These people were condemned to death and shot as an expiation for crimes. The population was informed of their names by means of posters and was told that such people could expect pardon if no further murders of Germans took place. For one murdered German, 10 of these Poles were executed and the same thing was done with the Ukranians."
Does that not mean from the first days of the introduction of Frank's decree, it was merely a cover for mass executions of hostages and others similarly placed persons?
Q Then what does this sentence mean:
"For each slain German, 10 Poles not directly connected with the crime will be executed." What does that mean? by death, and who would be sentenced to death. It is possible that these Poles were designated as hostages, were called hostages.
Q That means the decree was a cover for executing hostages, does it not? more. Real shootings of hostages is shooting of people who are not criminals, who are innocent, and who are shot on account of an act committed by someone else
THE PRESIDENT: Do you think this will be a convenient time to break off?
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has heard with the deepest regret of the death of Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone of the Supreme Court of the United States of America. His loss will be most deeply felt in America where he had proved himself to be a great public servant. But it is fitting that this Tribunal, upon which the representatives of the United States sit, should express its sympathy with the American people in their great loss. appointed Attorney General of the United States in 1923 and two years later he became an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. In 1941 he became Chief Justice and discharged the duties of that high office with great ability and in accordance with the highest traditions. of the great loss the American people have sustained.
Mr. Justice Jackson, the Chief Prosecutor of the United States, is a member of the Supreme Court over which the Chief Justice presided and perhaps he would like to add a few words.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: May it please the Tribunal: United States that the news of the passing of Chief Justice Stone brings sadness to every American heart in Nurnberg but because he was the personal friend of so many of us. He had a rare capacity for personal friendship. No one was more kind to and thoughtful of younger men who from time to time came to Washington and they found in him guide, philosopher and friend. the American representatives to the Tribunal, Mr. Biddle and Judge Parker, feel the same way and many of the younger men on the staff had intimate contact with the Chief Justice which you might not expect if you had not known Harlan Stone.
most difficult periods and imparted to it the impress of his integrity, an impress which stayed with it and was traditional in the department, as we all know. always patient to hear the arguments of both sides and to arrive at his decision with that complete disinterestedness and detachment which is characteristic of the just judge. He presided with great fairness and with kindness to his associates and to those who appeared before him. qualities which we have come to associate with the New Englander.
The consolation of his friends lies in this: He died exactly as he would have chosen to die, in full possession of his faculties and in the discharge of his duties. of his passing and to allow us to record on behalf of the American Bar our appreciation of his talents and character.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Smirnov.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Before asking further questions of the witness I would like to make the following announcement.
In the questions put by Dr. Seidl it was stated that the document was false which is the official appendix to the report of the Government of the Polish Republic in the field of cultural valuables. this but would like the Tribunal to note that this is an official appendix to the the official report of the Government of the Polish Republic and thus can hardly be doubted.
May I continue with my questions now, please?
THE PRESIDENT: Did you say anything then?
WITNESS BUEHLER: I was going to ask something. Was it a document that contained a list of art treasures?
THE PRESIDENT: Is that the document, Colonel Smirnov, a document which contains a list of art treasures?
WITNESS BUEHLER: No, I do not mean that.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: No, Mr. President, it refers to the loss relating to cultural valuables, such as a list of libraries and similar damage.
THE PRESIDENT: It is U.S.S.R. 93, is it not, the document you are referring to?
COLONEL SMIRNOV: It is an appendix to the document U.S.S.R. 93.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, It deals with certain directives. That was the evidence that was given this morning.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: This is a list of cultural losses, an official appendix. It does not conatin directives but gives the financial sums which have been suffered by the public libraries of Poland.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there anything you want to say about it?
WITNESS BUEHLER: Yes; I do not think the description just given applies to the document which I had in mind. The document which I doubt contains directives regarding the cultural policy on Germany's part in the Government General. It does not concern itself with art treasures,or a listing of library property.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. What I took that you said this morning was that the directives which you thought were referred to in the document did not appear to have been made or at any rate you had not heard of them and you thought they might be forgeries.
WITNESS BEUHLER: I doubted the document, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the document.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: May I ask the next question?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: general had no direct connection with the actions undertaken by the police; is that right?
A May I hear that question again, please? ment general had close connections with police actions. Have I understood you correctly? of opinion. Apart from that the police were not under my jurisdiction; the chief of the police was in no way under my orders.
Q In that case the police were not included in your duties?
Q bVwey well. In that case how can you explain that no one but you especially has carried on successful negotiations with the police about successful utilization of the property of Jews who were executed in the camps? Do you remember those negotiations with the police?
A I didn't quite understand you. Regarding the what?
Q I am asking you this: If you had no direct connection with the police then how can you explain the fact that you, specifically you, were the person who was carrying on successful negotiations with the police about utilization of the Jewish property of the persons slain in the camps?
A I do not remember any such negotiations and I couldn't have conducted them The administration was of course that source which by orders from the Four Year Plan had to carry out the part to confiscate Jewish property.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. President, may I have the permission of submitting the document given to us by the American prosecution No. 2819-PS? The document describes the relationship between the government general and the economic department. It is addressed to Warsaw from Lublin. I am quoting the title of the document:
"The transfer of Jewish property to the administration of the government general.
"I am informing you herewith that on the 25th of February 1944 in the presence of the state secretary Dr. Buehler and other higher authorities of the SS and the police Obergruppenfuehrer Korte as well as the departmental chiefs the question was discussed of the transfer of the property of Jews which is now in storage which will be transferred to the administration of the government general. The decision reached on the subject was that the transfer should take place in the near future. The property which has been confiscated by the security police and the SD shall be transferred directly into my department. Please get in touch with the Obergruppe and the police with regard to the procedure." BY COLONEL SMIRNOV: the police?
A I had to work together with the police daily. I don't want to deny it for a moment, but I hadn't a right to give orders to the police. dealings with the police, was being transferred to the government general? On the basis of your negotiations with the police this property was transferred; is that not so?
A No, that is not correct. The property wasn't mentioned which originated from these Jews, but property questioned was property which was in a bad state originating from Jews, and which in accordance with decrees was being taken over by the police and removed from the jurisdiction of their administration. Jews who were not slain?
A Why not? Right from the beginning the police had taken over Jewish problems Subsequently they appropriated their property in a particular manner too. were not yet executed, who were still alive?
A The storehouses which have been mentioned here aren't to be interpreted as being concentration camps; they were goods which were stored. in camps? What were the other storehouses?
A I didn't know what things looked like in concentration camps since I have never entered or seen one; but that the police were appropriating mobile Jewish property that is something I was told about. I was told about it by the chief of my trustee department.
Q I am asking you this: In 1944 when the death sentences on a large scale were applied what other storehouses were there for Jewish property except the storehouses for the property of the Jews already executed? Do yo know of any other storehouses, and if so where were they?
A The Jews were deprived of their property on the spot. That Jewish property was located in concentration camps is something I have never assumed since I didn't know anything about these camps at all. And where the police took that mobile property to that is not clear to me. But apart from that -
Q Please note the date, the 25th of February 1944. At that time in Poland were there Jews still alive in concentration camps or were the Jewis ghettos already quite emptied by that time?
A The Jewish ghettos were empty, but Jews were still alive; I know that, because one way or another they were being used in armament industries Jewish property couldn't have been dragged out of the territory, it must have been somewhere in the government general, very probably near ghettos or wherever else the Jewish evacuation took place from. And this letter I emphasize does not concern stores which were in concentration camps, they were everywhere. Every place had somewhere some stores which originated fro resettlement of Jews, and their confiscated property.
Q The Jewish ghettos were already empty. In that case what happened to the Polish Jews if the ghettos were empty? --where were they? in the northeast of Europe, an intention of the chief of the RSHA which had been communicated to me the day of the conference in 1942 and stated to me emphatically.
Where to on the 25th of February 1944?
Q The document is dated 1944, the 25th of February 1944. Please note. Now, could you tell me whether regarding the close contact between the Gestapo and the administration of the government general whether the Gestapo chiefs were present at every conference in the government general? Does not that testify to the close contact, and were there no special meetings in the government general relating directly to police questions? ral governor was that he should have juridiction over the police, but the explanation of the reason why the governor general repeatedly called the police to come and join negotiations doesn't exclude the fact that the police had their own way and used methods of their own.
Q Yes, it is clear. However, were there no conferences in the government general dealing directly and only with the questions of the police?
Q Very well. Will you tell me just when was Mr. Kreuger dismissed as chief of police and who was appointed in his place? called away from his position at Cracow. He was replaced by Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe.
Q What were your personal relations with the latter?
AAfter that the relationship with the police was quite hostile.Whenever the administration had a wish regarding police juridiction such wish was always turned down by Krueger. It occurred that when Kreuger had left Cracow I tried to work together with the new higher SS and police leader and establish a good relationship so that in this manner I could influence the work of the police and the methods employed by the police.
Were they good, or were they bad? How would you define them? is on page 38, second paragraph of the Russian translation. I am quoting. It is a note of Frank to Himmler of the 12th of February 1944. It begins like this:
"Immediately after the salutations, the Reichsfuehrer of the SS Himmler entered into conversation with me and SS Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe. From the very beginning the Reichsfuehrer asked me how I was cooperating with the new Secretary of State for Security, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe. I said 'I feel deep satisfaction on the fact that between myself and SS Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe, as well as between Secretary of State, Dr. Buehler and him, there exists an extraordinarily comradely relationship and friendly cooperation.'" Does that correspond to facts, Mr. Witness?
weeks. This statement confirms just what I had stated here at the beginning, namely, that after Krueger had been replaced by Koppe, I always tried to establish a relationship which was a comradeship, so that I could influence the police and the Government General through Koppe. So that there wasn't any friction superficially speaking. cooperation; is that correct? forms. Apart from that, our daily problems brought me together with Koppe, so, for instance, there was the question of Jewish property. That was a question which one couldn't have possibly discussed under Krueger since he had the viewpoint that the entire Jewish property was belonging to the SS. Police, did anything change with regard to the Polish population? Were the Polish measures softened? Did they become less repressive with Koppe's arrival?
16th of December 1943. Please show the defendant the original. Incidentall is that your signature there? Is it your name there among those who were present? The list of names is on page 154.
A Government meeting, 16th December 1943? Yes, I signed that, that's right.
Q Do you remember who was Ohlenbusch? department. the police administration, or did he not? the police was regularly present. direct connections with the police or not? Government, he did of course have connections to the police, official connections. not?
A Yes, of course. As far as his official position was concerned, he came under me.
Q I am quoting here a short extract from page 176. The members of the Tribunal will find it on page 38, paragraph 3. Page 33, I'm sorry.
"We must discuss the question of whether it will be wise to execute people in the same places where an attempt on the life of a German was made. We should also discuss the question whether it would not be possible to organize or establish special places for the executions, since it is established that the Polish population arrive to whatever places executions take place, collect the soil soaked in the blood of those executed, and take such little bit of soil to church." administration?
A. It doesn't mention buckets of blood in my translation. It says containers. I don't think that blood flowed to fill buckets.
Q. No, no. We are talking here about containers or vessels into which the soil was placed. Do you not consider the question of organizing secret places for execution a purely police question?
A. I am of the same opinion. For this reason, this affair was by no means approved of. But perhaps I may add that at the same time German passers through were daily killed when they were traveling through Cracow and Warsaw, and that this affair was brought about due to the excitement which was taking place among the German population at the time.
Q. I am asking you about something else, Mr. Witness. Do you not consider the fact that this question was discussed at the initiative of the police and that even the officials of the civilian administration had only indirect connection with this -- or was it otherwise?
A. No, I wouldn't way so. This wasn't suggested as a police measure. It arose from the threat from which the Germans were suffering at that stage, that period of the occupation.
Q. This question of the secret places for execution, did it arise at the initiative of Ohlenbusch, or do you deny that?
A. What do you mean, this question?
Q. Did it arise at the initiative of Ohlenbusch, or do you deny that?
A. I don't know whether this was discussed at all. In my opinion -
Q. (Interposing) Before you are the minutes of that conference at which you were present.
A. Yes. It is referring here to statements made by Ohlenbusch, if I am not mistaken. Yes, it mentions President Ohlenbusch in here, that's right.
Q. I am going on to the next question. Were there no reports read at the conference to Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe about the following? On page 34 in the second paragraph there is a quotation which I want to give. It is on page 180 of the text. Beginning quotation:
"For accidents on the railway there have been 150 persons shot and 50 Polish terrorists have been shot on the place of the crime for the death of one German official.
However, we should take into consideration the fact that during the shooting of 200 persons, more than 3,000 persons were usually concerned, including close and distant relatives." same severe measures, the same barbarous measures, were taken in Poland with regard to the civilian population as previous to Koppe's arrival?
A. As far as this mentions the shooting of 150 and 50 people respectively this obviously doesn't concern the shooting of hostages, which never did have the approval of the Governor General or my approval. If I have nevertheless stated that in its entirety Koppe's regime appeared milder to me, then I must stand by that statement of mine.
Q. The shooting of the hostages was not approved either by you or by the Governor General; is that what you are saying?
A. They did not have my approval, and I don't think they had the approval of the Governor General.
Q. Will you please look at page 185, beginning quotation, "The Governor General -
A. Interposing) Just a moment; I haven't found it yet.
Q. "The Governor General expresses to Obergruppenfuehrer SS Koppe his gratitude for his total efforts in the field with which he is connected, and wants to mention that he is a great expert in the police matters. He promises to Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe the cooperation of all the departments of the Government General and wishes him success in his work."
How should we interpret this statement? In view of the answer you just gave before to the other question, how should we interpret this statement now?
A. This statement of the Governor General does not apply to these 50 or 150 people. It applies to the work in its entirety which was to be done by Koppe in the Government General. And in consideration of the principles that should apply to that work, one of the principles was that shooting of hostages were no longer to take place. It is quite possible that in this case that principle had not yet been applied and achieved.
Q. Please stop here for a minute. Just before this you read Koppe's report dealing with the shooting of the hostages, on page 180, and subsequent to that the Governor General expressed his approval. Does that not mean that the Governor General approved this activity of Koppe's?
A Well, this was not the only statement made by Koppe. The statement of the Governor General was referring to the statements made by Koppe, and not only to that one bit.
Q Very well. In that case, he also approved this report and this statement. was influencing Koppe so that the shooting of hostages was no longer to happen. chief of police, who personally issued a decree to shoot one male citizen from every household in which a poster announcing a Polish national holiday should be found? book on the first page.
"The Governor General received Dr. Waechter, who explained that posters announcing Polish national holidays were being posted throughout the city. The Governor General immediately issued a decree that in every household where such a poster is found, one male person should be shot. This decree must be carried out by chief of the police, Dr. Waechter. Dr. Waechter arrested 120 hostages immediately in connection with this situation."
Do you remember that? Who introduced the practice of taking hostages? ference?
A Please, will you answer my question? Was I there or was I not? please.
Would you answer the following question, please? Your residence in Krakow took place according to the decree of Dr. Waechter, where Dr. Waechter detained 120 hostages. Now, are you trying to tell me that you did not know that 120 hostages were detained?
that hostages were shot at all.
Q Please answer the following question. Have I understood you correctly to have said today that there was no famine in Poland, that there was no dearth of food?
A What? I didn't understand that.
Q Yes, this is a question. Have I understood you to have said that there was -
Q I am asking that you be shown the speech of Dr. Buehler, State Secretary, at a meeting on the 31st of May 1943, in Krakow, and I am quoting:
"The Administration of the Government General considers it quite clear that for some time already the food quota established for non-Germans in Poland cannot in the future be maintained at the same level without allowing an increase in the activity of the population and thus lead the population to revolt. Quite naturally, the insufficiency of the food supply affects the mood of the population. However, the increased activity on the one hand, and the decrease in wages on the other, leads to further depression."
Did you not say that?
A I could follow the first part, but I didn't find the last sentence. second sentence. "Part of the Polish population is, by this time, in despair." That is also there in your test!
A Where does it say so, please? Would you show it to me?
(The text was indicated to the witness)
A (continuing) Yes, I have made these statements.
Q I also have this question. Do you not think that your announcement made in 1943 testifies to the fact that you have testified falsely today?
A No; no. What I meant by my statement was that the population had to help themselves, and I regarded it as helping themselves when a worker remained away from his place of work for three days and was looking after his food supplies.
That was considered by me to be a desperate step on the part of the worker. population to obtain the necessary food supplies but that it was not impossible, so that a famine and catastrophe was not noticed by me at all. of the Government General were country people so that famine, to a considerable degree, could not happen at all. It may be, then, that the low part of the country had been exploited completely. in the Government General, a revolt could take place, and you also stated that the population was in despair. Is that not evidence of the fact that there was famine in the country?
A When I said "revolt" I meant "disquiet". I didn't mean an armed uprising. It is quite clear that order, and the will to work, did suffer from the lack of rations. I stated this morning how it happened that the supplies for the Poles couldn't be carried out. On the other hand, however, there was such a considerable free market and black market that the worker too, if he had sufficient time, could obtain the necessary rations; and time which he didn't have, he took. That was the help of which I was ***
Q Please answer the following question. Is it now true that the Poles had only such chances for education which, according to the idea of Frank and Goebbels, would merely emphasize the future fate of their nation?
A There were efforts which could be felt; there were efforts to keep the level of education down. These tendencies originated in Berlin, from Himmler.
A What?
A They were closed; they were closed and they were not reopened.
However, certain courses took place in Warsaw, in Lubeck, during which university education was passed on to these people, but these courses were to be closed out by demand from the Reich. issued to close the universities. Perhaps you recognize the signature? It is an official report. and was signed by the Governor General on the 1st of November, 1940.
Q Tell me, were there not only workingmen's schools left in Poland?
A Not only handicraft schools remained. There were, for instance, commercial schools, and there was a group of them. Apart from that, there were trade schools and elementary schools, which were installed to a full extent. to train workers, petty officials, tradesmen; craft schools, in other words?
A Whether only small persons or other attended them, I don't know, but at any rate, they had to level off commercial schools. at Warsaw destroyed? Can you answer that question?
A I don't know for certain. I heard once that it had been the Fuehrer's wish that the walls of the castle in Warsaw should be razed to the ground. destroyed?
A I don't know whether it was blown up; that I don't know.
Q But it was destroyed. Who ordered it to be destroyed, do you know?
Q Defendant, I show you the place where I would like to quote. It is found on page 1 of the document book, and it is a very brief quotation. I am reading:
"The Fuehrer discussed with the Governor General the general situation and the approved general administration, specifically referring to the destruction of the royal palace and of other parts of the city."
At whose directive, then, was it destroyed? Do you see?
A It is not known to me that the castle was destroyed. As far as I know it was meant to be destroyed on one occasion, a plan which was, however, discarded.
Q Was it not in your presence that Dr. Frank, on the 31st of April 1943, gave a decree to apply police measures while recruiting manpower?
A I should have to see the minutes. I can't remember it offhand.
Q If you please (handing papers to the witness). The place which I should like to quote is on page 46, in the last paragraph. Quoting:
"Discussion with Secretary of State Dr. Buehler, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Krueger and Dr. Frauendorfer in the presence of Reich Minister Dr. SeyssInquart. Subject of discussion is the deportation of workers, especially agricultural workers, to the Reich. The Governor-General states that as all methods in the way of appeals, etc. have been unsuccessful, one must come to the conclusion now that the Poles evaded this duty to work, either out of malice or with the intention of doing Germany indirect harm by not placing themselves at its disposal. He therefore asked Dr. Frauendorfer whether there were any more measures left which had not yet been taken in order to win the Poles over voluntarily. Reichshauptamtsleiter (head of a Reich head office) Dr. Frauendorfer answered this question in the negative.
"The Governor General stated in conclusion that the path had now been indicated.
"Where the Labor Department could not achieve any more, the police would have to step in."
Is that not a decree to apply police measures in recruiting manpower?
A I wouldn't contradict the statement, since I have seen the minutes. It is one of the utterances of the Governor General which, I believe,were not altogether made voluntarily, but which did in no way alter my course which I took on this question.
Q Please answer the following: Were you not present on the 18th of August 1942 at the discussion of Sauckel with Frank, and was it not in your presence that Doctor Frank spoke to Sauckel joyfully about sending new echelons of workers to the Reich with the help of the police and with methods of recruiting? recruiting of workers I had a conference with the Reichs Commissioner Sauckel before the visit to the Governor General took place. I cannot now remember whether I was present when Reichs Commissioner Sauckel visited the Governor General.
I would ask you therefore to let me have a look at the minutes.
Q Will you show the witness the minutes?
(Papers were handed to the witness.)
Quoting two short sentences:
"Doctor Funk: I am very glad that I can inform you officially that after this date, as of today we have sent to Germany over 800,000 workers. Only a short time ago you asked for more, for another 140,000. I am happy to inform you officially that in accordance with our agreement of yesterday, 60 per cent of these new Poles will be sent before the end of October, whereas the other 40 per cent will be dispatched to the Reich before the end of the year."
On page 120 there is one other sentence I want to quote:
"Besides the 140,000 you can count during the following year on new echelons of workers. Now that we have been using police measures you can count on a considerable number more than the following year."
Doesn't that imply the use of quite unorthodox police methods in recruiting manpower?
A I don't recollect that I have been present on that occasion, so I can in no way confirm or deny whether that was done in this particular way.
COLONEL SMIRNOV: Mr. President, I have no more questions of the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to re-examine?
DR. SEIDL: I have a fewmore questions to ask the witness. to have arisen. The question which I put in connection with Document USSR Exhibit 93 really referred to Appendix 1, which has the title "Cultural Life in Poland." That appendix deals with directives regarding the cultural policy which the administration of the Government General was supposed to have issued, and the way I understood the witness was that he was only to answer that particular question and not refer to the other appendices, such as, for instance, confiscated art treasures.
Perhaps it would have been better if he had not used the word "forged". At any rate, he wanted to say that he didn't know the directives in question.