What kind of a mental state is it which causes a person to say that he remembers precisely a thing which you now say did not happen?
A. I do not say that the things did not happen. All I say now is that I acquired knowledge about these things very much later.
Q. Well, your mental state was such, then, a year ago that you stated that you saw things which you did not actually see? Is that what you want the Tribunal to believe?
A. Yes, in certain cases, certainly.
Q. Referring to Exhibit 544, I invite your attention to paragraph (5) which says:
"In March 1945 Himmler ordered Gluecks and myself to report to him. Ho commissioned me to visit every camp commandant and to pass on the order that no more Jews were to be exterminated and those who were still alive were to be well treated."
Did that change in policy occur because it was then realized that the extermination policy was wrong, morally and in every other way, or was it because the collapse was imminent and there was a desire to have as little evidence presented as possible to those who might investigate the extermination program? Which, one was it, of these two?
A. Himmler never told me anything about this. Later on I heard that he stopped the program in order to had the surviving Jews as pawns in his foreign political game which he played in 1945, but neither Himmler nor anyone else authentically told me about this, and I only know this from hear say.
Q. That is your explanation?
A. Yes, it is.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. I would like to turn now to the last subject that I intend to interrogate you about, and that is a brief description of your position in German life. You were a general in the Waffen-SS, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you give us the dates during which you held that position?
A. I became a general in grade for the first time, I believe, in 1939 or 'r0. I became a Lieutenant-General when the first planning agency, general planning agency for the base troops was planned within the Reich budget. At that time I was a Gruppenfuehrer, and I was given the grade of a Lieutenant -General in the Waffen-SS. That must have been in 1939 or 1940. I am note quite certain as to the date. I became a general when I was promoted Obergruppenfuehrer in 1942.
Q. And that was when you were made chief of the WVHA, was it not?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. You were an SS-Gruppenfuehrer in the General-SS also, were you not?
A. Yes.
Q. And during what dates?
A. Well, I must make a correction here. Later on I was a member of the Waffen-SS and not the General-SS so that my grade as Obergruppenfuehrer of the Allgemeine-SS really does not apply.
Q. You were an Obergruppenfuehrer in the Allgemeine -SS, were you not?
Q. No, I was Obergruppenfuehrer in the Waffen-SS.
Q. And what position did you hold in the Allgemeine-SS?
A. In the Allgemeine-SS my highest grade was that of Gruppenfuehrer. That rank I held when I was transferred to the Waffen-SS.
Q. You were also Ministerial Director in the Reich Ministry of the Interior. Will you give us the dates of that position?
A. I became, as I recall it now, Ministerial Director, in 1938, and that appointment became void when I was put in charge of a planning agency within the Waffen-SS, which took place in 1939 or 1940. Therefore I held this position only for a short time. Once I was appointed Lieutenant-General in the Waffen-SS my position as a Ministerial Director became null and void.
Q. Witness, I have your personnel file here from the SS, and I would like to show it to you, and perhaps we can get some of the dates a little more exactly from it if you refresh your memory by looking at these files. I hand you Document NO-192 which I will mark for identification as Exhibit 545, NO-1225 as Exhibit 546, and NO-1228 as Exhibit 547. Can you tell us what Document NO.92 is, what it consists of? Just a moment until all of the copies are distributed. Will you first identify Document NO-192, which is Exhibit 545? Can you tell us what this is?
A. These page is a leadership questionnaire which came from SAObergruppe II at Stettin of the Nordmark. It deals with my personnel data during the time I was a member of the SA, SA leadership of Naval Detachment II at Kiel, and it is correct.
Q. The next one?
A. The second page is a personnel file which was compiled for every leader in an SS-administrative office, and it is also correct. The third page must have been an enclosure in my personnel file of some sort, and its contents are also correct.
Q. The defendant has Document NO-192. The dates and information given there are correct, is that right?
A. Yes, they are quite correct.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the date, it isn't clear in our copy, 21 June 19-- what? Right at the top of the document, NO-192, "Submitted to Fuehrer 21 June."
THE WITNESS: 1933, when I was a member of the SA in Kiel.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Robbins.
MR. ROBBINS: I think this is 1940; 21 June, 1940.
Q. (By Mr. Robbins) Will you look at the document you referred to as being on Page 2 in the original. 21 June 1940.
A. Page 2, do you mean?
THE PRESIDENT: It is the very first date of the document at the top of the document, right opposite the photograph.
THE WITNESS: 20th of June, 1933, on the first document, on top, below Fuehrer's Questionnaire.
THE PRESIDENT:NO-192?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there a photograph on that document, a picture?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, right near the picture it says, "Submitted to Fuehrer" in pencil.
THE WITNESS: Page 3 of my document, Page 3, of Document 192 there it says....
THE PRESIDENT: What is that date?
THE WITNESS: 21 June 1940.
THE PRESIDENT: 1940. That fixes it.
THE WITNESS: 21 June 1940.
Q. (By Mr. Robbins) You were also Reich Treasurer of the SS, were you not?
A. I was in charge of the Reich-treasury of the SS. That denomination was later changed into administrative chief of the SS. I was Reich Treasurer of the Allgemeine SS.
Q. Could you give us the period of time during which you held that position?
A. Well, I was in that position from 1934 up to the capitulation.
Q. You were also Reich Treasurer of the German Red Cross?
A. My official position there was called Plenipotentiary-General for all property matters of the German Red Cross.
Q. Did you ever hold any other position in the German Red Cross?
A. Before that appointment I was chief of the administrative office of the German Red Cross.
Q. Did you ever hold any other position in the German Red Cross?
A. No, no other position. I had a grade, I believe I was called Generalhhauptfuehrer, which was just a title, but not a position.
Q. Will you give us the dates during which you held official positions in the Red Cross?
A. I believe that I was chief of the administrative office from 1936 onwards up to, roughly, 1939 or 40. But I am not clear as to the exact date. Then I resigned as chief of the administrative office and was promoted to Plenipotentiary General in all property matters, in which capacity I remained until the end, 1945.
Q. You were also a member of the German Reichstag, were you not?
A. Yes, I was that for some months. I had to resign again because of my economic activities. Nobody was allowed to be a member of the Reichstag who was a member of a board of directors. That was the reason why I had to resign as a member of the Reichstag. I was an understudy, as it were, of the Reichstag, and I functioned as a member of the Reichstag for someone else.
Q. What month was that, do you recall?
A. It was during the war. I am not clear of the exact date. It was for only a very short period of time.
Q. Will you look at the Document NO-1225 which I have just handed you, as Exhibit 546? I should like to read a part of that to you. This is a certificate dated 31 October 1938:
"During the events of 8 and 9 November 1923 at Munich we party members from Kiel were staying together and were ready for action in the Seamen's Home at Kiel, Flaemischestrasse 21 under the code name 'Volksbund Uwe Jens Lornsen, Kampfbund fuer Deutsche Volksrechte e.V.' (People's Association Uwe Jens Lornsen, Association Fighting for the rights of the German People, registered association). Among its members there was also the present SS-Gruppenfuehrer, Party member Oswald Pohl, number of membership in the NSDAP 30842. A journey to Munich with the purpose to enter the city was not possible because of the then prevailing restrictions. To frustrate an interference by the police we had to destroy all papers, as for example membership cards, and so on. This may explain the absence of membership cards and of lists of the party members of that time."
Can you tell us what events are referred to there as happening on the 8th and 9th of November, 1923?
A. That was Hitler's first attempt to seize power.
Q. That was the so-called Munich Putsch?
A. Quite so.
Q. And can you tell us the significance of this certificate stating that you wanted to be present but that you were unable to be?
A. I was given this certificate in 1938 by the signatories, who were members of the People's Association Uwe Jens Lornsen, with the request that I should back up the application to receive the so-called "Blood Order" from the Party, as it was called. That "Blood Order" was a souvenir coin from the Munich Putsch and was issued only to those members of the Party who took part in Munich at the time. These old Kiel Party members believed to have a right to claim it for themselves if they used me as a support, because I had been in Munich at the time and was well connected with Party agencies. I did it, but success was negative and they were not given the "Blood Order". That is the history of that document.
Q. You were not given the Blood Order?
A. No, I did not receive it, nor did the others.
Q. This certificate was made for the purpose of helping you obtain the Blood Order, is that right?
A. Well, the certificate was drawn up without my active participation. The old members of Kiel wished to have it and they made me part of this group because they hoped for more success that way, if I used my influence in Munich - which I did. I went at that time to the agency concerned, but the application was turned down.
Q. You were an active supporter of the NSDAP at that time, were you not?
A. Well, that was not a local group of the NSDAP. Only the predecessors of the People's Association, which was the Uwe Jens Lornsen, were not part of the NSDAP.
Q. Well, you were active in that association, is that correct?
A. Yes, I was a member of it, and visited its meetings.
Q. Will you look at the next document which I gave you which is NO-1228, which I have marked--
THE PRESIDENT: 1224?
MR. ROBBINS: I haven't given him 1224 yet, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the one we have.
MR. ROBBINS: You also have 1228, do you not?
THE PRESIDENT: No.
MR. ROBBINS: It seems to have been distributed. I have two additional copies here. I distributed three documents a moment ago.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Some of the German counsel had the English.
MR. ROBBINS: I see.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Do you have this document, witness? It is the one that starts with the description of you: "Old National Socialist, alert and cheerful, an enemy of all paragraphs---"
Can the translators give us a translation of those words "An enemy of all paragraphs"? (To interpreters) Do you have the German there? What is the English equivalent?
INTERPRETER: I assume it means "anti-red-tape", but I am not positive.
MR. ROBBINS: "Paragraphs" is the literal interpretation?
INTERPRETER: Literal translation-- But I think it means somebody who is against red-tape, bureaucracy.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. Can you identify the signature at the bottom of that letter?
A. That was Gruppenfuehrer Wittje.
Q. That is W-i-t-t-j-e?
A. Yes, Wittje.
Q. And do you know the purpose for which this letter is given?
A. I do not know, but I assume that the cause was perhaps a promotion - simply another entry into my personal files.
Q. I would next like to show you Document NO-1224, which I will mark as Exhibit 548 for identification. Can you tell us what this document is? This is signed by you, is it not?
A. Yes, I signed it.
Q. And what is it?
A. I will have to read it first. Well, it would appear to be a written statement from the time when I took part in a training course, the Reich Leader School in Munich, in the summer of 1932. At that time I was for four weeks at the SA Leadership School in Munich, where I took a training course from which period this written statement originated.
Q. It is dated the 24th of June, 1932?
A. No, it should be the 24th of August, 1932. Twenty-fourth August, 1932, is the correct date.
Q. Is that the date on the original photostat that you have?
A. Yes.
MR. ROBBINS: I should like to read the first three paragraphs, and then I will have no further questions on cross-examination:
"Why am I a National Socialist, and why an SA man?
"Because I was a National Socialist before National Socialism came into being, and thus the person I was, formed by heredity, education and environment, could only be politically satisfied by an idealistic conception of the world, such as that of National Socialism.
"Thus the unconscious instinct which was in my blood preceded the intellectual process of political realization. I could, therefore, not go through a political development in the Party sense.
"Equally, I could not remain passive either. Being a National Socialist, I became an SA man, because I realized that one was dependent on the other, and only the connection of both formed a whole, just as body and soul form the live man."
I have no further questions on cross-examination.
THE PRESIDENT: This Tribunal will recess.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
OSWALD POHL - Resumed REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Witness, the prosecution at the end of the cross examination introduced the printed document before you, NO-1225, which is exhibit No 546 for Identification. I already asked you during the direct examination what kind of political activities you performed since the last war and you mentioned the name of Volksbund in which you were active. I ask you now, Witness, was that the Volksbund Uwe Jens Lornsen, Fighting League for German National Rights, in Kiel?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that the association which you had in mind?
A. Yes.
Q. At that time in November, 1943, you did not march towards Feldherrnhalle because you were prevented from doing so for the reason contained in this certificate, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Nor did you at any time after that during your interrogations by the prosecution, deny the fact that from that time on you were a convinced national socialist?
A. I was convinced of the good points of National Socialism and I believed in it strongly. That is at all times I believe in National Socialism and I would have marched at Munich, if I would have had the opportunity to do so.
Q. The prosecution then introduced a certain document, NO-1228, Exhibit No. 547. This is an opinion of the 14th of May, 1935. I ask you now, witness, did you know this opinion of Gruppenfuehrer Wittze, who is mentioned as Berger here by mistake. Did you know anything about this opinion before it was introduced in the cross examination?
A. No, as far as I know, I saw it here for the first time.
Q. By order of Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler as of the 3rd of March, 1942, effective the 1st of May, 1942, the Inspectorate was incorporated into the WVHA as Amtsgruppe D. I ask you now, witness, what did you have to do as Chief of the WVHA and what did you have to do prior to that with the administrative situation in the camps?
A. As Chief of the WVHA prior to that time the Economic Enterprises in the concentration camps were subordinated to me. Prior to that time I had nothing to do with the administration of the camp proper.
Q. What did your activity limit itself to after the incorporation of the Inspectorate into the WVHA with reference to those camps?
A. After the incorporation according to Himmler's task, I dealt with the labor assignment of the inmates as the highest authority.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO): Dr. Seidl, hasn't this material been covered rather fully?
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, during cross examination this question was dealt with; and I have no further questions on this problem. However, I should like to have this point clarified; and I think it is rather important to do so.
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO): It seems to me that on the direct examination we spoke about the fact that he had charge of labor allocation; that it was mentioned in cross examination. I don't know what further feature there is to illuminate.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q On the 24th and 25th of April 1942 you called all camp commandants and work shop managers for a conference in the WVHA in Berlin, as can be seen from Exhibit Number 40 of the prosecution, Document R-129. Did you at any time after that ever call a meeting of the concentration camp commandants?
A No.
Q The prosecution during the cross examination put before you Exhibit Number 60, which is in Document Book Number 3 of the prosecution. This is Document NO-1290, and it is a letter to the camp commandants of the 22nd of November 1943. It deals with the working time for the inmates; and I shall put this document before you now and ask you what can be seen from the file notes with reference to who set up this letter, and so forth.
A The letter was drawn up by Amt D-II, which is Labor Allocation of Inmates, and it was then signed by me.
Q In other words, it was drawn up by the Inspector of the concentration camps and apparently submitted to you for your signature? Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Was the procedure very often used in the same way?
A It occurred once in a while, perhaps even quite often, that Court No. II, Case No. 4.Gluecks during his weekly conference submitted drafts to me for which he wanted my signature because the contents of the letters concerned general instructions.
It occurred once in a while that these drafts which were submitted to me through those channels were signed; and I myself in Berlin and my staff did not have any experts for concentration camp matters.
Q During your examination you mentioned repeatedly the outside camps of the concentration camps, and you called them labor camps. Did these labor camps have anything to do with the labor camps in which the voluntary foreign laborers were billeted or lodged and which in part were under the German Labor Front? I ask you now, Witness, what was the difference between these two types of labor camps?
A They were two groups which were entirely separated from each other and which had no connection or contact with each other. Although they both had the same name, labor camp, they had nothing to do with each other. The labor camps of the concentration camps were outside camps of the concentration camps and in the enterprises where a large number of inmates worked. That is where these inmates were billeted. These outside camps of the concentration camps were under the control of the commandant of the main camp who had put the inmates at the disposal of the enterprises. Economically speaking, they were under the enterprises, so to speak. The labor camps in which the Sauckel workers lived were, generally speaking, only lodging camps from which the workers could move about freely. They could come and go as they pleased. All those workers who had come to the Reich through the Sauckel organization were either channeled to small workshops or peasants, where they worked and lived; or then they were channeled to those lodging or billeting camps which were supervised by either the enterprises or the German Labor Front. That was something entirely different from the outside camps of the concentration camps. They had nothing to do with each other.
Q The prosecution during cross examination submitted to you Court No. II, Case No. 4.Exhibit 181.
It is in Document Book Number 4. In this connection you were asked how many concentration camps there were. In order to eliminate doubt and particularly since there apparently has been a mistake in the translation, I ask you again, how many concentration camps were there in the Reich at the end of the war?
A Towards the end of 1944 I believe there were thirteen concentration camps, that is, main camps, and approximately 500 outside camps, labor camps, in other words.
Q In this document 185 labor camps are mentioned. Do I have to assume from your answer that these 185 labor camps were again distributed amongst the enterprises or can be distributed amongst the enterprises?
A These 185 labor camps or rather outside camps were located near the enterprises.
Q As Exhibit 528 the prosecution introduced documents which refer to Lebensborn. I did not receive a copy of this document as yet. You will recall this document, however; and I ask you again what was the relationship between the Lebensborn and you with reference to the WVHA?
THE PRESIDENT: He answered this same question at great length, and now your question is, "Say it again."
DR. SEIDL: If the Tribunal is of the opinion that the defendant has already had the possibility of giving an exhaustive answer to this question during the cross examination, then I am ready to withdraw this question.
THE PRESIDENT: Don't you think he answered it fully?
DR. SEIDL: I am not of the opinion that he has had the possibility of explaining the reason why he no longer recalls in this document of 1938 in the cross examination and why he first of all stated that he had no further connections with the Lebensborn than any other SS member.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if there is something new that you want him to testify to, of course he may do so; but there is no purpose in just Court No. II, Case No. 4.having him go over the long story of the Lebensborn again.
We remember it very well.
DR. SEIDL: I shall not ask him about the whole story of the Lebensborn. I shall just limit myself to asking him what kind of activity he exercised as a member of the Board of Supervisors.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, but we shall stop him if he starts to grinding the old wheat all over again.
Q.- Witness, what were your functions as a member on the supervisory board of the Lebensborn, and how could it be explained that you could no longer recall any of this before or after the introduction of this document?
A.- When this document was introduced I no longer knew that once upon a time I had been on the supervisory board, or in the Lebensborn. Nor can I recall that as such I had any other activities but to read a report of the Lebensborn once or twice a year. This activity was so far removed from the remainder of my tasks that I could not carry it out. At the same time I could not recall what the economic connections were between the Lebensborn and the WVHA. The Lebensborn did not belong to the WVHA but belonged to the Main Office Personnel Staff, and later on I only recall that they had Partschenderf, which was the only estate which they had bought through a special contract, or rather sale to the German Research Office for food, but even here I could not recall any further points of contact or connections of the two, but the entire activity was so slight and remote that I really had no reasons to make such statements to this Tribunal.
Q.- The Prosecution during the cross examination introduced a new document put before you, that was Document NO-1954, which was provided with Prosecution's Exhibit No. 529. This is a letter which you wrote on 21 September 1942, to the defendant Dr. Hohberg, and it deals with the new regulations of the Economic Experts on your staff. It says there that this agency is to be called in future. The Economic Inspector with the Chief of SS-WVHA. Apparently, you no longer recall this incidence, and I ask you why you no longer recall this matter?
A.- This decree was a spontaneous measure which I had taken at the time. I doubt even if there had been any discussion with my Economic Experts about that. In any case it disappeared entirely after that, and I did not see it in any other organizational chart, or any document, so I must have deducted from those facts that those measures were not carried out. From the development later on my opinion is corrobarated, for these Economic inspectors were substituted by the auditors, who were sent to the enterprises two or three months later. That was a new regulation, but this position of an Economic Inspector, I could no longer recall because it has never become effective, because I would have found it in an organizational chart, or a document if it had become a reality.
Q.- What was the influence of the WVHA could have over the release of the inmates from the concentration camps, and what were the principles of which the business managers left themselves a guide when sponsoring such request?
A.- The WVHA also had to write a sponsoring letter for their inmates, or, rather make an application of the Reich Security Main Office for their inmates whom they wanted to have released, so long as the inmates were in the enterprises in the camp, and they were exclusively under the influence of the RSHA. The business managers, of course, were interested in having these inmates secured for their enterprises, who had been skilled in their jobs, and were skilled workers and in contrast to the private industry represented their key personnel. They could only do it, however, if these inmates were removed from the grip of the RSHA, and this could only be done by having these inmates released in order to use them as free workers immediately afterwards for the enterprises, and, that actually occurred in very many, many cases.
I myself can recall two specific cases, personally, in which former inmates even received leading positions in these enterprises. One of them became a business manager for a larger plant with a monthly income of one-thousand marks, and the other one was Chief gardener in Dachau with approximately two-hundred marks wages. Both of them had free living quarters, and they could have their families, and they did have their families with them. That I know also that these enterprises also had put at their disposal the many released inmates of family settlements. That was the only way for the enterprises to keep these leading personnel, by removing them from the grip of the RSHA, and to be able to use them for the enterprises proper.
Q.- The prosecution during the cross examination, introduced Exhibit No. 498, shown to you. That is Document Book 20, Document no. NO-1611. It is on page 1 of Document Book No. 20. It says here in paragraph 3 literally, and I quote: "It will be our endeavor to have these Jewish laborers changes for Poles, and to change these small Jewish enterprises into large Jewish enterprises, in the Eastern part in the General Government, and there some day according to the Fuehrer's wishes they are to disappear," and of quotation. This letter of Himmler's is dated 9 October 1942, and you also received a copy of this letter. I am asking you now, witness, when you read that letter, in particular the last paragraph, what did you think at the time?
THE PRESIDENT: That same question was asked of him, and I remember the answer, at great length. Don't you re member it, too?
DR. SEIDL: Yes, I remember the answer. However, I believe that he should be more precise in answering, particularly, in reference to the fact that during the cross examination a whole series of documents were put before him from which one could draw a conclusion that he already at the time had a good idea of this particular sentence in the last paragraph of this letter.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, certainly, we don't want to put any obstacles in your way, but there does not seem to be any good reason for asking him the same question which he answered at great length before. If there is something particular you want to ask him, there is no objection.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Your present question is, what did you think when you read that last paragraph. That calls for a twenty minute speech which we already heard.
DR. SEIDL: Your Honor, I am under the impression that the Tribunal fears that my re-examination will take too long, and to assuage this fear, I would like to state here that the whole re-direct examination will take a whole half on hour at the most, and that all these fears, so far as I am concerned, are unfounded.
THE PRESIDENT: It is not a question of how long you are going to take. It is a question of how much time you are going to waste. You can take a week if you want to, provided the material that you are asking for is new material and not simply of old material gone over again. We are in no hurry, Dr. Seidl, provided we are going somewhere.
DR. SEIDL: I shall withdraw this question.