It is put up for discussion there that such evidence can only be required if it is a question of coordination within the racial community. The reason for that matter was that in the field of expert opinions on eugenics, as I have already mentioned, in the course of the war a bottleneck had arisen. This led to accumulations of cases according to numerous reports by presidents of district courts of appeals. In such cases one had to wait from two to five years before it was possible to get the required expert opinion, and just that was the reason to give concern in cases which deals with Aryanization, because these people were interested in obtaining a decree as soon as possible. The question was discussed already in the conference of Presidents of District Courts of Appeal of February 1944 at Weimar. That can be seen from Exhibit 100, NG-674. And at that tine already we emphasized. the difficulties which had arisen and the necessity to limit the use of these means of evidence. The aim which we had in mind was to see to it that evidence in the form of investigations of eugenics should be reserved for those cases where the parties concerned were urgently interested to receive a decision as soon as possible, and those were particularly the cases of Aryanization. Therefore, we were not at all concerned in this case with persecuting the Jews, but to obtain some favors for these cases, favorable conditions, so that these trials could be carried out as quickly as possible, and as orderly as possible.
THE PRESIDENT: The only favor would be to the advantage of the person who successfully proved that he was not a Jew, wouldn't it?
THE WITNESS: In my opinion the aim of every case, particularly in status cases, is to establish the truth, and for that these means of evidence were needed.
BY DR. ORTH:
Q Witness, will you please refer in conclusion to Exhibit 457?
A I have explained before that the Public Prosecutors as well as the courts when dealing with descent cases were attacked, and that on account of their attitude in favor of the Jews, because in fact most of these cases were decided in favor of the persons filing the claim, and therefore Thierack in the month of February, 1944 - it might have been in February, 1944, or in spring, at any rate, - I could not be sure about the month - ordered that a draft of a decree be made covering the point of view which should be taken into account in dealing with descent matters of Jews and persons of mixed descent.
He ordered that reports be made to him on this matter and to that report the remark in Exhibit 453 refers on Page 4. That generaldecree, as fan as I know, never was issued. The matter was rather shelved because of the difficulties which had arisen due to the turn the war took. After these difficulties had been straightened out Thierack, however, returned to that question again. I denied that the need existed for such a general decree, but I told the Minister that it appeared to me, in order to stave off such attacks against courts and prosecutors, that it would be much better if the Minister would put himself with bis entire authority and responsibility into the matter. That could be done, and it was proper because the Public Prosecutors were the ones who had to file charges and wanted to. In this manner the decree, the circular decree of 28 December 1944 came about which I signed on order of the Minister but which did not achieve any practical importance due to developments. Moreover, this circular decree - I should like to emphasize again only refers to charges to be filed by the Prosecutor, to a part of these charges against the illegitimacy of descent, but not to cases where the persons themselves had filed claims.
Q I shall leave these documents now and want to discuss a different subject with you briefly. To what extent did the Reich Ministry of Justice deal with matters of hereditary health?
A That question has already been answered by Dr. Schlegelberger. The entire group of problems on principle fell within the jurisdiction of the Reich Ministry of the Interior, which signed all the decrees concerned.
The Reich Ministry of Justice was only concerned to the extent as the organization to set up hereditary health courts and the procedure were to be covered. The questions of organization were matters for the Reich Ministry of Justice, and there they were dealt with in Department I, whereas masters of procedure were dealt with in Department 6.
Q During your work as a department chief were you frequently concerned with matters of hereditary health laws?
AAccording to my recollection, only twice. The first time in connection with the so-called "War Measures Decree" of the year 1943 and the second time in connection with the Second War Measures Decree in the year 1944.
Q What were these matters concerned with?
A The lack of personnel caused by the war made it mandatory to spare the courts any not absolutely urgent work. Therefore, in connection with these problems I approached the Reich Minister of the Interior and required that the hereditary health courts be suspended temporarily, because during the war I did not consider these cases to be urgent, and I hoped that it would be possible later on to bring about some changes in the legislation which I desired. The Ministry of the Interior in 1943 decided that these matters should not be restricted any further, that is, one should not go beyond any decrees which had been published before. In 1944, however, it agreed that the carrying out of cases of hereditary matters should be restricted to the most urgent cases. Accordingly a decree was issued by the Reich Ministry of the Interior to the hereditary health courts. I only want to refer briefly to No. VII of Exhibit 451 in this connection. It shows that what I have stated in regard to 1944 is correct.
Q In this connection would you please comment also on Exhibit 452, that is NG-790.
A I believe the document speaks for itself. May I just refer to one point, though. That is the fact that reopening of cases should not be suspended in those cases where the sterilization had not yet been carried out. Quite generally may I state that about the question of suspending the activity of the courts the decision had to be made on the basis of their own digression. These were just general directives. If the sterilization had already been carried out on the basis of a previous decision by the Hereditary Health Court, then it was no longer urgent to reopen the case.
Q During the term of your work as department chief in the Ministry was there ever a case reported to you or did you come to know of any complaints about the fact that the proceedings for sterilization before hereditary health courts were abused for racial or political reasons or purposes?
A No, I only heard about such charges from the study of the indictment.
Q In Document, Exhibit 419, the Witness Suchomel states that before officials of the Ministry of Justice, a lecture was given about euthanasia. Did you happen to know about that lecture and did you attend it?
A Suchomel said himself that the lecture took place in the year 1942. Therefore, I could not know anything about that because at that time I was not yet in the Reich Ministry of Justice.
Q The Prosecution submitted as Document NG-702, Exhibit 481; and as Document EG-783, Exhibit 484, letters which you wrote, or which were addressed to you. First, a purely technical question. Do these two documents belong together?
A Yes. Exhibit 484 contains the answer from attorney Messina the answer to my letter addressed to him, which is contained in 481.
Q From this correspondence, the conclusion could be arrived at that you had something to do with the People's Court. Is that assumption correct?
A No. With the People's Court, as I have already explained, I had nothing to do neither in technical matters nor in personnel matters nor in the organizational matters except for the preparatory work for the intended reform of the administration of justice and the administration of courts after the war, which I have already mentioned.
Q If you had nothing to do with the People's Court, how then did this correspondence with Dr. Messina come about?
A On the occasion of a field trip to the district of the District Court of Appeals, Graz, I had a conversation with the Gauleiter and Reich Governor (Statthalter) Reiner of Corinthia, in his capacity as Supreme Kommissar for the Occupied Region of Trieste. The conversation was concerned with questions of legal remedies. Since that occupied territory adjoining the Alps and of Trieste, neither by law nor administratively was under the jurisdiction of the Reich Ministry of Justice, but the use of legal remedies between the courts of that territory and the German Reich had to be regulated on the basis of principles of international law.
The attorney Messina attended that conference as the man in charge of matters of justice for that occupied region and on that occasion, Reiner and Messina informed me that Corinthia was suffering greatly from attacks by guerrillas coming from the South, and that these raids of guerrillas were carried out mostly by German deserters; but that carrying out of cases was delayed by the People's Court within the jurisdiction of which these cases would come, so that the effect of such trials could not be achieved. They asked that something be done about it. I told the two gentlemen that officially I had nothing to do with that matter but that I would be prepared to forward their complaints to the Minister.
I did that, a few days later when I met the Minister at Kochem. The Minister, in the presence of the Chief Reich Prosecutor before the People's Court, who by the way was already informed about the matter, discussed these problems and told me to ask the attorney Messina to submit the material for the statements which he and the Gauleiter had made to me which they had promised us. Thereupon I wrote the letter, which is in Exhibit 481.
Q After receiving the reply to your letter, that is Exhibit 484, did you take any further steps in that matter?
A I did two things: first I informed Ministerial Director Letz of Department I, who had to handle this matter as a matter of organization; and secondly, as for Drl Messina's answer, Exhibit 484, as soon as I received that, I gave it to the Minister personally. I had nothing else to do with the matter and did not hear anything about it later.
Q Witness, now I should like to discuss with you the questions relating to your membership in the SS. How did you come to the SS?
A Himmler knew me from my hometown Landshut. He was considerably younger than I. I had no personal contact with him, but in a small town, it is quite natural that you know eath other, particularly in the circles of professional men.
In 1936, I believe it was in the fall, Himmler had an inquiry sent to me whether I would agree to have a personal conference with him. I agreed, but for a considerable time I didn't hear anything about the matter, until at the end of the spring of 1937 I was called to Dresden, to Himmler. At that time Himmler told me that he had pushed through his police law now, and in order to set up the police he was looking for expert jurists, and he had also thought about me. He offered me a good position, asked me whether I was ready to enter the police service. I refused, and also gave him the reasons for it. At that time I was a judge with the Reich Supreme Court, but I did not mind telling him that I did not agree with certain practices of the police and the activity of state authorities in connection with the Roehm Putsch, and that I had found that the courts in that case were quite excluded by the executive power, and that I did not agree with it.
With these police practices I meant protective supervision in cramps. Himmler also commented on these objections on my part. He stated that the establishment of concentration camps was not intended to be a permanent institution to do away with political adversaries. He told me that the number of political prisoners had already been reduced from about 15,000 to 3,000 and that every political prisoner, if he had made a declaration of loyalty to the Reich, could have his freedom restituted. He also commented on the questions concerning the Roehm Putsch. I do not want to discuss that in detail here.
Himmler told me that he was glad I expressed open criticism to him and he asked me subsequently to enter his SS. I told him that that wa.s out of the question; for one, because I was very busy in my profession and had no time to do any other service; and then because I was bound by my religious belief; and finally, because I had been a member of the Schlaraffia.
Himmler did not accept these misgivings. He told me, in particular, that "It is a matter of course and I do not expect you to do any service in the SS. You will come to the SS, as I have handled it recently with many cases, because it is my intention to get the best heads into the SS also." He said he could not expect the spiritual elite to do any service in the SS. They joined the SS in an honorary manner, and he had also told me that if I agreed I would be transferred to his personal staff or some higher staff, and that it would be in a rank which was in accordance with my civilian status.
I asked for time to think it over. Then when I returned to Leipzig, I discussed that matter with several people, also with my chief president, who was at that time Dr. Bumbke, the President of the Reich Supreme Court. I did not do that because I had misgivings or objections against the general SS as such - at that time, there were no objections or charges raised against the general SS -- but because I did not want to be bound to a Party organization again. I was generally advised that I should not refuse the invitation by Himmler. The Chief President even encouraged me to accept. He pointed out to me that the general conditions were about to settle; that also foreign countries apparently showed more confidence, and that at home there were reasons to assume that the revolutionary development had come to an end and that evolution was beginning to take place. He also said that he thought the moment had arrived where those people, especially the intelligentsia, who had remained aloof up to that time, should and would have to try within the Party and within its organization to take an influence in the development of matters. That point of view of the Reich Supreme Court President was to a great extent the same as my own. Therefore, I decided to accept Himmler's invitation.
Q If I understood you correctly, what you believed was that you could brush aside your objections - original objections - because Himmler himself was the one who helped you to no so, is that correct?
At No. This question is based on an erroneous assumption. The misgivings -
THE PRESIDENT: We understood your explanation. You said that you thought it was time for the intelligentsia to exercise some influence within the Party, in accordance with the President of the Reich Supreme Court's advice. That was your point, wasn't it?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY DR. ORTH:
Q At that time you stated some of your misgivings to Himmler. Did these objections refer to actions of the Ss or the police?
A I said already: actions of the police because I did not know of anything else.
Q And how did your membership in the general SS practically come about?
A First, I joined the staff of the 48th SS Standarte at Leipzig, the so-called Legal Department. That however, was purely a formal matter. I neither did any work or any service for the legal department nor any other part.
Q Did you ever swear an oath of allegiance to the SS?
A No. The honorary leaders ware urged once on the course of a so-called formal oath taken by recruits that they also should swear the oath, tut I did not do it.
Q Did you do any work in the SS later, or any service of any kind?
A No. I believe it was in the course of the year 1938 that I was transferred to the staff of the SS main office in Berlin, while I still had my residence in Leipzig. Before the war I never was at that office nor any other Ss office in Berlin. I did not know anybody there personally so that any personal or official contact was lacking for me.
Q Did you ever take part in any formation or any other meeting of the SS?
A No.
Q Did you have any function of command within the SS?
A No.
Q At the beginning and during the war, the members of the General Ss as a rule were drafted to the Waffen-SS. Was that the case with you too?
A No. I was drafted to a unit of the Army. I assume that I was not drafted to the Waffen-SS because I was not a regular member of the SS.
Q The prosecution asserts that you had been a favorite of Himmler's and you heard it said the other day that you were supposed to be a friend of Himmler's. What can you say in that connection?
A I was not a friend of Himmler's and I did not consider myself as one of his favorites. Himmler came from the same town and that was just a matter of coincidence. Neither before the conference in the spring of 1937 nor afterwards, was I in any close relationship with him, nor did I ever approach him with a personal request. I was promoted in the SS, but practically only after I had become a Ministerial Director in the Reich Ministry of Justice. As for my professional career, Himmler certainly did not do anything to it as long as I was with the Reich Supreme Court; and that I became Ministerial Director afterwards, that I did not consider a particular advantage or favor because at the Reich Supremo Court, according to what my previous president had told me, I could have expected that after the war I would have obtained the position of a senate president. It is my personal point of view that the position of a senate president at the Reich Senate is to be considered higher than Ministerial Director in the Reich Ministry of Justice.
Q Did you maintain your independence as far as Himmler was concerned?
A My inner independence, of course, I maintained it against Himmler; contrary to the assumption of the prosecution, I did not sell my soul to Himmler -- not a bit of it. I believe that that has become very clear because in the church question I always frankly stated my point of view in '42.
Q A basic problem for the SS was the racial question. Were you forced to make any concessions to Himmler, as far as that was concerned?
A No, Himmler never asked any favors or concessions from me; particularly about the racial question, he never spoke a word to me.
Q Perhaps you can briefly tell the court what your attitude was concerning the Jewish question in practice?
AAfter 1933, and that is what counts here, and also after I had become honorary leader of the SS, in dealing with Jews I acted just the same as I had acted before. Jews whom I knew were those I continued to be in contact with, at least I tried to help where it was possible for me to help. Also in my official capacity, I tried to counteract hardships wherever that was possible.
Q In your official function, did you have any opportunity to handle demands made by Himmler or his Ss officers, and in what manner did that come about?
A Yes, I had such an opportunity. I had many opportunities of that kind, because as I have hoard here, the way it was before I came to the Reich Ministry of Justice, it was also after that time. We were, I may say, almost continuously confronted with some demands made by the SS, but I did not actually fill a single one of these demands -- at least, I cannot remember any one. Of course I considered it important not to be on bad terms with people whom I happened to know, but as far as the matters themselves wore concerned, I retained my point of view. I could mention quite a number of examples on that.
Q The prosecution in Document, Exhibit 426, submitted a letter which shows that you were invited to visit Himmler. Will you kindly comment on that letter?
AA few days ago I was charged to take over Department VI of the Reich Ministry of Justice, Thierack told me that he wants me to go and visit Himmler in his field headquarters. I told him that I did not see any urgent necessity for that. He told me that it seemed to him it was right if I would inform Himmler personally about the fact that I had entered the Ministry of Justice and about my sphere of work there. I told Thierack that I couldn't do a thing like that, even if I I had no actual objections, because I wasn't on such good terms with Himmler that I could gain admission so easily.
A short time later, I received the information from one of the personal referents of the Minister, which is mentioned in the letter, Exhibit 426, that upon the direction of the Minister I was to find out the date when I would be able to go and see Himmler. That was the purpose of my letter.
Q Did you writs to Himmler in your official function or as an SS Oberfuehrer?
A I wrote in my official capacity. That can be seen from the letter. Moreover, I was not at all an SS-Oberfuehrer, but an SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer, or SS-Sturmfuehrer, or something. That was a very subordinate rank.
Q Did that visit actually take place, and what was talked about?
A: As far as I remember, it came to that visit in March of 1943; that was at the time when I already became Ministerial Director. The conference lasted only a very short time because Himmler was very busy and I had to return to Berlin the next day. Primarily, however, that conversation dealt with my experiences as a battalion commander and regimental commander in combat. Only quite aside we discussed my position and my activity, my present work, and that finished the visit.
Q: Did you wear the SS uniform on the occasion of that visit?
A: No, I didn't possess one.
Q: Did Himmler give you any special mission for your work in the Reich Ministry of Justice on the occasion of that visit?
A: No, that was quite out of the question; nothing was mentioned about anything like that.
Q: In Document, Exhibit 426,, which is NG-703, a number of letters are also submitted, correspondence between you and higher SS leaders. First there is your letter to SS Gruppenfuehrer Berger of the 3rd June, 1943, pages 8 and 9 of the document. Would you comment on that letter, please.
A: Berger was a chief of the SS main office, SS Hauptamt. He did not know me personally, although I was assigned to the staff of the SS Hauptamt, SS main office, I think, since 1938, as far as the roster was concerned. In order to meet me, one day he asked me to come and see him. That was the only visit with Berger. We neither discussed political matters nor SS matters, but we talked about general subjects. We particularly came to speak about the Reichsgerichtsrat Dr. Niethammer, who lived in retirement in Leipzig and who came from the same town as Berger.
Berger asked me if I came up to Leipzig again to bring regards to Dr. Niethammer. I did so subsequently when I came to Leipzig to visit relatives, and I found there a letter of congratulations from Berger to me on the occasion of my promotion to SS Standartenfuehrer, and the Totenkopfring decoration, the death head ring. I thanked Berger for that letter and at the same time told him that I bad transmitte his regards to Dr. Niethammer. This letter is written in a language which was in accordance with the expressions used at that time and I ask you not to forget that I had just come from combat; returned from combat as a soldier; I had no reason to be unfriendly when writing to Berger on something like that.
Q: The letter shows, as you say, that Himmler had given you the totenkopfring, the death head ring.Is that a decoration?
A: No, in the letter addressed to Berger, and possibly also in the letter to Himmler, but I don't remember it I may have spoken of a decoration myself; I may have called it a decoration, but, in fact this is the way it was. That ring as a rule was conferred upon a member after three year's of membership to the leadership of the SS, whereas I received it after twice that time. I did not have any right to expect any decoration because I had no merits for the SS.
Q: Did you correspond further with Berger?
A: I cannot tell you that with certainty any more. It is possible, however; my position in the Reich Ministry of Justice brought it about and I believe it was always like that, that in various legal matters I received letters from people who happened to know me and who asked me to examine their legal matters.
Such letters, of course, were also received from the circles of the SS, that is from people who happened to know me. These letters also, just as the applications made by people whom I did not know, were dealt with, were reexamined by the departments who handled such cases, and then a decision was prepared. I did that either personally upon the suggestion made by the referent, or the sub--department chief, or the referent himself. I believe that I remember that Berger also applied to me in such legal matters in writing, but it is possible that one of his assistants wrote it. I don't know that any longer. I believe also that i can remember that my decision was in the negative, but otherwise, I had no relations to Berger.
Q: Witness, in this document reference is made to your correspondence with Professor Dr. Gebhardt. Did you happen to know Dr. Gebhardt personally?
A: Gebhardt, as well as Himmler, comes from my home town of Landshut. I knew him from there, but neither with him did there exist any personal relations. My family, however, my relatives, however, owed him special gratitude because he had been the doctor for my late father and had assisted him during his many years of suffering. That is why in the letter of congratulations which I addressed to Dr. Gebhardt that I addressed him as friend of our family, and I could do so. The correspondence which I had with Dr. Gebhardt concerns the Hamburg Professor, Dr. Dettwitz; it further shows that I was able to distinguish between the matters of the case.
A: Beyond that did you have any corresponsence with other higher SS loaders?
A: I cannot exclude the possibility, but the same applies here that I have said before.
Moreover, I have no objection, no misgivings against correspondence of that sort. The best proof can be found in the fact that these letters arc in existence and could be submitted to the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: You are referring to letters you wrote; you are referring to the letters that you wrote, are you not?
A: They are letters which I wrote.
THE PRESIDENT: Then, they were not in your possession?
A: Well, of course they were in my possession; they belonged to my official files.
BY DR. ORTH:
Q: Witness, wasn't it a question of copies which were found in your belongings?
A: What was submitted by the Prosecution were the copies sent out.
THE PRESIDENT: I see; go ahead.
Q: Among the documents submitted by the Prosecution, there is a letter which requires a little explanation. You are thanking in this letter for a candle which you received -- "Jul Chandelier, but you regretted that you could not accept that chandelier. Will you comment on that?
A: At that time I did not know how to handle the matter, and I did not know that that "Jul Chandelier" could be bought, and I received that candle, which I might say at that time was quite precious because there was a scarcity in the Reich, but I was afraid I had received it by mistake, and I wanted to correct that error.
Q: The Prosecution charges you with having known about the crimes of the SS which led to its being declared a criminal organization by the IMP? , and that after the 1/9/1939 just the same you maintained your honorary rank in the SS.
The witness Behl testified in this connection that the illtreatment in the concentration camps even before the war, but certainly after the outbreak of the war, were known to every official in the Ministry and beyond that, to every person, every one in the population. What can you say about that, as far as you are concerned?
A: I don't know from where the witness Behl derives such extensive knowledge about that fact of knowledge, any rate, until the outbreak of war I only knew about the concentration camp Dachau; it was known to me that political opponents of the Third Reich were kept there in protective custody. Of any ill-treatment, I did not know; I did not know anything about that; neither from the circle of my colleagues in Leipzig nor from the population in Leipzig did I over hear anything by way of any hints about that. Later, during the war and I believe it was from notices in the newspapers, I heard of further concentration camps at Oranienburg and Buchenwald, but about ill-treatment, or even murders, killings, or extermination in large numbers of human beings, I did not hear a single word. I myself never saw a concentration camp, not even from afar; and in particular, until the surrender, I never got in touch with any person who either on the oasis of his own experiences or by information received from somebody else had known anything about concentration camps. Otherwise, one would have told me.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will recess until 1:30.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours, 16 September 1947).
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 16 September 1947) JOSEF ALSTOETTER - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION- Continued.
BY DR. ORTH (Attorney for the Defendant Alstoetter)
TIE PRESIDENT: You may proceed.
Q. Witness, during your service with the Wehrmacht, you spent many months on the Eastern front. Did you not at that time hear of the crimes which the SS committed in the Eastern territories?
A. No; nor did my unit ever have anything to do with such crimes. My unit had nothing to do with other units where such crimes occurred. From the sphere of the division to which I belonged, I am sure I would have heard if they had known anything of such crimes, and I never heard anything about them.
Q. When in 1943 you went to Berlin, did you not have an opportunity to hear in some way of the atrocities of the SS?
A, I didn't have the opportunity. The idea never occurred to me, for in the house in which I lived, until it was destroyed in November, 1943, there lived Jewish families until that very moment. They were families whom I saw by chance in the air raid shelter; I didn't know them. Furthermore, at the end of 1943 or the beginning of 1944 in my professional capacity, that is to say in the Reich Ministry of Justice, through an official letter from the Reich Accommodations Commissar, I heard that the Jews in Vienna who were violating the existing laws by the Gauleiter of Vienna, had been concentrated in ghetto inside Vienna proper, and the Reich Accommodations Commissar suggested that we should legalize that situation, and I should like to point out that we refused to do so. In 1944, through that letter from the chief of the security Police, I heard that letter was written in Ma.y, 1944, I heard that for reasons of security , the Jews of Vienna had been sent to Theresienstadt or had been moved further to the East. At that time I had no doubts pud my staff had no doubts author that that was merely a campaign against some of those Jews of Vienna.