the cities such as Warsaw, Cracow, Lemberg, and the industrial areas in the center of Poland, had previously been dependent to a large extent on the surrounding country, on the peasants, for their food. There was now in this area a lack of grain, a lack of storage facilities of all kinds. the government of the Government General had to try to reconstruct all these missing, establishments, and therefore the supply of the population was increasingly difficult. It wasn't intdended to supply them fully right away but to improve it gradually. I have always, seen to it that in whatever directives were issued against the Black Market margins were provided for the acquisition of foodstuffs, and that the population of the cities should have the possibility of finding a way to the producer. but an order came from the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan which ordered not to improve the rations, not to increase the rations, but to send certain quotas of foodstuffs to the Reich. All these foodstuffs in fact were not taken from that area, but they were used up by the armed forces right there. officials of the Four-Year Plan for improvement of the food supply conditions of the Polish population. That struggle was not without success. In many cases it was possible to increase the rations, especially of the workers in armament industries and other privileged groups of the working population, to a considerable extent. General it was not easy to get the daily needs. On the other hand, in the Government General there were no famines and no epidemics. A Polish and Ukrainian Committee which had delegations in all districts of the Government General worked out a program for the supply of foodstuffs for those parts of the population in greatest need. I have intervened that this committee shoul be supplied with the greatest possible amounts of foodstuffs, in order to have the greatest possible success in its welfare actions, and it is known to me that that committee took special care of the children of large cities.
Q. Witness, what were the measures that the Governor General took to safeguard art treasures in the areas under his administration?
A. Already with the decree of the 16th of December 1939 the Reichs Leader SS, in his capacity as Reichscommissioner for the Security of Germandom, without knowledge of the Governor General, confiscated all art treasures of the Government General and ordered that they be transported into the Reich. The Governor General was successful in preventing that transport or most of it. for the Four-Year Plan, State Secretary Muehlmann, who claimed that he had the authority from the Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan. I asked to see that authority. It was signed, not by Goering himself but by a man of his surroundings, Kritzbach. He was charged with the task of securing the art treasures of the Government General; and in order to tie this man with the Government General, the Governor General charged him with the safeguarding of this art treasures of the Government General. conferences which took place with the Governor General that the Governor General always placed the emphasis on the fact that these art treasures should stay within the area of the Government General.
Q. The Prosecution, under No. U.S.A. 378, that is Document 1709-PS, submitted a report about the entire activity of the Special Plenipotentiary for the safeguarding of art treasures in the Government General. On page 6 of that report we read, and I quote:
"The reason for investigation task of the State Secretary of the Government General of the 30th July 1942: to examine and investigate the entire activity of the Special Plenipotentiary for the safeguarding and securing of art treasures in the Government General." and did the report lead to serious objections?
A. The reason for that investigation caused a collision of duties for me between the job given to me by the Reich and by the tasks entrusted to me by the Governor General. I had also heard that several museums did not take care properly of several of their art objects. The result of the investigation was that the State Secretary, Muehlmann, could not be blamed in any way.
Q. The Prosecution has submitted another document, 3042-PS, U.S.A. Exhibit 375. It is affidavit by Doctor Muehlmann, and I quote:
"I was the Special Plenipotentiary of the Governor General of Poland, Hans Frank, for the safeguarding of art treasures in the Government General October 1939 until September 1943. The task was given to me by Goering in his function as chairman of the Reichs Defense Counsel. I confirm that it was the official policy of the Governor General, Hans Frank, to safeguard and secure all important art treasures, official installations, private collections, and as much as belonged to the Church of Poland. I also confirm that the art objects mentioned were actually confiscated, and I am aware that in case of a German victory they would not have remained in Poland, but would have been used for the completion of German art collections."
I ask you now: Is it correct that the Governor General from the very beginning considered all art treasures which had been secured as property of the Government General?
As far as they had been in a property, they were secured; but never did the Governor General think of transferring them to the Reich. If he would have wanted that, he could have used the situation of the war to send these art treasures to Germany. But where that witness get his knowledge from, I do not know. It is a letter of the Commander of the Security Police, the SD, for the District of Krakow, to the District Tomaszow, of the 19th of July, 1944. There we read, among other things, and I quote:
"The Higher SS and Police Leader Ost issued the following order:"
I skip a few sentences and quote:
"The Reichsfuehrer SS has, with the approval of the Governor General, ordered that in all cases where attempts at assassination at Germans were made or where vital installations were destroyed, not only the culprits should be shot but, beyond that, all men of the family should also be executed, and women over sixteen should be sent to concentration camps." this problem with the Reichsfuehrer SS and whether he had given his approval?
A I know nothing about an order of that kind. During the second half of *** once an order about the responsibility of families came through, but I could not say now whether that was concerned with the Reich or with the Government General, a police order I would say. However, if that formula -
Q Was it with the approval of the Government General? questioned the Governor General on that point. of the Governor General? against all executions without trials and without reasons. objections to the Fuehrer about the measures of the Police and the SD?
A Yes; I myself have seen at least half a dozen of memoranda, either directed to the Fuehrer or via the Chief of the Reich Chancellory. I have written these letters myself, which contained objections against executions; against perpetrations which had to do with the recruiting of workers; about the displacing of populations from other areas without the approval of the Governor General; and about the conditions of nutrition, about happenings generally which were contrary to the principles of an orderly administration. USA 610. That is thememorandum to theFuehrer of the 19/6/43. Is this memorandum essentially different from any other memoranda which you have seen; and what was the reaction of the Fuehrer to such objections?
A This memorandum is somewhat different. The former memoranda were straight objections against these happenings, against theperpetrations by the Police. After these memoranda remained unsuccessful, upon the order of the Governor General, I made theobjections which are contained in this memorandum in the form of a political suggestion. The perpetrations mentioned there were not caused by the Governor General, but they were objections against the meddling of other officers.
Q In the diary we find on the 26th of October'43, a report about four years of German reconstruction in the Government General which you, yourself, have made. On the basis of what material did you compile that report? thirteen main departments of the Government had given me. of the Government General to the Polish and Ukrainian people, as you have come to know it during your five years? activities as Chief of the Administration? improve the advantage taken from this area by increasing the substance. In order to achieve that, a decent treatment of the population was necessary, no restrictions on freedom and property. Those were the principles of policy according to which, upon the orders of the Governor General, I have always acted as chief of the administration.
work of conditions to grant to the population a certain minimum of cultural freedom and development? of this desire found a great deal of resistance on the part of the Security Police, the Propaganda Ministry of the Reich, or also mainly from conditions; but the Governor General intended to see to it that the Polish and Ukrainian populations should not be excluded from cultural activities. the higher schools and that, therefore, in disregard of directives of the Reich, he established the so-called trade courses and higher schools? in Warsaw and Lemberg on the principles of college teaching. As a matter of principle, the Governor General also intended to open gymnasiums, middle schools, seminaries for priests, but it always failed due to the objections of the Security Police. Since no compromise could be made, in October '44, upon the orders of the Governor General, on my own I directed the opening of high schools and seminaries for priests with a certain amount of money for the Poles. Two days after the publication of that directive, I was told, and it was transmitted to me as the opinion of the Fuehrer, that I had gone beyond my authority.
Q Dr. Frank has spoken about the principle of the unity of administration and about the fact that the Governor General was thedeputy of the Fuehrer and the deputy of the authority of theReich. Was this according to facts, and what other offices of the Reich and the Party meddled into the administration of the Governor General? and in many important fields was limited. So, for instance, before the establishment of the Governor General, the Reichsfuehrer SS had received powers for all occupied territories to be concerned about the strengthening of Germandom. The Plenipotentiary for the Four-Year Plan also had authority in the Government General, but many other offices, as the armament industry, railroad, building industries, and other fields tried, and tried successfully, to acquire influence in the parts of the administration of the Government General.
After the Governor General lost his offices as Reichsleiter in 1942, there was a great rush in that direction. I would like to say that there was a sort of enthusiasm to tear parts off the crown of the king of Poland. and who paid them and who took care of them?
arrested by Krueger and that it wasn't even possible for the Government General to achieve their release. I remind you of the case of Scipessi.
A Yes. Well, that I can confirm from my own experience. Even some people who were around me were arrested without my being notified. In a case like that, I would send an ultimatum to the commander of the Security Police to release the functionary and when he was not released and I demanded the recall of that official of the Security Police, the result was that Himmler expressed his special confidence in his functionaries of his police. to work under normal conditions?
A I should like to say, never, at no time at all. During the first year we were too busy to reconstruct destroyed villages, destroyed cities, destroyed means of transportation; bridges had been blown up in large numbers and after these destroyed objects, as far as it was possible during the war, were repaired, the Government General was already an area of deployment for the war against the East, against the Russians, and then an area through which troops marched to the front and rear area. It was the great workshop, repair shop for the front. draft of a law about the treatment of foreign elements. What was the attitude of Dr. Frank toward the draft?
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks that the matters which the witness is going into are really matters of common knowledge. Everyone knows about that. I think you might take the witness over this ground a little bit faster than you are.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, sir. He gave the answer already. BY DR. SEIDL:
THE PRESIDENT: But I am speaking for the future, Dr. Seidl.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, sir.
BY DR. SEIDL: of a law for the treatment of foreign elements. What was the attitude of the Governor General? a conversation with Heydrich in February 1942, Heydrich told me, as a special mission, to try to have the Governor General retract his protest against that law. The Governor General refused.
Q The prosecution haspresented a chart which shows Dr. Frank as having authority over the Reich Minister of Justice. Did such a relation or such a channel exist?
A That must be an error; such a thing never existed. the Governor General and the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler? individuals, were so different.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, I thought we had been hearing what the relationswere all morning, between the Governor General and the Reichsfuehrer.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, I will not put that question. BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, the Soviet prosecution, under No. USSR 93, submitted an annex to the report of the Polish Government and that annex describes the cultural life in Poland. I have shown it to you once before and would like you to tell me whether in fact the Governor General or his Government ever issued such directives? any of these directives signed by the Governor General. The document which has been shown to me, seems to me to be a forgery, a misinformation, and it can be recognized as such from its contents. policies of the Governor General and which are in contradiction to what you said before as a witness. How can you explain these contradictions?
in contradiction to what I said, but they are actually in fact in contradiction to what I said here and am going to say as a witness. Since I have heard these statements frequently myself, I tried to figure out how he came to them and I can only say that Frank probably, more than necessary, took part in the conversations, the discussions of the Government officers. There was hardly ever any conversation or meeting in which he did not take part and that was the reason that he had to speak very often--many times during one day, and I would like to say that in 99% of all cases he spoke without preparation; he improvised, and just upon his temperament, and frequently I witnessed that he made such grotesque statements and retracted them again in one of the following sentences or at the next opportunity and tried to straighten him out, and I also witnessed how he retracted authority which he had given to someone. I am sure that if I could go through it, I could give you a dozen statements to the contrary upon each one of these.
A May I still say the following? If the Governor General was to go with the members of his administration, he never made any such statements--at least, I cannot remember it. These statements were always made when the Higher SS and Police Fuehrer was sitting next to him, so that I had the impression that in such moments he was not free.
Q The diary of the Defendant Dr. Frank has about ten to twelve thousand typewritten pages. Who kept this diary -- he, himself, or somebody else. first by stenographer Dr. Meitinger; later by two stenographers, Kauk and Mohr, and it was kept in that manner, that these stenographers during the conferences, were in the room and took notes. other sides about what had been spoken, had been mentioned at the conference. to jot down literally everything but only put down conclusions, according to the sense. I have also experienced that I was asked as to what the Governor General had meant in any particular instance.
Q Did the Governor General read these diary notes later?
THE PRESIDENT: How can this witness tell whether he read the notes later?
DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, the witness, Dr. Buehler, was the closest collaborator.
THE PRESIDENT: If you wanted to put that sort of question, you should have asked the defendant Frank. BY DR. SEIDL:
Q A further question, witness. According to your observations, what caused the Governor General not to destroy that diary but when he was arrested to turn it ever?
THE PRESIDENT: That, again, is a matter which rests in the mind of Dr. Frank, not of this witness; why he did not destroy it.
DR. SEIDL: He answered the question already, and I am not going to put that question any more. BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Now, one last question. In 1942, following the speeches made by Dr. Frank, he was deprived of all his Party offices. What were the consequences for his position as Governor General?
A I have also referred to that. It weakened his authority considerably and the administration in the Government General became increasingly difficult. ing or orally has offered his resignation?
A Yes; applications for his resignation, I have frequently written myself and I know that he has asked for it also frequently.
DR. SEIDL: I have no more questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any other defendants' counsel wish to ask any questions?
DR. SERVATIUS: Dr. Servatius, for Sauckel. BY DR. SERVATIUS: the Polish workers who came to Germany, came before April 1942, into the Reich, that is, before Sauckel got into office?
A. I could not make any definite statement about that, but I know that the recruitment of labor went on with lesser and lesser results, that the main quotas probably came during the first years.
Q. The quotas of labor which had been demanded by the Governor General, were they reduced by Sauckel in consideration of the fact that so many Poles were already working in the Reich?
A. I know of one case, yes; the deputy of Suackel talked to me about it, President Strube.
Q. Is it true that from the Polish area, Himmler for his own purposes recruited workers, and that is to say, without knowledge of Sauckel and without sticking to the directives which Sauckel had issued?
A. I assume that that happened. Whenever I was told about raids against workers, I tried to clear those up, and the police said "That is the labor authority," and the labor people said "It is the police." But I know that once at a visit in Warsaw he has spoken about the loafers standing around, and I consider it quite possible that these raids, these manpower raids in Warsaw, occurred without cooperation and without information of the labor authorities by the police.
Q. Do you know about the directives by Sauckel?
A. I have not seen them in detail, and I don't remember them very well. I only know that Sauckel had stated on the occasion of a visit in Cracow that he had not ordered any violence.
Q. Was that a speech, an address?
A. No; that was a conference.
Q. Do you recall an address which Sauckel made in Cracow to the various\ officials?
A. He spoke as a Party speaker.
Q. Did he say anything about the treatment of the workers at that occasion?
A. These statements were made in a conference which preceded the visit to the Governor General.
Q. And what did he say?
A. My people had told him, and his people, that arrests had occurred, and he answered that as far as he was concerned he had not ordered any violence, and disputed definitely that arrests of people from movies or other places of assembly had ever been ordered or caused, by him.
Q. Do you know the structure of the labor administration, manpower administration, in the Government General?
A. The manpower department was part of my field.
Q. Did Sauckel have any immediate influence into the execution?
A. He not only had influence, but he sent a plenipotentiary who was not under my authority.
Q. Was it possible for that plenipotentiary to go about with the recruitment?
A. If he wanted, yes.
Q. In what manner? Could he give any directives or immediate orders?
A. The recruitment columns were not under my authority. They had been established by Sauckel. I have tried on several occasions to get these people within my organization, and these attempts were always counteracted with the argument that these recruitment columns had been put in action in all the occupied territories, that they could not be tied down to one particular area. was in charge of the main department; Labor President Strube was on one hand dependent on the directives of Sauckel, on the other hand, he was also subordinate to me and responsible to me as far as he acted as president of the main department, Labor.
Q. This forced recruitment that was necessary -- with what personnel was that done? Could the recruitment columns do that?
A. I do not know that. The plenipotentiary always disputed the fact of forced recruitment.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the defendants counsel wish to ask questions? Does the Prosecution desire to cross examine?
BY COLONEL SMIRNOV:
Q Mr. Witness, I would like to learn just exactly what was your official position in 1940, from 1940 and up to the moment of the liberation of Poland. Were you Frank's first deputy? November 1939, I served the Governor General in a leading position in his staff. In November 1939, I became chief of the office of the Governor General, that is, the Central Administrative Office of the Governor General, in Cracow. During the second half of the year 1940 the designation of that function was changed into State Secretary of the Government, and I was Secretary of State of the Government General until I left Cracow on the 18th of January 1945.
Q In that case you were the first deputy of Frank. That is, when he was absent you would take his place.
A My field was definitely limited. I had administrative matters to take care of. Under my authority were not the police, the Party, not the armed forces, and not the various Reich offices within the area of the Government General. The deputy of the Governor General was Seyss-Inquart, Reichsminister Seyss-Inquart.
Q And after Seyss-Inquart left? and I could not state the month any more, but, I think in 1941 I was designated the deputy of the Governor General, but that appointment was only made with modifications. I was supposed to be the deputy of the Governor General only when he was neither present in the area nor -
Q (Interposing) Please do not describe it in such detail. Answer me briefly. When Frank left, who took over his duties?
A I answer in the way my conscience tells me to. Whenever Frank was not in the area and could not be reached outside of the area, then I was supposed to be his deputy.
Q I understand. In that case you took his place when he was away. Correct? outside of the area.
Q Yes. That is just what I asked you about. I would like the defendant to be shown the stenographic report of a conference of the 25th of January, I believe it is, which includes the list of those who were present.
The Tribunal will find the place which -
THE PRESIDENT: What year? You say the 25th of January.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: 1943. The Tribunal will find it on page 27, USSR 232, paragraph 6. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: present?
Q I shall quote three sentences. Please give the defendant the original. Quoting three sentences from the speech of Dr. Frank "I would like to emphasize one thing.
We must not be too soft when we hear about 70,000 persons being shot. These persons are also victims of the war. Let us think, first of all, of us who are here on the list of war criminals of President Roosevelt. I have the honor of being war criminal number one on that list, which means that we are now conspirators on the scaleof world, history." Do you think that Frank had considerable reason to consider you one of the very active war criminals on that list? all that is necessary.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, that is not an answer to the question The question was, do you consider yourself to be one of those criminals?
THE WITNESS: I do not consider myself a criminal. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: then recollect who personally -- I emphasize the word "personally" with regard to the Polish population? I am talking about the decree of the 2nd of October 1942. Were you not one of the participants and perpetrators of that decree?
A Which measures? Which decree? I would like to be shown it.
Q I am talking about the decree signed October 2, 1943, USSR No. 335, the decree about introducing special courts martial conducted by the secret police. of influence. that decree?
A Yes. The decree comes from the police.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: The place which I want to quote, Mr. President, you will find on page 35, the fourth paragraph of the document I mentioned, the USSR document. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV:
Q Were you not the person who, together with Dr. Weh, at the time when even Frank was indecisive about signing that decree, tried to convince him to sign that decree introducing frankly terroristic measures and legalizing police authority?
Quoting page 1012 of the minutes of the conference taken by Dr. Buehler and by advisor Dr. Weh:
"The subject of the conversation is the draft of a decree re the combatting of attacks on the German work of reconstruction in the General Government, submitted to the Governor General by Dr. Weh.
"After a short explanation by Secretary of State Dr. Buehler and Dr. Weh, the Governor General withdraws his objections and signs the draft decree."
Were you not the person?
Q I am asking you: Were you not the person who influenced Frank to sign that decree as quickly as possible?
Q No. That means the minutes are false?
Q In that case, how do you expect me to understand you?
A Yes, I can explain that. The draft for that decree had been made by SS Oberfuehrer Bierkamp and had been presented to the Governor Genera. The Governor General -
Q (Interposing): Will you please -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): He is in the middle of his answer. You must let the man answer. What were you saying? You were saying the draft had been made by somebody?
THE WITNESS: The draft had been submitted to the Governor General by Bierkamp who had just come into the Government General. The Governor General returned it to him and gave him the order to have it modified in the legislati department, and when it was presented to the Governor General, the objections of the Governor General were as to whether the legislative department had worked it out or not. I cannot assume the material responsibility for this draft, and I did not have to. BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: the decree had not yet been sufficiently worked out, is that it?
Q And after that the Governor General signed the decree? 1943, when a letter of Count Ronokier was discussed, mentioned the practical implications of this cruel decree of the 2nd of October, stating that the application of the decree would allow, in the future, the masking of shooting of hostages and would give the shooting of hostages a legal cover, so to speak?
A I ask that the question be repeated. I only understood part of it. October 1943, spoke about the practical implications of the decree of the 2nd of October, stating that it would allow masking the shooting of hostages as that would then be covered by a legal decree, so to speak?
A It is not quite clear to me. May I repeat what I understood?
conference on the 23rd of October, 1944 -
A 1943. Who, at the occasion of a conference on the 23rd of October 1943 stated -- stated what? October, the shooting of hostages would be properly covered up by a -
A No, no. I did not make a statement of that kind. fourth paragraph. Quoting your words:
"Secretary of State Dr. Buehler considers it necessary to sentence in advance by court martial those Poles who are to be shot. One must also in the future avoid calling these Poles hostages, for the shooting of hostages alarms public opinion abroad and especially prejudices the world against the conduct of the Germans in the Government General." object against the executions without trial. Gestapo officials as justice, not insult, not mockery?
A Which court do you refer to? I pleaded for courts martial. officials of the Gestapo in accordance with the decree of October 2. to that aggravation of the court martial order of 2 October, so you can understand how he came psychologically to that decree. May I do that?
Q I am not particularly interested in the psychology of it. What I want to know is whether a court consisting of the officials of the secret police can really be called a court, whether it isn't an insult to the very idea of a court of justice?
A The military courts had to be definitely named according to the decree. I am not of the opinion that a court, simply because there are only police individuals in it, should not be considered a court. in regard to the decree of the 2nd of October. Generally, I demanded trials and regretted the shooting of hostages, considered it a very regrettable fact.
Q You have avoided answering my question directly. Perhaps you will look at paragraph 3 of the decree which states of whom the court was to consist, paragraph 3 and paragraph 4. Quoting paragraph 4:
"The courts martial carried out by the Security Police are to consist of one fuehrer of the SS who also belongs to the administration of the security Police, and of two other assistants belonging to the same organization." that kind, would result almost invariably in executions?
A Did you ask me?
A Whether I considered that a court? I mean, you ask me about things which did not come from my field of work. I could not say anything as to why the courts were named like that, and I could not say anything about it.
Q Perhaps you will look at the signature under that decree. It is signed by Frank, and it was you specifically who tried to convince Frank to sign that decree
A I thought before that I had corrected that error. I did not convince Frank to sign that order. I told him that that order was worked out in the legal department, and therefore I have to reject any responsibility for that order, because it did not come from within my province.
Q I shall pass on to another question. Do you recollect the first results of the decree? Specifically, do you remember at all the report of Obergruppenfuehrer Bierkamp at the conference of the 27th of October 1943? Do you remember anything about that?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: The place I would like to cite, Mr. President, can be found by the Tribunal on page 36 of our document, in the last paragraph of the text, Quoting: "The Security Police had many people in its hands who has committed punishable acts since the 10th October on the basis of the decree of that date.