as any other decent human being.
My life was devoted to service on economy. I considered it fortunate that in the first years of the war I could work in this sphere in order to alleviate the destruction brought about by the hard necessities of war. I had no reason, therefore, to be dissatisfied with the tasks given me by military order.
I will stand by the principles of inviolability of private property. The sentence of Jean Jacques Proudhomme, "Possession is theft", I cannot recognize. What I myself once owned I had to work for too much and save under too much deprivation not to realize the value of protection for my property, which has become the booty of the victors.
I did not propose the confiscation of the brick works. At that time I was working elsewhere. I did not decree the confiscation. For that I did not have the power nor did I carry it out. That was a matter for other offices. At that time, however, I asked myself "Can you administer the property of others ordered by the State, but for the sake of the owner?"
I answered this question with "Yes", because with that "Yes", I did not infringe upon the limits of the principle of private ownership, which I had adopted. The limits of private ownership cannot be drawn as clearly in industry as with goods for personal use.