I have in the meantime inquired with the Polish delegation. As the Tribunal knows, this document was made before a Polish judge, before Judge Sane, who is the investigating judge of the Polish Government for War Crimes. Judge Sane was present in Nurnberg, or, is still present, and I have obtained a certificate from the Polish Delegation to the effect that this statement was taken by Judge. Sane himself and that this is riot a sworn statement, but that Judge Sane re quested from the affiant to tell the truth. At the time when Hoess made this statement, he was a defendant in his own case and it is not usual that statements of such persons are taken under oath. It is not usual in Poland. It is against regulations in Czechoslovakia. I do not knew what the current rule is in Germany. the Polish, delegation and I shall submit it to the Tribunal as soon, as it is translated so that I can get translations for the German defense counsel. I would request at this time that the Tribunal may defer its decision on the admissibility of the document until the Tribunal has received this certificate.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that agreeable to you, Dr. Heim?
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I agree that the discussion about this document should be deferred to a later date.
I have now finished the case of chief of Defendant Blobel. At a later date, that is very soon, I shall submit Document Book II for Defendant Blobel. There are only a few documents contained in it.
THE PRESIDENT: Tomorrow morning we will begin with the case of Blume. The Tribunal will now be in recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 31 October 1947, at 0930 hours.)
of America; against Otto Ohlendorf, et al;
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II-a.
Military Tribunal II-A is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Lummert, you are ready to proceed?
DR. LUMMERT: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The defendant Blume will be taken to the witness box. as follows: BY JUDGE DIXON:
Q Defendant, raise your right hand and repeat after me: will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
( The witness repeated the oath)
JUDGE DIXON: You may be seated. BY DR. LUMMERT: data?
A My name is Walter Blume. I am 41 years of age. Before the German collapse I was a ministerial councillor and Colonel in the police in Office I of the Reich Main Security Office. I am married and have five children. that my examination of the defendant Blume, will be subdivided into three main sections. In the first section I shall ask the defendant Blame about his education, about his career and a few general questions.
In the second section we will deal with the 7 weeks when he stayed in the East. The third section finally will refer to Count III of the Indictment, the membership in the organizations declared criminal by the International Military Tribunal. In connection with the examination I shall introduce a few documents as evidence. description of your education? Westphalia as the son of a schoolmaster of a girls' high school. In my home town Dortmund, I went to elementary school for four years and after that I attended Hindenburg High School for 9 years, and the so-called "Abitur" the matriculation, I passed on Easter 1925. After that I studied law for six terms in Bonn, Jena and Muenster, and in 1923 I passed the first legal state examination, the "Referendar" examination at the Law Courts in Hamm. In the following years I received the proper legal training with several legal authorities in Dortmund and in Hamm. In July 1932, I passed the main State examination for law, the "Assessor" examination in Berlin. In 1933 I passed an exam as a doctor of law at the University of Erlangen.
Q Did you have a special aim for your career? state. In particular I aimed to work as a County Councillor. of a County Councillor? The Landkreis county district contains a number of communities and smaller cities which are an administrative district, while the larger towns are independent.
That is, they form their own independent city districts. In the state Bavaria , for example, there are about 150 of such districts. examination of law in July 1932, what did you do after that in order to achieve your aim, that is, to become a County Councillor? to be accepted as a civil servant in the state administration department but as I found out everywhere, in the State of Prussia at the time one had to be a member either in the social democratic party or in the "Centrum" party. Since I did not belong to either party my efforts were in vain at the time. May I add that owing to the idea of the class struggle I objected to the principal of the social democratic party. The Catholic Center Party, I was not interested in because I was a Protestant and thus did not agree with its Catholic principles. the middle of 1932 when your attempts to become a civil servant failed?
A like most legal"assessors" after their first legal state-examination I first was given the position of an unpaid assistant to a Judge at the Court in Dortmund. I kept this position after my examination until the spring of 1933. this field? I knew very well pointed out to me that perhaps now there would be a chance to become a civil servant in the administrative service. He knew my desire to become an officer in the inner administration and he offered to help me to get a position with the Police in Dortmund because he knew the then Police President at the time, the SA Gruppenfuehrer Schepmann personally.
I agreed to this because it would bring me closer to my professional aim. A few days later I was asked to see the Police President. At the time he just needed a lawyer in the Police in Dortmund, and, therefore, approved to my service there. After a few months of training time for which I was not paid, the Police President Schepmann, as he had told me during that first discussion, wanted me to go to the Prussian inner state administration, As a lawyer, therefore, I asked for leave of absence and started to work in the police in Dortmund about the end of March or the beginning of April 1933. I do not remember the exact date. with the NSDAP until that time in the spring of 1933? political party. My general political views were those of a good German citizen and of a man with nationalist views. My father was conservative in his political views. As for myself in the years before 1933, after I had become of age, I never felt any desire to become politically active. My interest in the problems and the political movements at the time was merely theoretical. I had not formed any ideology as yet but I was still searching. For that reason I had not joined any party.
Q Did you join the NSDAP or one of it's organizations or affiliations in 1933? Dortmund, the Police President Sehepmann told me one day the NSDAP had criticized him because he had employed a lawyer who was not a member of the Party.
He asked me to join the Party and I replied to him that I intentionally had not joined any party as yet, because I objected to those many people who joined the party for opportunistic reasons. He replied to me that it was in his interest if I joined the party because he would not then have any more difficulties because of me. For the same reason he would also like to sec to it that I became a member of the SA. He would then take me into his group staff, pro forma, I agreed to joining the Party and the SA and on the 1st of May 1933 I became a temporary party member and also a member of the SA, as a sturmfuehrer. That is the rank of a lieutenant in the staff of the SA in Westphalia. you said you became a member of the party and the SA and what were it's aims in your opinion? therefore, joined the party, and the SA I did not do that because I thought I would have an advantage in my profession but at the time I saw the connections between the national and social intentions as the NSDAP; I considered this to be an ideal solution of the very difficult economic and political problems in Germany, which, particularly, since 1930 made things very difficult in Germany. Most of all I objected to the idea of the class struggle which was the policy of the Leftist parties. Instead of this I considered the idea of an community as the NSDAP advocated to be right, I had not Party dogmas. The old and new party members were different kinds of people and the field of activities wi thin the party seemed very extensive to me and to be based on just ideals. The unity in the Party, in my opinion, was the idea of the union within the people, and I realized that it was not the number of party members which would help Germany out of its misery by only the temporary voluntary subordination under one will.
Apart from that I wanted the basic wellbeing of the economic situation in Germany and a good position of Germany in relation to the rest of the world. I was convinced that the NSDAP had wanted to achieve these aims in a legal and peaceful manner. The only difficulty was Russia, and I knew that there would have to be a. critical dispute. I considered this right from the very beginning and I even thought it probable because already then I saw no possibility of settling the differences between the Soviet aims of having a communist world revolution and the aims of the NSDAP concerning the national and social rebirth of Germany. a national-socialist dictatorship in Germany?
A No, I did not think of that. The reason was that I did not expect a dictatorship. I thought the NSDAP would do away with parliamentarism as such -
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, there seems to be a question.
DR. LUMMERT: The translation doesn't seem to follow all of the time. The witness just said that he agreed to the NSDAP, because it wanted to do away with the excesses of parliamentarism, that is the bad side of parliamentarism. It was translated that ha agreed to it because parliamentarism was eliminated. There is some difference. May the witness repeat his statement?
THE PRESIDENT: We understand what the witness intended to say or perhaps did say was that he was interested in seeing that the bad side of what he regarded as the excesses of parliamentarism should be eliminated, not a representative government as such?
DR. LUMMERT: Yes, that is quite right, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will show that. BY DR. LUMMERT: Chief of the State in these difficult times should deal with the responsibility and that only one man should have the responsibility. Hitler seemed suitable to me at the time for this because of his personal courageous character as the broad masses of the simple regarded him, and, therefore, he was given the opportunity to eliminate the bad idea of class fighting but personally and as a lawyer I fully approved of a legal state and believed that the NSDAP after a sort of revolutionary temporary period would set up a new legal state; the legal state is the opposite of a dictatorship,
Q Witness, what was your opinion on the so-called Jewish question? Jews in the public life of Germany, in the official positions, in the free professions, and so forth, he slowly reduced to a state of a low percentage in proportion with the total of the German population. I also considered it necessary to stop the increase of immigration of Jews from the last, from Poland to Germany, who had come into Germany since 1916 continuously, and had spread anti-Semitism in Germany. These so-called Eastern Jews culturally and in. their appearance were on a much lower level than those Jews who had always been in Germany. But Army measures beyound those which I mentioned, like expulsion, or extermination, I did not desire, nor did I in these and the following years. In my opinion the articles of the Party program of the NSDAP didn't say anything to the contrary.
Q witness, what was your professional career after that. Please give the Tribunal a short and precise description of this?
AAfter April 1933, as I already . mentioned, I worked for a few months without pay with the police in Dortmund, until about the middle of 1933, the inner Ministry of Interior of Prussia informed me that I would be employed in the Information Service in the Police in Dortmund. From that moment on 1 received the usual salary as a chief assessor. During my test time the Chief of the newly founded Prussian Secret State Police Office in Berlin Oberregierungsrate Dieltz came to Schepmann in Dortmund in order to discuss the set up , a Prussian Police Office in Dortmund with him. After this discussion I was called in by Schepmann: he introduced me to Dieltz, and suggested to him that when having terminated my temporary position I should be put in charge of the police Office in Dortmund. Until than, during the test time, he, Schepmann would deal with the business connected with it, because the State Police Office was formed out of Department I-A, the police presidium. When I had finished my tests here in May or June 1944, I was appointed government assessor in the Prussian service of the inner administration and simultaneously was put in charge of the State Police Office, which had just been set up for the government district at Ansberg, with its headquarters in Dortmund.
Dortmund belonged to the district of Ansberg, and in this position I remained until the Fall of 1934. At this time I was called to the Prussian State Police Office in Berlin as government assessor. There my tasks consisted of compiling out of the reports coming is from all over Prussia from the various State Police Offices, a general situational report, which the chief of the Prussian State Police Office handed on to various offices in Prussia, I worked in this office until June 1935. During that time the SA, in which I had not been active in Berlin either, transferred me to the SS. I had the same rank with the 33, SS-Untersturmfuehrer, that is lieutenant. The external reasons for this was that during a social event in Berlin I had come in White tie and tails and Heydrich, who had been present, had criticised this. The new chief of the Prussian State police Office even, and most of the other members of the Secret State Police, had appeared in SS-uniform. He said at the time he expected the people of his office would appear in the same color, and arranged for my transfer from the SA to the SS in the same rank. On. 6 June 1935 I married. In the same month the chief of the State Police Office for the District of Halle, transferred me to Merseburg, on the Sale River. I worked there for over two years. Then in the Fall of 1937 I was appointed chief of the. State Police Office for the District of Hanover, and was transferred to Hanover, and soon after that I became a government councillor. In this position I remained until the war started. In December I was appointed a Senior Government official for Berlin, and I was promoted a senior Government councillor. In this position I was until May 1941. During this month I was transferred as Personal Referendar to the Reich Security Main Office, that is, the RSHA, as it is usually abbreviated, I joined office I. When I had worked in this activity for about one month I was appointed for temporary security police tasks - as they told me at the time, - and was ordered to go to Pretsch on the Elbe River. Sofar as I can remember this was about eight days before the beginning of the Russian campaign had started on 22 June 1941.
ask you more details. They are the real subjects of the trial here, concerning you personally. Please describe to me your professional career after you returned from Russia in the middle of August 1941? resumed my activity as Personal Referendar in the Reich Main Security Office. My superior was the Office Chief of Office-I, the SS-Gruppenfuehrer Streckenbach. During my activity there I was appointed ministerial councillor. I remained in this position until approximately July 1942. At this time I was transferred to Duesseldorf, as Inspector of the Security Police and the SD. Before I started my work, which was at the order of the RSHA, I had been given a special task in the Upper Ukraine, which took about eight weeks. Then I started to work in Duesseldorf, and remained their until October 1943. Then I was appointed Commander of the Security police in the SD in Athens, in Greece, and retained these from October 1943 until August 1944. After we left Greece, I returned to Berlin. For a few weeks I was unemployed, because Kaltenbrunner, chief of the RSHA, disapproved of me, and he did not even receive me. Kaltehbrunner said at the time, and told my superior in Athens, Schimana who was in Athens, "Blume has supported the Greek policy, and not the German policy. He can not obey. I shall transfer him to the Reich Ministry of Finance," but this never actually happened. In any case, temporarily, as in 1941 and 1942, I was sent from there to a position in the RSHA, and paid by them, and in the Fall of 1944 the office chief of Office -I appointed me to assist in the customs supervision of the which Ministry of Finance, in the Security Police. My special subject was personnel transfers. Before completing this task in Marcy 1945, I was transferred to Blankenburg in Thuringia, in order to deal with vim censorship of the Wehrmacht there, and to transfer it into the Security Police. There my professional career ended, because the American troops approached.
I did military service for a short while, and on 8 May 1945 I was taken into American captivity in Austria. second main section of your examination, namely, your activity during the -approximately-seven weeks in the Rest. I intend to sub-divide this into three parts. First of all, I shell question you concerning the time during those seven weeks. After that I shall question you in particular concerning some documents, in which the prosecution charges you with certain things. Finally I shall ask you about your views at the time. whether the Fuehrer's Decree concerning the executions was right or wrong, and when conclusion you drew owing to your opinion at the time. Witness, you already mentioned that in June 1941 for about eight days before the Russian campaign, you were sent to Pretsch on the Elba River. This was, as you were told, at the time for a temporary assignment in the Security Police. Please give me all details you remember? purpose of this assignment was not known to me. After arriving in Pretsch I found several leaders who held approximately the same rank as I did; the men and sub-leaders who had been in Pretsch and Duben for several weeks, I found doing military training. They had been formed into companies. The conclusion I drew from this was that it was to assist the Security Police during military enterprise. In the discussions, presumptions were mentioned concerning England or Russia. A few days before the Russian Campaign, suddenly SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Streckenbach, of Office-I of the RSHA appeared in Pretsch, and he told the leaders who were gathered there most of them late because the first leaders of the Einsatzgruppen and the Einsatz and Senderkommandos - that we were going to attack Russia.
He announced the intentions of the Security Police task, and in particular the division in which the Einsatzgruppen and kommandos were formed, and, he explained our relations to the Army. During this speech he announced to us the Fuehrer Decree, which said that during the Russian Campaign the Eastern Jews in Soviet Russia were to be exterminated. These persons who were there were speechless about this decree. Then came the reaction. Those who held the same rank as Streckenbach called out loudly, and other people present in spite of the usual strict discipline were very restless, and remarks were made to the effect: how can this be done, it is impossible and can not be carried out. Steckenbach answered these remarks and said he could understand our reaction of disapproval, but nothing could be done here because it was a Fuehrer Decree, and this had to be complied with. For the Fuehrer Decree he gave the following reasons: First, a necessity of securing the conquered territory against partisan activity which was to be expected, as it was to be expected that Eastern Jews were the natural helpers of the partisans, and, secondly, that the Eastern Jews were the intellectual supporters of World Bolshevism, and this total destruction was necessary, in order to make the victory over Soviet Russia final. Finally Streckenbach pointed out the fact that for our activity in the Einsatzgruppen, military law applied, and he ordered us to instruct the men in our kommandos that each individual was under military law with all its consequences, in case they disobeyed an order; courtmartial or SSPolice Courts proceedings would be used, and possibly death sentences would be pronounced. Apart from that Streckenbach said expressly, that the Fuehrer had instructed the Army kommandos that the fight against Bolshevism could not be conducted under European laws and rules, it was not war in the usual sense, but a worldwide political ideological difference, thus, political police were appointed for the prospective war of the West, and had officially been built into an offical military plan, and that cooperation between the Army and the Security Police would have to be carried out.
DR. LUMMERT: Your Honor, I would like here to submit Document Blume No. 1, before I continue to ask the witness questions. In order to explain this, I want to mention that disobedience against the State orders under the dictatorship of Hitler was a crime punishable by death. No matter whether the disobedience concerned military or civilian subjects. This fact is well known. I believe that this Tribunal might like me to compile the laws which applied to the police at the time, and, therefore, also for the defendant Blume. I only chose the most important laws and decrees for this, and ask the Tribunal to take official notice of this. Your Honor, to make the same easier to identify, I submit this as Blume Document No, 1. The document is in Document Book No. 1, pages 1 to 13. It contains first of all a few chapters on the military penal code, which concerns in particular desertion, disobedience, and refusal of obedience, which the Tribunal will find that for all of these offenses in case of war, part I, the death sentence can be passed as well as also other sentences. The second law is the so-called special war decree, which was published at the beginning of the war. It contains sentences which are stricter and concern in particular the subject of undermining the military strength.
MR. FERENCZ: Your Honor, please, I must object at this time to any detailed analysis of law in this case. These are matters which will probably be raised In the closing argument and have no place at this time.
THE TRIBUNAL: I do believe, Dr. Lummert, that we will get into some difficulties if we begin to argue on the law while the witness is on the stand. Now if there is any specific question you desired to put to the witness on the law with which he is personally familiar, that, of course, is entirely in order, but to address an argument of law to the Tribunal in the midst of an examination of a witness might be a little difficult to follow in accordance with the procedure.
Another thing is that it places a rather unusual burden on the interpreters to translate extemperaneously a rather involved legal situation.
DR. LUMMERT: Your Honor, I understand this to the effect that the introduction of Document 1, is not objected to, and that only the explanation on this document should take place at a later time?
THE PRESIDENT: Of course there is entirely no objection to the introduction of the document book. On the contrary we recommend the introduction of the book and congratulate you on the speed with which you prepared and submitted it to the Tribunal. He especially want to thank you for the trouble you went to to have it translated on your own motion and through your own energies. The only point we make at this time, Dr. Lummert, is that to present a legal argument while a witness is on the stand is just slightly contrary to the usual procedure in a trial.
DR. LUMMERT: May I hand you Document Book No, I, and I ask the Court to take judicial notice of it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, and do you wish to introduce it as your exhibit?
DR, LUMMERT: It is only an exhibit for identification only.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, very well. The Secretary-General will note that exhibit.
DR. LUMMERT: I will then take the liberty to discuss the contents of this document after the examination of the Defendant Blume. I now continue with the examination of the Defendant Blume. BY DR. LUMMERT: Streckenbach in Pretsch. I now ask you, what were your personal considerations and feelings when Grupperfuehrer Streckenbach announced this Fuehrer Decree during his speech in Pretsch?
A. I remember very well that already during Streckenbach's speech a whole number of various questions and thoughts and feelings arose. I immediately realized that this was an unusual, even an immense decree, but I presumed at the time that the leadership of the German people and the German Reich had carefully considered this decree and had approved it.
I thought of all the authorities who obviously requested that this decree should be fulfilled, namely, the Fuehrer himself, the Reich Government, the supreme command of the Army, the Reichsfuehrer-SS and the Chief of the Security Police and the SD. At the time it did not even occur to me that all those authorities only had to obey one dictator in this, but for me at the time it was natural that such an important decree had been discussed by all high authorities. Also for me, like for all Germans an order was an ethical conception, and I was convinced that such a law soldiers had to obey unconditionally. the particular importance of the Fuehrer Decree which was law at the time in Germany. For that reason I realized the consequences of not obeying such an order according to the military code and to other codes. I emphasize here that the entire German police since the beginning of the war was considered to be carrying out a special commitment. A special decree had been issued, which my defense counsel has mentioned previously, and the competent regulations of increased severity for the police were also applied for the military forces. civilized people could carry out such an extermination order, and I felt particularly concerned that we who were present at the time all of us were intellectually inclined - had to be given such an order. The execution of such an order seemed impossible to me, although I thought of it that Soviet Russia itself would disregard the usual laws of civilied states neither for their own nationals nor for others. In particular I knew that Soviet Russia had not participated in the Geneva Convention. Added to this was the fact that during my work of many years as Chief of the State Police Offices I had read the interrogations of all people who had returned from Russia, and according to instructions had reported about all that happened; the State Police officers interrogated them about this.
These interrogations confirmed to me that in Soviet Russia no European standards were applied, and that for Europe the Communist problem, was problem No, 1. I know that in Soviet Russia during the last twenty years many millions of people had been killed in order to materialize the ideology of Communism. I also knew that the Jews in Soviet Russia were one of the main supports of the Soviet dictatorship and the intellectual bearers of the idea of Bolshevism. In short, my thoughts and feelings were in a turmoil.
Q. What did you do, owing to these contradictions in your feelings and your thoughts?
A. I looked for a way out. After some consideration I thought I would be able to find this if I was not put in charge of a Hauptkommando, a main kommando in the rear Army territory but rather was put in charge of a small advance kommando, a Vorkommando, with the fighting units. I hoped to be able to remain with the fighting forces and through that restrict my activity and the activity of the subordinate men to combating partisans, whom we expected, and to Security Police assignments, and particularly securing documents of Soviet authorities, in particular of the N.K.W.D., and the study of the general and political situation of the newly occupied territories and the reporting of the findings.
That same day I went to Streckenbach for the reason. I knew him very well because he had been my superior in Berlin. I could fully trust him and I asked him, would he give me a small Vorkommando, an advance kommando, although owning to my rank I could have asked for a larger kommando. I told him as the reason quite openly that I did not want to have anything to do with mass executions and that I hoped as the leader of a Vorkommando to be restricted only to working in security tasks. Streckenbach replied to me that he could fully understand my views and agreed to give me a Vorkommando, Sonderkommando 7a.
Q. Witness, apart from this discussion with Streckenbach, did you get any other instructions about the Russian assignment?
A. Yes, the future leaders for the Einsatzgruppen, for the Einsatz and Sonderkommandos, including myself, the following day or the day after the next, were called to Berlin, to the Prince Albert Palast, the headquarters of the RSHA. There Heydrich made a speech. He took for granted that we knew about the Fuehrer order and based his speech on this and therefore talked about our relation with the Army. He informed us that strict agreements had to be made with the Army chiefs about our assignment and our cooperation and had already been agreed upon and that our tactical orders concerning the advance and so forth, we would receive from the superior Army officers. He also mentioned as Streckenbach had done, that the Fuehrer had ordered that for the expected war in the East no European rules would be applied, but in this fight Germany would have to use the same ruthless methods as Bolshevism had always used in order to achieve its aims. Heydrich was very serious and said that the Security Police in the assignment in the East would have to make a test and prove themselves in their soldierly attitude. In the East, partisan fightings of serious proportions in the roar territory which had been captured, were expected. The rear territory according to the will of the Fuehrer, had to be secured against partisans and their assistants by all means. As was imminent danger Heydrich described at the time, the entirety of the Eastern Jews.
Q. What happened after that speech by Heydrich?
AAfter that we traveled to Pretsch or a locality near Pretsch. We returned, if I remember correctly, to Schmiedeberg. There Heydrich appeared shortly before we left in order to supervise the march of the personnel of the kommandos. namely the speech by Streckenbach and the speech by Heydrich, get any special detailed instructions about the carrying out of the Fuehrer decree? at the time it was left open how it should be carried out in detail. In any case, I myself did not quite know how it would be done. I was moved by the fact that without instructions we were left to our own fate. This moved me almost as much as the actual Fuehrer decree. I could only calm myself a little because I had been given Sonderkommando 7a, and I hoped that because of this I could avoid carrying out the Fuehrer decree because of the immediate connection which I expected with the fighting units. I still want to mention that in Pretsch or Schmiedeberg I heard two other speeches. One, as far as I remember, concerned the Communist World organization, Comintern. The other lecture concerned general measures about the political, economical and military conditions in Soviet Russia, and was as far as I remember given by a younger member of the Ministry of the Exterior. other, from the very beginning, to avoid carrying out security assignments in the East?
A No. As I have already stated, without my knowledge and without my assistance, and without knowing what was concerned, I had been transferred from Berlin to Pretsch. After the fuehrer decree had been announced, owing to the strict discipline in the RSHA and in the entire German police, it was quite impossible, from the very beginning, to ask to be released from participation in the assignment which had been ordered. The written orders by Heydrich existed for all of us.