It said: "I should like to point out that the working time of prisoners, laid down by order, which amounts to 11 hours daily and so forth, has to be kept up also during the winter months." And the last paragraph: "Up to 2 December 1943, all those detachments are to be reported to the Chief of Office Group-D, for submission to me, with which a net working time of 11 hours daily can not be kept up. Reasons for it will have to be given." It is a fact, is it not, that you quite frequently gave orders and instructions to the concentration camp commandants?
A. Yes, I did not directly write to camp commandants, and this document here shows that it was handled by Amt D-2 on occasion of allocation of labor, and it was not by me. That is nothing unusual. It happened quite frequently. The matter was discussed with me before, and then it would be provided with my signature. In this way, of course, with regard to allocation of labor many types of orders were passed onto the camp commanders.
Q. My copy of the document shows that it was signed by you. Will you look at the document again?
A. Yes, that is correct. I am not disputing that I signed it. I only said it shows that the matter was handled by Amt D-2, that is, Maurer, and, this matter probably was discussed with me before, and that is why it was provided with my signature. It bears my signature.
Q. There was instructions by you directly to the concentration camp commandant; I also refer to the order on 20 April 1942, which we discussed previously, and the one where you said the working employment must be in its true meaning of the word exhaustive, and that there is no limit to working hours. That is another order by you to the concentration camp commandants, is it not?
A. Yes, of course, it is through the allocation of labor, and that perhaps was an order to the camp commander which I signed, that is correct.
Q. Now your testimony of last Friday that you did not ever give any instructions to concentration camp commandants is not true, then is that right?
A. No, I mean something was different by that. I mean that my direct orders to the camp commanders, or of decrees, of an executive type, of what should not concern the field of allocation of labor.
Q. Excuse me, you weren't asked about the type of work that you gave orders concerning. You were simply asked by Dr. Seidl as to whether you ever gave orders or instructions to concentration camp commanders and you answered that you did not. Now, in Document R-129, which was dated 30 April 1942, which is an order by you to all camp commanders, is a direct order by you concerning the working conditions in the concentration camps. It provides that the employment must be in the true meaning of the word "exhaustive" and that there will be no limit to working hours, provides any circumstances which may result in a shortening of the work hours, for example, meals, roll calls have to be restricted to a minimum which cannot be condensed any more. It is forbidden to allow long walks to the place of work, and noon intervals only are for eating purposes. He goes on to prescribe the guard duties, and it even provides for sentries on horseback, watch dogs, movable watch towers, movable obstacles. It is a fact, isn't it, that your testimony on last Friday is not correct?
A. No, I stick to my testimony that I on my part did not issue any direct orders to the concentration camp commanders, but only through the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps. After all, in my staff I had no apparatus to deal with these matters. In any case that is how I understood it.
THE PRESIDENT: We are using a lot of time on something that is pretty plain here. What the witness is saying is that he did not speak directly to the camp commanders, but he did give them orders through the Inspectorate. It is just like telling your secretary to write a letter to somebody.
Q. (By Mr. Robbins) I ask you to turn then to Document NO-599 on page 75 of the German document book. It is Exhibit 63 on page 74 of the English Book No. III. You testified that you had little or nothing to do with concentration camps on labor allocation in the east in the Government General. This is a file memorandum by you. The subject is the taking over of the Jewish labor camps from the SS and Police Leaders in the Government General, and it states that there were present Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, Globocnik, Gluecks, Loerner, Schellin, Maurer, Florstedt, and Dr. Horn, and it goes on to say that the following points were agreed upon.
Approximately ten labor camps in the SS and Police Chief existing in the district of Lublin will be taken over by the WVHA as branch camps of Concentration Camp Lublin. Were those plans ever carried through; were those camps made subordinate to the WVHA?
A. Yes, as far as I can recall. Early in January, 1944, the camps were taken over as labor camps. They were branch camps of the Concentration Camp Lublin, and thus they came within the field of competence of the Inspectorate of Amtsgruppe D.
Q. And that was under you?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. And it says that these labor camps will be converted into concentration camps. I want you to tell us what happened when a labor camp is converted into a concentration camp.
A. From the moment on when the labor camps were annexed to a concentration camp the inmates became prisoners.
Q. And they became concentration camp inmates?
A. Yes.
Q. It says - this file memorandum states - that through being taken over by the SS WVHA the inmates of the labor camps will become concentration camp prisoners, and in the last paragraph it states that the participants of this conference realize that the taking over of all these labor camps by the WVHA will be possible only if the guards detailed at present for these camps will remain there and be subordinated to the WVHA. Were those plans carried out also?
A. Yes, I have already stated that camps, as far as they were still in existence in January '44, all these camps were taken over.
Q. Your supervision, the supervision of the WVHA over these camps extended beyond merely allocation of labor, is that not correct?
A. No, the entire incorporation was carried out in line with the entire simplification of the working procedures, and that is why the camps were taken over.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Let me ask a question. What kind of people were in the labor camps?
A. Well, I don't know myself, Your Honor. I myself have not seen these camps. I am not exactly informed as to who actually was located within these labor camps.
Q. Do you know whether it was free labor, voluntary labor?
A. I don't think so, no. It must have been labor camps which were subordinate and which had been established by the Police and SS Leader of the district. I don't believe that he would put free workers into these camps. He would only put those people into these camps for security reasons or because of criminal reasons.
Q. It was not a place where voluntary laborers came from the east then?
A. No, no, it had nothing to do with that.
Q. Well then, what was the difference between a labor camp and a concentration camp? They were both prisoners.
A. The labor camps were branch camps of the concentration camps. The labor camps were always located at the places of work, either at the location of plants or wherever work happened to be.
Q. Well, what difference would it make to a laborer whether he was in a labor camp or a concentration camp? He was a prisoner in either event, wasn't he?
A. There was no difference. There was no difference whatsoever.
Q. Why did they change a labor camp to a concentration camp? What was the difference?
A. The labor camps which were so annexed to the concentration camps until that time were first of all related to the SS and Police Leaders. They were institutions by the police which had nothing to do with the concentration camps, and they were now to be annexed to the concentration camps so that their administration will be placed into one hand.
After all, there was not only one Police and SS Leader in that district, but there were five, and each one had his individual labor camps. Therefore, there were five different competences. They were removed through those measures.
Q. So then the result was that the SS took the prisoners from the five branches of the police and put them under their own custody?
A. Yes. It was a simplification of the control, the supervision.
Q. Centralization of the control?
A. Yes.
Q. But it did not help the man that was in the camp; it did not change him in any way?
A. No, it did not change his status at all. He was not affected by this whatsoever.
Q. Except that I suppose you claim that he was better treated by the SS than he was by the Gestapo?
A. The Gestapo was not included in the administration of the camps. The labor camps were in any case subordinate to the SS because the SS and Police Leader, after all, was also a member of the SS. There was no difference.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that is probably true.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. I have one more document in this book that I would like to ask you about and that is the next one following the one we have just discussed, NO-1548, Exhibit 64, on page 78 of the German and 76 of the English. This is an order from Hoess of Amtsgruppe D of the WVHA to the concentration camp commanders, and he requires that reports on protective custody camps will have to be made periodically and that this report will include the number of executions carried out. Now, I ask you, did you receive these reports which were made by the concentration camp commanders to Hoess?
A. No.
Q. You never saw any of them?
A. No, no, I cannot remember ever having seen a protective custody report from any of the camps.
Q. Did Hoess or Gluecks ever tell you about the number of executions or special treatments?
A. No, I never discussed these matters with him.
Q. Did you know the protective custody reports and reports on executions were made out?
A. I did not have any knowledge of it. I was able to assume that. However, I believe that these reports did not go to Hoess, but that they were sent to the RSHA. In any case I did not receive any knowledge of them.
Q. You have said that you talked to Gluecks every Friday. Didn't Gluecks ever tell you at any time about the number of executions that were being carried out in the concentration camps?
A. No, no. We never discussed that.
Q. Turn to Book No. IV if you will, on page 17 of the German and 16 of the English, Document NO-020. Here you report to Himmler that during Eicke's time there were only six camps but that after you took over the concentration camps their number had been increased to 185. Is that statement correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. In this letter you were taking credit, were you not, for the increase in the number of the concentration camps?
A. No, this statement has completely different meaning. Already at that time, in March, 1942, I had pointed out to Himmler that besides the administration of one of the biggest main offices I was not now willing to take over the entire inspectorate for which up to now two leaders had been solely responsible. Already at that time I had pointed out the steady increase in the number of these camps, and with this final note I pointed out to him once more just how enormous this whole matter had extended, and that is the reason why I made the statement. I did not have any reason, and I did not have the authority, to establish concentration camps, in my opinion, because I was not decisive in determining their number.
Q I ask you now to turn to Document NO-1545 at page 59 of the German and page 46 of the English. This is Exhibit No. 90, and concerns the establishment of brothels for concentration camps. You have testified that you knew nothing about this. Is that correct?
In the letter it is stated that it was a wish of the chief of the Main Office that the two rooms provided for the prostitutes be particularly well-furnished. Do I recollect your testimony correctly, that you knew nothing about this?
A I did not say I did not have any knowledge of it. In another document I pointed out to the camp commanders that these special buildings should not be placed in the middle of the camp. Of course I knew that brothels existed there. I have never denied it. I only said that I did not know what was done with the funds of this special account which has been mentioned here. I don't know what Amtsgruppe D did with the funds of these special accounts. I mentioned that perhaps this money was used in order to maintain these institutions.
Q I think we are beginning to get at the truth of the matter. The funds from the houses of prostitution went to Amtsgruppe D, is that correct? The profits of them?
A Yes, as far as I know.
Q I should like to show you Document NO-400 and ask you if this is your order. I am sorry that I don't have the German ready.
THE INTERPRETER: May we have an English copy?
Q This is your regulation, isn't it?
A Yes, that is an excerpt from the regulations which pertains to the granting of special privileges to prisoners, and I used this order; and the regulations about the visiting of brothels came from Himmler himself who personally ordered the establishment of brothels. That was not my original idea.
Q But you provided for the regulation, and you provided for the amount of money which would be received by the prostitutes, did you not? This provided that 45 Pfennigs out of the charge of two Reichsmarks will will go to the brothel; supervising female prisoners will get 5 Pfennigs.
The remainder of one and a half Reichsmarks should go to Amtsgruppe D. That was your idea, was it not?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Turning to another subject - still concerning the profits - to the WVHA, I ask you if you know anything about the charges which the concentration camp commanders made to the RSHA for the execution and cremation of concentration camp inmates. This money also went to the WVHA, did it not? The profits from execution of inmates?
A I know nothing about that.
Q I have in my hand a bill which was submitted by concentration camp Natzweiler commander to the RSHA in Strassbourg for the expenses for executing twenty prisoners and, cremating them. The bill rendered was for one hundred and twenty-five Reichsmarks and five Pfennigs. It states that the commander of Natzweiler would be obliged for an early remittance of the said amount. Do you mean to say that you don't know anything about the charges that the concentration camp made for executing prisoners?
A It is impossible that I, as Chief of the WVHA, should take care of the small expenses from the commanders of the concentration camps. After all, I was not a clerk. The matter was completely unknown to me. I don't know that any bills were written out on these matters.
Q It is a small amount - 127 Reichsmarks - for twenty prisoners. Does that sound about right to you - the charge? Or does that sound excessive?
A I can not make any statement at all about that because I have heard of it here for the first time. That any bills were written out.....
Q Isn't it true that Amtsgruppe A audited these expenses and that the funds were sent through Amtsgruppe A? That they were supervised by Amtsgruppe D, which was in charge of the concentration camp?
A I don't know what Amtsgruppe A should have had to do with that matter. It is possible that they were sent to the administrative office of Amtsgruppe D, and that they were sent there on behalf of the Reich. However, I have never heard anything about that.
Q Now, undoubtedly they did go to Amtsgruppe D, but weren't the books also audited and funds kept by Amtsgruppe A as well?
AAmtsgruppe D had its own administrative office. I assume that these funds were accepted by that administrative office on behalf of the Reich. But that was a small activity which needed neither the collaboration of Amtsgruppe A nor mine.
Q I will ask you then to turn to Document Book No. 5
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Mr. Robbins, NO-400 that you just examined the witness about - that never was offered nor has it been given an exhibit number, has it?
MR. ROBBINS: That is correct, Your Honor. I should like to give that Exhibit No. 526 for identification.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q I ask you to turn to page 109 of the German Document Book, the Document 2189-PS. It is on page 96 of the English book.
WITNESS: Your Honors, this document is missing in my document book.
INTERPRETER: It is also missing in the Interpreter's document book.
MR. ROBBINS: Well, never mind. This is an order by Gluecks of Amtsgruppe D and it states that Pohl has ordered, effective immediately, that punishment by beating will be executed by prisoners in concentration camps for men.
Q Does that sound familiar to you?
DR. SEIDL (Counsel for the defendant Oswald Pohl): I object to the question until such time as the Prosecution furnishes the defendant with a copy of this document. In the document book which is in the hands of the defendant this document is not contained, and if the Prosecution wants to ask him a question concerning this document, then it seems appropriate that a copy of this document be submitted to the defendant.
I therefore want to suggest that the discussion of this question be postponed until such time as the Prosecution is able to furnish the defendant with a copy of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this in one of the regular document books?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor. I am sure that the document has been distributed in German; it just has not been inserted in the document book.
Q I will withdraw the question concerning the document and simply ask you if it is true that you have ordered that punishment by beating be executed by prisoners in concentration camp for men. Is that your order?
A I have never issued such an order.
Q Then, if Gluecks, chief of Amtsgruppe D, said that you did, he was wrong?
A Yes, that is quite possible. I did not occupy myself with disciplinary measures.
Q Will you turn to page 154 in the same book, to Document NO-2341? It is on page 149 of the English. This is a letter from you to Gluecks, and it reads as follows:
"We shall not tolerate the fact that only complaints about the bad quality of the clothing are made, and perhaps the inmate in question is even pitied because the poor fellow no longer has any shoes, instead of teaching him how to treat his clothing by giving him regularly a sound thrashing if necessary."
Did you order that inmates be beaten if they complained about their clothes and shoes?
A No; first of all, this is not work which originated from me and I could not imagine in what connection such an order should have been issued. It comes from Amt B-3. I can't remember that I have ever ordered such a measure to be carried out. Above all, in November 44 -
Q It is November, '44.
A Yes, November 44 -
Q Well, you signed the letter, didn't you?
A I can't see it from this document. It is a copy in extract form, and I can not remember ever having signed such a letter. In that case, I would have to look at the original.
Q You don't remember signing such a letter ordering that if inmates complain about their food and clothing that they should be beaten? That is what the letter says.
A No, I can't remember ever having written that, and I can not see any indication that I ever signed such a letter.
Q Well, I will produce the original and perhaps that will refresh your recollection.
THE PRESIDENT: Would you like until tomorrow morning to do that?
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess until 0930 tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 28 May 1947 at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Oswald Pohl, et al., defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 28 May 1947, 0930, Justice Toms presiding
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the courtroom, please take their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal No. 2.
Military Tribunal No. 2 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
OSWALD POHL - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION - Continued BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Witness, would you turn to the document we were discussing last night in Book 5. Would you turn to the document we were discussing yesterday afternoon when the Court adjourned? Book 5, Document 2351. On page 154 of the German. Would you read that to the Tribunal.
Perhaps there is some mistake in the translation of in my interpretation of the document to you yesterday. Would you read it aloud, pleas?
A "Attention of the Chief of Amtsgruppe D, SS Gruppenfuhrer of inmates' clothes concentration camps. It is impossible to complain on the bad quality of clothes and to feel sorry for individual inmates because the poor fellow, for instance, would not have any more shoes left...instead of beating him regularly to teach him a lesson how he should deal with his things."
Signed "Pohl, SS Gruppenfuehrer, General of Waffen SS."
MR. ROBBINS: I know that Dr. Seidl is going to object on the ground that this is not yet in evidence. It was offered and then withdrawn. It was withdrawn because of the fact we did not have the original document. This was a part of an official governmental order investigating details by the U.S. Army. It was a part of that report.
I am just asking the witness if he can identify the document. If he says that he can't--I don't intend to go any further until we are able to find the original document.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What exhibit number is that, Mr. Robbins, please?
MR. ROBBINS: It was not given one. One-forty-eight (a) 148 a has been reserved for it.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I see.
DR. SEIDL: (Defense counsel for the defendant Oswald Pohl) At the time I objected to the submission of this document because it is an extract from a larger document, and the extract in itself is not suitable to form a suitable picture of the contents of the whole document.
For that reason, the Prosecution withdrew the document; and I object that any use be made of the document in cross-examination because it is not possible in cross-examination to form a proper picture of this exhibit as most of it is missing in the document book. The document submitted by the Prosecution shows at once that it is a very small extract from a very large document; and to use this small extract could easily lead to an erroneous picture of the whole document.
THE PRESIDENT: The document has not yet been offered in evidence. Mr. Robbins is seeking to have it identified, by the witness. You may ask the witness whether he can identify the document.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Can you identify this document, witness?
A No, it is not my document. It is signed by me in the form of a typewritten name, and I cannot recall seeing a document of that content.
Q Do you exclude the possibility that such a letter was written by you?
A It was not written by me, which I see from the initials that it came from Office Group B.
Q "B" or "D"?
A "B".
Q There is only one other question on this group of documents concerning conditions in concentration camps that I wish to ask you about.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Robbins, you do not offer this document then?
MR. ROBBINS: No, I do not at this time.
Q And that is in Book 13. I think it is not necessary for you to turn to it. Perhaps you recall it. It is a cable, NO-502, which is Exhibit 101. It is a cable which you sent to Himmler stating that the first transportations of Jews from Hungary show that about fifty percent of the Jews who were fed for work are women. Then you say: "Since there is not sufficient, adequate, pure female work available for this large number of women, we must put them to work for OT construction projects. Your approval is requested."
It is true that you requested approval--is it not--for the use of women on construction projects?
A Yes, I asked for permission for the use of Jewish labor.
Q And Jewish female labor?
A Yes.
Q Then Himmler sent you the following teletype:
"Of course Jewish women are to be made use of for labor. In this case, one has merely to provide a healthy diet; a pure diet of raw vegetables is important. Be sure not to forget the import of garlic from Hungary in sufficient quantity."
I would like to ask you, witness, it is very obscure to me. What is it that Himmler is referring to in the last sentence, requesting you to import garlic from Hungary for these Jewish women?
A Garlic is a vegetable and cannot be cultivate in Germany sufficiently.
Q And Himmler was interested in seeing that these Jewish woman had a proper diet of garlic, is that correct?
A Yes, certainly.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Don't you think that you can smell the meaning from that?
MR. ROBBINS: That was what I was getting at, Your Honor.
A That was meant to be supplementary food, and we tried to get whatever we could.
Q It was meant as sarcasm, was it not, on Himmler's part?
A No, not at all. He meant it quite seriously, not at all sarcastically.
Q Then up to date we have covered the precursors and predecessors of the WVHA; the organization of the Verwaltungsamt from 1934 to 1939, and then the Main Office Building and Construction and Economy and Administration; or the WVHA from 1939 to 1942; and the organization; and the organization of the WVHA. And the part that each of these organizations played in the concentration camps, and their support of the concentration camps in the use of innate labor. There are only three other subjects that I would like to discuss with you. They are first, the SS industries 1039 and the part that Amtsgruppe W played in the SS industries; and the positions of the other defendants in the other Amtsgruppen. And, thirdly, the subject matter dealt with in the last document books; namely, Action Reinhardt.
Turning first to the SS industries, I have handed the witness and placed on the desk of the Tribunal Exhibit 383, Document NO-1039. This is already in evidence as Exhibit 383. It is in document book 14, page 19 of the English book, and page 13 of the German book. Prosecution considers this one of the basic documents in the case, as far as an understanding of the various SS industries is concerned.
This document gives the names of the larger SS industries, does it not, witness?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q And it gives a fairly clear picture of their positions in Amtsgruppe W, does it not?
A Yes.
Q Will you look at the chart that is on the wall from which your affidavit was made, and tell us if there are any errors in the picture as far as Amtsgruppe W is concerned, other than the fact that, as you said yesterday, there was no Chief of Staff W.
A The offices are quite correctly listed here.
Q Do you have the chart which is attached to the basic information brief from which this chart was made, the wall chart was made?
A No, I have not got it.
Q I wonder if any of the defense counsel have this basic chart in German...
Q Will you look at this chart which is in somewhat more detail than the wall chart and see if it gives a fair picture of Amtsgruppe W and the position of the industries?
A Well that is the chart which I corrected myself.
Q And it gives a correct picture?
A Yes, quite.
Q First, I would like to take up the functions of Staff W, which is the first division listed in Exhibit 383. The person who was called Chief of Staff W, whether or not he was chief, was Baier, was he not? Baier was called the Chief of Staff W, is that correct?
A Yes, from 1943 onwards.
Q And he replaced the Defendant Hohberg in that position?
A Yes.
Q Now I would like for you to tell us what functions the Defendant Baier performed as so-called Chief of Staff W.
A Baier dealt with auditing of all the branches which belonged to the German Economic Enterprises, the DWB, and immediately after joining he started to revise -- to build up, rather -- the Revision Department and to check up on the various enterprises. That was his task in Staff W.
Q Baier has said in previous interrogations and testimony that he had supervision over all questions concerning plant management and industries, is that correct?
A No, he had nothing to do with the management. That I would look after with the managers of the various enterprises themselves and and Baier had nothing to do with that side of it. Baier was first of all the auditing expert, because that was in accordance with his training and experience.
Q Did he have any phase of supervision over any of the W industries? Did he exercise any sort of supervision whatever?
A No.
Q I would like to read to you from part of your prior testimony which was sworn to and which was taken on the 4th of June, 1946. You were asked by Dr. Kempner:
"Did you have banking connections with the Reichsbank?
"Answer: With the Reichsbank and Bank of German Labor Oberfuehrer Baier could give you exact information about that. He was in charge of the holding companies under me. All our enterprises were compounded in a holding company, the DWB, and they were managed by Oberfuehrer Baier, -They were managed by Oberfuehrer Baier--and he has information about all their financial dealings."
A I said yesterday that these were my first interrogations a year ago when the whole picture and the various details were less clear to me than they are today. At that time Baier, when we received credit from the Bank of German Labor, was not with us and he could know nothing about the negotiations about the credit. As for the negotiations of the Reichsbank, Baier did not carry them or and the testimony I made a year ago, in the affidavits which followed I had to correct and that also concerns this detail. I was asked about all sorts of things down to the smallest bank accounts and I was unable to see the thing. The picture was less clear to me at that time than it is today and as I pictured it in the later affidavit.
Q As you told us time after time in answer to the questions to explain you couldn't recollect various details of the organizations. I would like to know how it is that your memory is better on certain of these details than it was a year or more ago when you were first interrogated on these questions?
A That is not an unusual thing that certain details with which I have special memories should have stuck more to my powers of memory. I haven't forgotten everything, but from these many subjects on which I worked, I have not been able to remember every detail. Many details, now that I have been thinking about them for a year, have become clearer to me than they were a year ago.