However, you say there in the Gau Hamburg you gave orders 30 July A LJG 17-1 that they were to he handed over to the police.
in several Gaus ---- I have to submit according to the experience of the last two months, information received, but I an convinced that in some Gaus it was handled the same way as in mine. explain to the Tribunal, though it is not strictly on the Leadership Corps. Why would an SA Obersturmbannfuehrer initial that document in 25 February 1945; why would he be initialing it? is initialed by Buckemueller, SA Obersturmbannfuehrer and County Staff Chief of the Volkssturm; why would he be initialing it?
A That I don't know, because --
Q I won't trouble you. Now, I want to take the next subject and again, I hope, deal very shortly with what Dr. Servatius mentioned -- the churches. Do you agree that it was the general policy of the Nazi Party to do everything in its power to weaken the influence of the Christian churches? It is page 7 of your book and page one of the English book. That is dated the 12th of December 1941 and it deals with a secret decree of the Reichsleiter Bormann regarding the relationship of National Socialism to Christendom. If you would look at the first paragraph, that deals with the finding of this decree, a copy of a letter on the "relationship", in the papers of a Protestant priest called "Eichholz" at Aix-la Chapelle, which is supposed to originate from Reichsleiter Bormann; and then the second paragraph says:
"As far as this document is concerned it does, in fact, as I have ascertained, represent a secret decree of the Party 30 July A LJG 17-2 Chancellery signed by Reichsleiter Bormann, in which Reichsleiter Bormann clearly points out that National Socialism and Christendom are incompatible and that the influence of the Churches in Germany, including the Protestant Church, must be eliminated.
The decree was addressed to Gauleiter Dr. Meyer at Munster on the 6th of June 1941." And then it gives the reference.
"I have ascertained that on the 7th of June 1941, the decree was also sent to the remaining Gauleiters...." and it says that since this first paragraph of the circular decree addressed to all Gauleiters is missing from the document in psssession of Priest Eichholz, it appears it was known to the church. the 7th of June 1941? If you can't remember the decree, you will find it in the next two pages and I just remind you of one or two of the worst pieces in it. At the end of the second paragraph it says: "Our National Socialist ideology is far loftier than the concepts of Christianity, which in their essential points have been taken over from Jewry. For this reason also we do not need Christianity." And it says that if the youth doesn't learn about it, Christianity will disappear; and then there are some very odd utterances and you talk about a vital force; and if you will look towards the end of Bormann's document, it says in the third from last paragraph:
"For the first time in German history the Fuehrer consciously and completely has the leadership of the people in his own hand. With the party, its components and attached units the Fuehrer has created for himself and thereby the German Reich leadership an instrument which makes him independent of the church And it goes on to develop that and if you will look at the penultimate paragraph, in the second sentence, it says: " Just as the deleterious influences of astroloters, seers and other fakers are eliminated and suppressed by the state, so must the possibility of church incluence also be totally removed."
Now 30 July A LJG 17-3 that it is recalled to your memory, I shouldn't think that you should have forgotten a decree couched in such, shall we say, extraordinary language as that; do you remember it?
leadership was not doing everything in its power to attack Christianity?
A Yes. In this case, we are concerned with a statement by Bormann which, to my knowledge, a few days after, upon orders of the fuehrer, had to be withdrawn as an individual opinion of Bormann.
Q That can't be so, because if you notice, the decree was issued on the 7th of June and this decree which, after all, is going to the RSHA, to Mueller, is the 12th of December, which is six months after the decree was opened and there is nothing in that decree about it being withdrawn. Surely, if it had been withdrawn on the 14th of June or there would have been something in this decree to the security service and intelligence office of the Reich, surely they would have enough intelligence and information to know that a decree had been withdrawn six months before. decree has not only been formerly withdrawn but that it had to be sent back, in fact. Security Police never heard about its being withdrawn -- and we discuss it in detail -- let us take it in that way. I don't know if you had heard or you may have read that the defendant Pritsche here said that even Goebbels was afraid of Bormann." so isn't it correct that Bormann was a man who had great influence, especially in the last years? were many who were not afraid of him.
Q But there would he many who would be influenced if 30 July A LJG 17-4 Bormann was to give an anti-Christian lead to the National Socialist Party, would there not?
forces in the Party. to take them well-spaced out. I suggest to you that yours is typical. Let me take one -- in 1935.
I can't remember, witness, whether you are a Catholic or a Protestant. I have no ulterior motive. I am going to deal with an incident in a Catholic church. Of which are you?
Q I take it quite surely you will follow it. You will know who the people are and so forth. This is an incident on the 27th of March 1935, when Cardinal Faulhaber was preaching in the cathedral at Munich and the local branch of the party wanted to take a record of the sermon in case His Eminence was saying anything which might offend the Party and they did so by breaking one of the windows of the church and inserting a cable which would pick up the sound so a record could be taken and there were various happenings and a lot of discussion with which I shall not trouble the Tribunal but one of the priests of the cathedral brought the incident to the attention of the local Wehrmacht Commander and it is with regard to what he says in relation to the functioning of the Leadership Corps that I want to draw your attention. You may take it from me that that is the general incident which is described at great length and which have accussations of exaggeration on both sides and, therefore, I am only going to take you to the passage in which the local commandant deals with the situation.
My Lord, it is at the bottom of page four. My Lord, it says "Page 5, continued at the top." Has Your Lordship got that?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
30 July A LJG 17-5
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, it is on the bottom paragraph on page 5. This is after the occurrence when the Wehrmacht officer is making his report; he says:
"On Monday, February 18, there came to the house of paymaster official Grueber the Kreisleiterin leader of the district of the Nazi Party Women's Organization Mrs. Dr. Dreis and asked the wife of paymaster official Grueber to come immediately with her to the Dom to listen to the sermon of Cardinal Faulhaber implying that this was Mrs. Grueber's duty as a member of the party and the Nazi Party Women's Organization. Mrs. Lrueber's objection that she was a protestant was rejected as unimportant; instead it was ordered that every member of the Nazi Women's Party Organization has to attach herself to a Storm Trooper in civilian clothes, in which way they would be considered as audience and not as sent out party members. There is no doubt that this measure shows the intention of disturbance of the service and the bringing about of violent scenes." And on that, the Wehrmacht officer, very wisely you may think, told her to rely on the fact that Herr Grueber was a paymaster or something of that sort and she needn't be mixed up with the Party matters. But what I want to ask you about is this: The Kreisleiterin leader of the district women, she would be the women's leader on the Kreisstaff of the Party, wouldn't she? If I am wrong, correct me. Is that her position?
Q And she wouldn't have taken that action of collecting the women of Munich to come and form a group, when Cardinal Faulhaber was preaching, without the orders of the Kreisleiter, would she? She wouldn't, would she? It must have been on the Kreisleiter's orders; is that not so?
THE PRESIDENT: Answer the question, please.
THE WITNESS: The event described to me is completely unknown to me and I cannot really imagine that a serious man in this case a Kreisleiter - should give an order which in its effect would turn against the Party.
30 July A LJG 17-6 BY SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE:
Q What I am referring to, you see, is this: Here is a report of a responsible officer in the Wehrmacht. I think he is regimental commander, and it is counter-signed by his adjutant. He is saying that the Kreisleiterin who is the women's leader, has come to this paymaster's wife and got her to do it. What I am putting to you is; Assuming that Mr. Grueber and this regimental commander are correct - it must do for the moment - assuming they are correct, the Kreisleiterin wouldn't have acted without orders from the Kreisleiter, would she?
A. That is probable. In my case, such a Kreisleiter would have been sent away, dismissed.
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, I think this document speaks for itself.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: If your Lordship please, I think so. My Lord, I am only going to give another example. I have to deal with just the points raised by Dr. Servatius and limitthe examples as much as I can.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps we better adjourn now.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, The Tribunal thinks, with refer-
30 July A LG 18-1 ence to any documents which you may have, perhaps it would save time if they aren't documents made by the witness who is in the box, if you would just put the documents in without the crossexamination.
SIR DAVID M. FYFE: I will do it. It will save time. I will welcome this. I will be glad to do as your Lordship suggest It suits my purpose.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the introduction of now documents as evidence, is, in my opinion, inadmissible, for I have no opportunity to comment on them since I have finished with my evidence. My witness has been examined. I don't know how I can answer them.
THE PRESIDENT: I am sure Sir David will let the counsel for the defense to re-examine them at that time, he can reply on the document later.
SIR DAVID M. FYFE: There are copies available and will be given to Dr. Servatius right away. The last one I was going to refer to is Document D-901, which is a now document. That contains four reports by Obergruppers. I should have said 536.
THE PRESIDENT: You have a numer to that other document, did you, th other one you put in? Wasn't there another new document you put in, 1507-PS?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: GB 535, my Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, very well.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: My Lord, this document consists of four reports from Ortsgruppenleiter and the comments made upon them by the Kreislei My Lord, I shall only quote to the Tribunal the first sentence of the first tw reports, which will show what they are. 1939, ''Point 9 Ecclesiastical questions." I quote:
"As the caretaker of the communal building of the St. Martin's community, Blockleiter and party member Keil informs me that meetings of the Confessional Front are again taking place at the St. Martin's Institute, Mullerstrasse (Ortsgruppe Gutenberg), the public being excluded." being carried on behind closed doors and he mentions the Gestapo.
The second one refers to a statement by an ecclesiastic. That is from the Ortsgruppe Pfungstadt, 17 February, 1939.
"'Whoever leaves the church has different taxes imposed on him', so our already much discussed confessional pastor Strack said once again on the occasion of a mother's evening. This gentleman should really be rapped on the knuckles seriously for once." fourth deals with the continued existence of an Evangelical youth club. page -- I will just read one and two.
"The report of Ortsgruppenleiter Wimmer, St. Martin's parish. The SD, Gestapo and the competent Ortsgruppenleiter will be instructed by me.
"2. I shall request Ortsgruppenleiter Frick, who reports from Pfungstadt, to go to the Kreisleiter tomorrow and shall get him to name his witnesses. This will be notified to you and to the Gestapo (to the latter with a report of the case). The priest Strack is sufficiently well-known and ripe for the concentration camp or the Special Court. His reported statement before fellow Germans constitutes an infringement of the law against malice.
In any case, the chap must disappear from the territory of the Kreis or Gau." That is the essential point. My Lord, the first is 315-PS, which will become GB 537. My Lord, that is the minutes of a conference on the treatment of foreign labor, on the 12 March, 1941 deliberate and general change of policy and if your Lordship will look at the middle of the second paragraph, your Lordship will find the sentence:
"In this instance the hither to prevailing treatment..." -- new that is the point I want to emphasize -- "the hitherto prevailing treatment of the Eastern workers has led not only to a diminished production but has most disadvantageously influenced the political orientation of the people in the conquered Eastern territories and has resulted in the well-known difficulties of our troops. In order to facilitate military operations the morale has to be improved by a better treatment of the Eastern workers in the Reich." coming into the party channels, which is shown in the next document 205-PS. My Lord, that will become GB 538. It comes from the Party Chancellery and it says:
"The Reich Propaganda Ministry and the RSHA have together issued a memorandum, concerning the treatment of foreign laborers employed within the Reich.
"I request in the attached copy that the necessity for a firm but just treatment of the foreign workers be made clear to members of the party and the people." Ortsgruppenleiter. page 2, it begins:
"Everyone, even the primitive man, has a fine perception for justice.
Consequently, every unjust treatment has a very had effect. Injustices, insults, trickery, mistreatment, etc., must be discontinued. Punishment by beating is forbidden. The workers of foreign nationality are to be correspondingly informed concerning the severe measures for insubordinate and seditious elements." "discontinue" in that directive. shows that there is a definite change. my Lord, that is dated 28 March, 1944. It is a party order, issued in the Gau Baden-Alsace, issued from Strassburg on 28 March, 1944 and you will see it is headed "Gaustabsamtleiter" and is "Secret" and it deals with sexual intercourse between foreign workers and Germans. And, my Lord, it explains the course that is to be taken with the foreign worker and in the case of a child resulting from the intercourse and, your Lordship, on the top of the second page of the document, it says:
"The following principles exist with regard to sexual intercourse between German men and female foreign workers:
"Should the foreign female worker have been induced to sexual intercourse by the German man (for instance by taking advantage of a condition of dependency) she will be taken temporarily into protective custody and then sent to another place of work. In other cases, the foreign female worker will be sent to a concentration camp only after delivery of the child and the period of nursing. The treatment of the German man concerned is also the subject of special directives. If he has seriously violated his supervisory or educational duties, female foreign workers will be taken away from him and no more sent to him in the future. Further measures, depending on the circumstance of the case, will be taken by the State Police." Lithuania, former Soviet territory and from Serbia. Lordship will see at the end of the first paragraph that the heading is:
"Regarding the treatment of pregnant foreign workers and children given birth to by the same in the Reich." The last sentence in the first paragraph says:
"The procedure for an application for abortion is once more explained below--" and then there are various health and racial investigations.
In paragraph 5 it says:
"If the investigations show that the progency will be racially satisfactory and hereditarily health, they will, after birth, go to homes for foreign children to be looked after by the National Socialist Welfare Organization (that is the party organization) or will be looked after by families.
"In negative cases the children will be lodged in Foreign Children's Nurseries."
And then the last paragraph:
"I request the Kreisleiters to record immediately through the usual channels, in conjunction with the Kre**obmann of the German Labor Front and the Kreis peasant leader, all cases of pregnancy which have already occurred and all children already born. An examination, in accordance with the new directives, of all children of foreign female workers who were taken under the care of the NSV before the issue of the new instructions, is also necessary."
Your Lordship will see the distribution. It is to Gauobmann of the German Labor Front, that is the representative of the DAF in the Gau, Gau propaganda chief, press chief and then the Gauamtsleiter, the person in the office of the Gau dealing with racial policy, national health, the peasantry, national welfare, questions of race, the Gau women's leadership and the Gau Labor Office and then Kreisleiters and the Kreis of the DAF and the Kreis peasant readers. It goes, also, my Lord, to the Security Police and SD and the Office of the Commissioner for the Reich Commissar for the Consolidation of German Race.
My Lord, I am very grateful to your Lordship for that. It saves a considerable amount of time.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I have a question on the evidence. The last document, 205, which was submitted here, was introduced anew. The witness wasnot questioned on it at all. I had assumed that the taking of evidence had been closed and that no new documents could be introduced by the Prosecution. I ask that this document be stricken out. It should have been brought before the Commission, shown to the witness and discussed, and then I would have had an opportunity for further evidence.
It is a fundamental question which will come up repeatedly. It was not submitted to the witness to test his credibility.
THE PRESIDENT: It was not submitted to the witness because of the order that the Tribunal has just made. In Order to save time, the Tribunal suggested to Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe that he should put the document in in that way. I said -- I understood you to assent to it -- that the document should be shown to you and that you should have an appropriate opportunity to comment upon it.
DR. SERVATIUS: I knew the document, but I would like to clear up the basic question of whether the taking of evidence, the submission of evidence by the Prosecution, is closed or whether here during the trial new documents can be introduce.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal considers that the Prosecution can certainly call evidence and use documents if they wish to rebut the evidence which has been called on behalf of the organization.
DR. SERVATIUS: Without showing them to the witness?
THE PRESIDENT: The only reason for not showing it to the witness was that the document was not a document which the witness made, and in view of that it appeared to the Tribunal to be a matter of comment upon the document, and if you have got an opportunity to put the document to the witness yourself or to comment upon the document, you have got a full opportunity to deal with it.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then I would also, if necessary, be permitted to submit a counter-document?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly. You can ask this witness anything you like about the document.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the witness was at the end asked less about facts, but there was an argument. I believe I can comment on that in my final statement.
THE PRESIDENT: I did not quite understand what you said then about an argument.
DR SERVATIUS: The witness was asked about theings which he himself does not know, and the example was told him of events in individual gaus, of which he knows nothing, and he was to draw conclusions as to what interpretation was to be given to the document.
THE PRESIDENT: On general principles, you can ask him anything in reexamination which properly arises out of his cross-examination. If he was cross-examined upon a document, or if the document was put in now, in the way it has been, you can ask him any question upon the document or upon his crossexamination upon the document.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes; I have a question. BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, the document was shown to you, the order of the Deputy of the Fuehrer, Hess, of 13 March 1940. That is in the German Document Book on page 43. This is the instructions to the civilian population on their conduct at the landing of enemy planes or parachutists on German Reich territory. Then you were referred to Number 4, where it says that enemy parachutists are also to be arrested and made harmless immediately. Did you observe that the letter is of the year 1940, and what was the situation in the air of Germany at that time?
A. I no longer have the letter at the moment, but I remember that it was from 1940. In my first answer to this question, I wanted to say that the air situation and the whole war situation would justify only a humane interpretation of this term, as far as mistakes are possible.
Q. Was it not the case that there was a danger that planes would land for espionage purposes and that the words "to make them harmless" were in connection with that?
A. In the air war various types of people parachuted -- fliers in emergencies, sabotage agents, agents in civilian clothers, and so forth. To what group this is supposed to refer is not clearly shown by the text.
Q. May I call your attention to the following: In Number 2 it says that fliers are to be arrested immediately and that resistance or burning of the planes is to be prevented. Number 4 says that enemy parachutists are also to be arrested and made harmless. Does not the term "likewise" show that it deals primarily only with arrests?
A. I repeat that the term "unschaedlich", in 1940 in view of the war situation at that time, I would have interpreted to mean only to make them defenceless but in no case to mistreat them or to kill them.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions to put to the witness. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Witness, were these Political Leaders paid, paid salaries by the Party?
A. Quite a small percentage -- less than 0.1 per cent were, according to my estimate, paid officials. The majority of them were honorary officials, without pay.
Q. That applies to all the ranks of the Party officials, does it?
A. No. Some of the tasks in the high offices made the free time insufficient to fulfill the necessary tasks in an honorary capacity while at the same time carrying on professional activity.
Q. Were all the Gauleiters paid?
A. After the seizure of power, yes; that is, gauleiters insofar as they did not hold a state office.
Q. And what were they paid -- how much?
A. I myself never received a salary as Gauleiter. Up to 1928 I earned my expenses myself. From 1928 on I was a parliamentary delegate, and from 1933 I was Reich Governor. The cases of most of my comrades were similar.
Q. You mean from 1933 on most of them had state offices which carried salaries?
A. Yes.
Q. And what about the Kreisleiters?
A. Up to the seizure of power, all Kreisleiters were, on principle, honorary officials without pay.
Q. And after?
A. And later the same was true for years. I estimate that the majority of them, with exceptions, from 1937 or 1938 on became officials and received salaries.
Q. Became state officials you mean?
A. No, not state officials -- Party employees.
Q. And received salaries; I see. And the lower ranks, the Ortsgruppenleiters and the Block leiters?
A. No. From Kreisleiters down they were all honorary officials.
Q. Even after 1933?
A. Yes.
Q. And after 1937?
A. Yes. The most important members of the staff were, in part, paid. The majority of the Kreisleiters' associates were honorary officials. From Ortsgruppenleiters down, including Ortsgruppenleiters, all were honorary, without pay.
Q. From what source were they paid, when they were paid?
A. By the Reich Treasurer of the Party.
Q. And from what source did he get the money to pay them?
A. From the contributions of members of the movement.
Q. The fuuds of the party were kept separate, were they?
A. The Reich treasurere had a completely separate administration of funds.
Q. Were the accounts of the party published?
A. No. I only know that occasionally at meetings the Reich treasurer occasionally made a brief report. This was not published.
Q. Was there any reference to party funds in the state budget or the state accounts?
A. No. On the contrary, I had the impression that the Reich treasurer, from the Reich insurance, from the dues of members had extremely extensive funds.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you call your next witness, Dr. Servatius?
DR. SERVATIUS: With the approval of the Court, I shall call the witness Kreisleiter Willi Meyer-Wenderborn. follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Will you state your full name?
A. Willi Meyer-Wenderborn.
Q. Will you repeat this oath after me: pure truth and will withhold nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath).
THE PRESIDENT: Sit down. BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, when were you born?
A. 24th of June 1891.
Q. You were a Kreisleiter in Cloppenburg (Oldenburg) in Gau WeserEms for twelve years?
A. Eleven years in Cloppenberg (Oldberg).
Q. That was from 1934?
A. To 1945.
Q. And you repeatedly directed the neighboring Kreis Vechta?
A. Yes.
Q. You were one and one half years Ortsgruppenleiter previously?
A. Yes.
Q. Beyond these Kries did you have any insight into conditions in other districts? Speak slowly. You must make a pause.
A. As Ortsgruppenleiter, and later as Kreisleiter I could do that, because I repeatedly met with the political leaders and with the Kriesleiters.
Q. Were you, as Kriesleiter, employed for a salary or on an honorary basis? You must make a pause and then answer.
A. The first half on an honorary basis, and later for salary.
Q. What other political leaders in the Kreisleitung recieved a salary?
A. The Kries fuhrer, manager, the propaganda leader, the training director, and the head of the treasury.
Q. Did the paid political leaders inthe Kries receive special secret instructions?
A. No. Never.
Q. Did they have a better insight into conditions?
A. The got around more than the others, and heard more.
Q. Of what persons was the Kreisleitung made up?
A. First, the main or leadership offices. These were organization, propaganda, training and personnel, and afterwards the social care and technical offices such as the Kreis peasant leader, the Obmann of the DAF, the head of the NSV, the head of the office for educators, and the head of the office for civil servants.
Q. Were the numbers of the Kreisleitung, did they become with t heir appointment members of a corps of political leaders?
A. There was not corps of political leaders. If the party member in question was appointed, when he was appointed he became a political leader.
Q. Do you know of an order from Hess according to hich the designation "political organization" or "corps of political leaders" was forbidden?
A. The designation "political organization" was forbidden by the deputy of the Fuhrer.
Q. As Kreisleiter, you held conferences in the Kreisleitung. Who took part in these conferences?
A. There were two kinds; one, in the narrow circle, that was the Kreis staff, and one in the larger framework, in which representatives of the officials took part and men who were interested in bringing up special matters.
Q. Were the contents of the conference of a purely economic character, or were political questions also discussed?
A. Primarily there were questions of social care for the inhabitants of the Kries. At the end, I mostly give a brief survey of the last few weeks.
Q. Were not critical political questions discussed and instructions given on them which made reference to the removal of resistance against the waging of a war of aggression, for example, instructions on the Jewish question, and the Church question, the union question, and the arrest of political opponents?
A. Special instructions I did not have to give. It was strictly forbidden to carry on out own politics. We hever heard anything about preparations for war. If any measures were to be taken against political opponents that was the affair of the state.
Q. What instructions were given on the Jewish question and what was the aim?
A. On the Jewish question, which did not have any great significance with us in a country Kreis, we dealt primarily with the basic subject, that is, reducing the Jewish influence to a number of Jews corresponding to their total strength in Germany. The struggle against Churches was forbiddne on principle. I did not need to give any instructions on that subject, for my men were all Catholic and had remained in the Church.
Q. How about the Jewish drives on the 9th and 10th of November 1938? What instructions were given in that case?
A. I recieved no instructions, and I faced the accomplished fact.
Then together with the Landrat I immediately freed Jews who had been arrested, and subsequently I recieved strict prohibition from my Gauleiter to employ political leaders or Party members anywhere, and that was not done by us.
Q. What instructions were give on the question of the unions, and what was the aim there?
A. This measure of the Reichsleiter on the first or second of May was a complete surprise to us, and we ourselves as politicla leaders had nothing to do with it, and no instructions were issued.
Q. What instructions did you as Kriesleiter give regarding political opponents?
A. The treatment of political opponents was primarily the task of the state organizations. If I suspected anyone of being an opponent, I brought about a discussion with him, and as a result I had to take a few measures.
Q. Was there not, in fact, such a close relationship between the state police and the Kreisleiter that, in effect, it could at any time arbitrarily carry out the arrest of political opponents?
A. It would have been good, and when I repeatedly suggested that to the Gaulieter, the Gaulieter Karoew* said that these were state measures which were not out business as poli tical leaders.
Q. Witness, you did not understand me. I wanted to ask whether you did not have the possibility to have arrests made on the basis of your close relationship with the state police.
A. No, I could not do that. I had no close relationship with the state police.
I never had occasion to have these people arrested.
Q. On the orders of the Superior Party Officers, was not a card index of opponents kept ?
A. No; we never kept such a card index.
Q. Did the Gestapo keep such a card index, and did you help them ?
A. I cannot tell you. They never told me about it. I do not know. In any case, I did not help with it.
Q. Didyou not as Kreisleiter demand reports and political judgments on the basis of a domestic card index registration file, and were these not reports of spies ?
A. There was no domestic card index registration file in my Kreis. It was intended to set oneup, but it was never done. I never demanded spy reports, and I would not have received the,. But I asked for reports on the feelings on the effective measures of the States and of the Party.
Q. And what was the purpose of these reports ?
A. We wanted to know what the effect of the new orders on the great mass of the people was.
Q. How did you receive your instructions to the Gauleiter ?
A. I received my instructions in wirting, and also orally.
Q. Did the Kreisleiters take part in conferences with the Gauleiters, and who was present at such conferences ?
A. We did not always take part; only when something was being discussed that especially interested our own particular Kreis. At the conferences of the Gauleitung, the Gauleiter and consultants took part.
Q. What was the content of these conferences ? Did that correspond to what you said a while ago about the Kreisleiter conferences ?
A. It was about the same, only on a larger scale affecting the whole of our Gau.
Q. How were the Ortsgruppenleiters instructed by you ? Was that done in the sense of the conferences in the Gau with Kreisleiters, or were false reports passed on ?
A. After conferences with the Gauleitung, I regularly informed my men about what I had heard there, and I passed that on as my Gauleiter told it to me.