Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Witness, you said it was planned. Who had the plan? Who did the planning?
A The management of the firm.
Q And who were the people?
A In this case the Defendant Mummenthey.
Q Is it therefore correct to say, if I understood you correctly, that, as it were, the DEST wanted to create an apprentice department within its enterprise in order to train the inmates as stone masons and apprentices?
A They did not only wish to do so--they actually trained them for years, somebody called Herr Kaiser who, in hard and painful work, explained the work and carried it out himself theoretically and practically in all the enterprises.
Q Witness, I don't understand one point. Now, we are talking about allocation of inmates in concentration camps. From what categories of inmates were these workers recruited?
A They were also people who were locked up in protective custody or inmates who were in concentration camps on the basis of a regular trial. Their professional backgrounds were of a great variety.
Q Let us be more precise. Did these inmates include criminals?
AAs far as I know, yes.
Q Were they also what was known as anti-social elements, elements which shy away from the community because they did not wish to work: tramsp, drunkards, beggars, and so forth? Were they included?
A Yes.
Q Was there yet another category among them? I mean those people who, for their political opinions or for their political behavior, had been committed to a concentration camp. Is that also correct?
A Yes; certainly.
Q Very well, I can imagine that the criminals and the antisocial inmates from the beginning were to remain in concentration camps for some nominal period of time until you could state an improvement in their status. The political prisoners, on the other hand, were committed Court No. II, Case No. 4.to concentration camps only for a limited period of time; and my question is:
Did this training program of the DEST apply to all those inmates, or only to a certain category of inmates?
A We thought it was important, first of all, that the antisocial elements--that is, those who were not used to a definite type of work, or had not learned anything--should do useful work so that after their release they would have a profession in which they could work.
QQuite so. In other words, these anti-social elements who had never done anything in their lives would be trained to become useful workers?
A Yes.
Q Is it true that Mummenthey also had the idea expressed it, and stood up for it, to have those inmates--I mean the criminals and the anti-socials--later on settling down near the plant in order to revive their joy of living?
A Yes. Our architect, Fuerth, had worked out that plan to the last detail.
Q For what works?
A Flossenbuerg, St. Georgen-
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q Just a minute, Doctor.
Witness, have you named all of the categories that comprised the inmates of the concentration camps?
A Yes.
Q Three ?
A Please?
Q You have named three?
A Yes.
Q There were no prisoners of war among them?
A No, we had no prisoners of war.
Q In any of the concentration camps that worked inmates of the DEST industries, there were no prisoners of war? You make that statement?
A No, not that I know of.
Q Were there any Jews from the East?
A Not that I know of.
Q So you have named all of the various categories that comprised the inmates of the concentration camps that worked for the DEST industries?
A Yes.
Q All right.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for Defendant Mummenthey): Your Honor, following your question, may I perhaps put something to the witness?
Q Witness, we have a document here where reference is made to Soviet Russian prisoners of war being trained in stone masonry. I give you this document, NO-1049, Exhibit 436, and I would like you to add something to your testimony, should there be a misunderstanding between your answers and what Judge Phillips has asked you. I do not wish to have any misunderstanding simply because your testimony was incomplete.
AAs I see it, this can only refer to prisoners who, as Free Workers, worked in the Reich during wartime and then, for some offense or other, were taken into protective custody and committed to a concentration camp. I can think of no other way to explain this matter.
Q Will you please read this sentence to the Court which is important here, about the two hundred prisoners of war?
MR. MC HANEY: Just a minute, witness. If the Tribunal please, I think I have been quite patient with the examination of this witness. His questions have been extremely leading. He has tended to sum up the answers to some length after they have been given, all of which is unnecessary.
It now appears to me that he is intending to impeach his own witness. He very clearly stated to Judge Phillips' question that he did not know that any prisoners of war or any Jews were used in the DEST industries. I think that is a clear and unequivocal statement; and now he is putting a document to him which tends to contradict his statement, and asking him to explain it. I don't think that is proper.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE PRESIDENT: It is quite proper to refresh the recollection of your own witness. This isn't impeachment. I think it is also proper to call to the witness's attention anything he may have forgotten. So on either one ground or the other I think this questioning is proper.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Witness, I wanted to ask you something else. In view of Judge Phillips' question, don't forget what you said yesterday afternoon about the diamond cutting works. You told us yesterday afternoon-I don't know whether Mr. McHaney was present at the time--that this diamond cutting work in Herzogenbusch employed Jews, and we also know that in Auschwitz there were also some female Jewish workers working there.
In order to have your testimony clear and exhaustive, I would like to ask you, did you know--and this is what Judge Phillips asked you, too--or did you not know at the time that the DEST enterprises at any time employed Jews from the East?
A When I talked about the diamond works in Herzogenbusch I said quite clearly and definitely that in the plant which was to be established not a single person worked for the DEST. It was only a plan--no work was actually done. Then I also know that in Auschwitz, with Herr Rupprecht, there were two or three Jewesses working as office clerks.
This I only heard after the evacuation of the Auschwitz agency. I did not know it before then.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, do you still say that neither in Auschwitz, Buchenwald or Flossenbuerg there were any Jews from the East employed by the DEST?
WITNESS: I know nothing about that. Apart from those two cases which I have just explained, I know nothing about that.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you were right in the plants where you could see the workers, weren't you?
WITNESS: No, I was never in the plants; I was working in Berlin all these years.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Witness, perhaps you haven't understood His Honor's questions. You went to the enterprises from Berlin at least once or twice as year, and then you looked at them?
A Yes, of course I visited them.
Q But that is exactly what the Presiding Judge asked you.
A Oh, I am sorry.
Q You must pay attention to the questions which are put to you, and then give your answer.
A Certainly.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q You actually saw the workers while they were performing their tasks?
A I didn't understand... Of course, during the day when I had to do some official business in the enterprises I walked through the plants, and I saw the workers doing their work.
Q But you didn't see any Jews from the East on any occasion?
A I don't know anything about it. I did not notice anything.
Q Well, just answer my question please, yes or no. You never saw any Jews from the East working in the DEST plants?
A No.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q What sort of clothes did the inmates wear in the enterprises?
A The usual striped uniform.
Q Will you please give us a brief description of it?
A Long blue-white slacks, and a jacket of the same color. In winter, overcoats of the same color scheme and a hat of the same color.
Q Did they wear any triangles on their uniforms?
A Yes.
Q Did they have any letters attached to their uniforms?
AA triangle of a certain color, and then a number.
Q. At the back of the uniform were there the initials of a country, perhaps, from where the inmate might come, for instance, as "U" for "Soviet Union"?
A. I never noticed anything of that sort.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you ever notice a uniform with the letter "0"?
THE WITNESS: No.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Counsel, I did not recall if the witness ever explained why he first said there were no prisoners of war employed in the DEST industries and then you confronted him with a document which showed that some prisoners of war were so employed. Did he explain that? I know there was an objection made and a discussion of the objection.
Q. (By Dr. Froeschmann) Witness, did you understand what His Honor said just now?
A. Yes.
Q. You were asked whether the DEST employed prisoners of war in its enterprises and you answered in the negative. I then gave you a document where reference is made to the fact that for training purposes 200 Soviet prisoners of war were to be used. His Honor now wishes you to tell him how it happened that you said, first of all, "no" to my question and then only when I gave you the document recalled this matter. How can you explain that contradiction in your testimony?
A. In this document which has just been handed to me, I am bound to assume that these 200 prisoners were people who formerly worked as free workers in Germany, had become guilty of some offense or other, and then were committed to a concentration camp, and they were used for training purposes.
Q. Witness, that information might be correct if it wouldn't say expressly in the document 200 Soviet prisoners of war. Please read it very carefully. They cannot be people who once upon a time were free workers in Germany because free workers could not be Russian prisoners of war.
A. Then in my opinion they must be prisoners of war who would be stationed in a prisoner of war camp.
Anyway, I don't know that prisoners of war were ever sent to plants from concentration camps.
Q. You want to say that when you gave your first answer you were thinking of real prisoners of war stationed and working in prisoner of war camps and you did not know or did not remember or did not know anything at all that such prisoners of war were being employed by the DEST?
A. Yes.
Q. But after the document is now put to you, then you reach a conclusion that they must be special people who were sent to a concentration camp on the basis of some special method?
A. Yes.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. McHaney, would you call that "leading" or "dragging" a witness?
MR. MC HANEY: Testifying, Your Honor.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I am endeavoring, if Your Honors please, to disentangle this small confusion. It is my feeling that the witness in his endeavor to tell the truth mis-expressed himself at first and I do not wish that a suspicion arises as to his veracity.
THE PRESIDENT: You are a very good witness, Dr. Froeschmann.
DR. FROESCHMANN: But totally unprepared, if Your Honor please.
Q. Witness, to discuss another matter: What hours of work did the inmates keep?
A. That depended entirely on the time of the year and on the climate. As a rule, they worked nine or ten hours, in addition to a one hour break for lunch. In wartime, when armament tasks became acute, there was another break of twenty minutes to half an hour for breakfast. In summer they worked always nine to ten hours and winter, according to the weather, the time was shorter.
Q. Witness, can you remember that once an order was issued by the defendant Pohl to the effect that hours of work were to be eleven hours in all enterprises of the DWB?
A. Yes, I can recall that, but that order was not really carried out.
It was ignored silently by all the plants, because it was quite impossible to work for longer than ten hours.
Q. Witness, in the war, were there any other disturbing elements, as far as hours of work were concerned?
A. Yes, of course, we wanted to save electricity, for instance, and as a result of air raids the plants very frequently had to interrupt their production, because raw materials, electric power, and other facilities were very short. I know of instances where in the enterprises no work was done for as long as a fortnight at a time.
Q. Who decided the hours of work?
A. That was decided by the work managers.
Q. Was there shift work?
A. Yes, we had three eight hour shifts, and later on two shifts which worked from nine to ten hours, exclusive of the lunch break.
Q. Witness, I put it to you that on the basis of a number of affidavits and witnesses' testimony the working hours in the DEST amounted to twelve to fourteen hours, it is alleged, although it has not been made quite clear whether this applied to the quarries or brick yards. What do you have to say about that?
A. Both in the quarries and in the brick works no such working hours were observed, neither by the civilians nor by the inmates.
Q. Witness, I shall now hand you Document NO-2126, which is Exhibit 298. This is the affidavit by Phillipp Grimm. In this affidavit Grimm says that he had been working in Office D-II and he drew up statistics, and statistics of fatalities. I would like you, witness, to read the first sentence of the second paragraph to the Court and give us your comments about it clearly and definitely.
A. I shall read this sentence: "I estimate that the number of fatalities which became clear from the statistics in D-II amounted to 10 percent per month."
Q. And the next sentence?
A. "The figures of fatalities for the W enterprises were in my opinion at least the same, if not higher."
Q. Thank you. What do you have to say about that?
A. This is completely out of the question because, as I said in answer to a different question, the DEST enterprises had to rely on healthy workers and they never did piece work. No impossible work was ever expected of an inmate. Therefore, any dissemination cannot be taken for granted here.
Q. Do you know anything, witness, that inmates died because they had been overworked in quarries at all?
A. No, I know nothing about that.
Q. Another point. How were the inmates treated by the other employees of the plant?
A. The inmates were treated just as were any other civilian workers whom we employed.
Q. Do you know anything about the fact that the inmates were being driven by the other employees of the plants -- were mistreated or sent on punitive details if they hadn't done their proper share?
A. I pointed out before that we never insisted that everything was done at once. We only insisted that that was done what an unskilled worker could do in his place of work. Any driving by the civilian foreman I know nothing about.
Q. Witness, but you must have learned since the surrender by things you read in the newspapers and magazines that it is alleged that in the DEST enterprises and particularly in the quarries inhumane acts occurred. For instance, we have a document here according to which in Mauthausen Jews were thrown down a quarry and atrocities of that sort occurred. My question to you is: While you were employed by the DEST, did you come across, either personally or from reports by the managers, any information that the guards mistreated or committed inhumane acts towards the inmates?
A. I never heard anything about that. I did not receive any reports about that nor did any of the managers, when they came to Berlin or when I visited a plant.
Q. My question was, witness, whether you had heard of the guards committing such acts, the guards, mind you.
A. No, I don't know anything about that. All I know is that in the early years in 1938 or 1939 the guards in some cases when roads were being built for the works insisted that the workers do more work than was expected later by the managers. When Mummenthey heard about that, he got the local commandant of the damp that was driving them and told him that this should be discontinued because it did not matter whether a road was completed today or a few days later.
Q. That is exactly what I meant. I did not speak about any particular year. At the beginning you heard of certain incidents whereby the guards did not treat the inmates in the same manner as the managers and other reports.
A. Quite.
Q. That is what I wanted to know. Then you say that Mummenthey, when he heard about that, immediately opposed this?
A. Yes.
Q. In this connection I would like you, witness, to answer this question: How were relations between the local managers and the local camp commandants? Do you know anything about that?
A. Yes. Relations were in every case very tense. The work managers and the commandants were never on very good terms. This is quite natural. In the works the managers were experts, technicians, whereas the commandants of camps were soldiers. The manager of a plant could not, of course, expect a man who was not a trained expert to tell him anything about his business. For that reason the quarrels very frequently arose. I recall one instance in Flossenburg where the then commandant of the camp, Kuenstler, interfered so often with the business of the works, the manager quarreled with him to such an extent that the defendant Mummenthey referred this to the defendant Pohl to have Kuenstler removed and another commandant appointed in his place.
Q. Do you know, witness, that the local commandants interfered with the actual production of the plants, inasmuch as they decided what inmate workers were to work in the plant even if they were of no interest to the plant?
A. Yes, that happened very often. That material which had been produced in the plant by request of somebody in the camp was used by the camp itself.
Q. Let's be a little more clear, please. Did the inmates have to smuggle that material into the camp, or what happened?
A. Yes, they had to hide it and bring it in.
Q. Was it heavy stuff?
A. In some cases it was tools, and in some cases it was processed stones. When the camp wanted to build something it would appear that these men who assigned the inmates for work in these enterprises of the DEST, would have them bring the required material with them, tools, as well as processed stones. Mummenthey, thereupon, frequently got into difficulties with the commandants when he insisted that this merchandise should be paid for.
Q. Witness, I am not so much interested in the fact that material disappeared, but in the fact of whether you knew that the commandant formed what was called punitive details which wormed inside the plant on certain jobs, such as carrying heavy stones uselessly back and forth without the plant having any need for them. Do you know anything about that?
A. I know that after they had done their work the inmates, when they left the plant had to carry stones along with them for the camp; from the area of the plant they had to carry stones as far as the camp. That was stopped by Mummenthey, as the stones produced in the plants were after that not to be taken to the camp.
Q. Do you know anything about this letter of the "death-ladder", the Todesstiege?
A. No, I only heard about that when in prison in Dachau. I read something in the newspapers.
Q. You know nothing about what the actual punitive details were?
A. No, I know nothing about that.
Q. Now, let me continue with the questions concerning the inhumane treatment of inmates. The plants of the DEST, as you told us yesterday, paid certain moneys to camp commandants, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell the Court quite briefly in what manner this payment was carried out. Whether these transactions were made by means of cash payments and transfers, or, didn't you know about it?
A. Yes, I know about that. For all unskilled workers, four marks per man were paid in full. For skilled workers, six marks per head were sent per month to the camp administration.
Q. Did the inmate directly, or indirectly, receive any other benefits from the managements in the form of bonuses?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell us more about that?
A. This was connected with the training of inmates. When Kaiser in 1940 stopped this program of training inmates as stone masons, then he suggested I believe, that inmates could be given a certain compensation in the form of bonuses.
On the basis of these vouchers, the inmates could go and buy for themselves in the camp canteen food, tobacco, and other items which were available there in wartime. These additional benefits came from the work management, and were given to the inmates.
Q. Did the DEST give through the managers other advantages to the work personnel, particularly, as far as the accommodations were concerned in the plants themselves?
A. Yes, in certain plants we had special halls where the inmates had their food. Also in all plants gloves were manufactured, because during wartime not every inmate had the necessary gloves. Also every plant had a shoe shop, where the damaged shoes could be repaired. Additionally we produced over one--thousand plates and things made from aluminum for the workers, to be paid for from our own exchequer.
Q. Will you tell us, witness, if the management of the DEST did everything within its power what a civilian enterprise would do for its workers?
A. Yes. The managers thought it was very important to have as many additional things as possible, because then you see the people would be more keen in their work.
Q. What attitude did Mummenthey take toward such suggestions?
A. He would also be very benevolent, and when we had discussions he always would point out to see it we find material in order to help the workers to start out as they should.
Q. Did Mummenthey in these discussion also point out that some other plant he had seen that special facilities for the workers were provided, and, that he recommended that these things should be imitated and done in other plants?
A. Yes, whenever he had inspected the plants, and he had seen that something had been established somewhere, which was good, he would issue a circular in which he told the other plant about it, so they also could follow such an advantage.
Q. Did Mummenthey in these efforts to look after the inmates come across difficulties on the part of commandants?
A. Yes, of course. It is needless to say - you cannot say needless from a human point of view - yes, I do mean it is needless to say, because the camp commandant followed up, as soon as Mummenthey as well as the work manager interfered in his sphere of duties, he would protest this interference. I should like in this connection to mention a case which I had experienced myself. The work management in Flossenburg one day went and inspected the food containers. This was reported to the commandant. The work management had at once to report to the commandant, and was put on the "carpet". He was told that he was not to interfere with such matters in the future.
Q. Was he threatened with anything, this work manager?
A. Yes.
Q. What was he threatened with?
A. That if he did this once more, and if he did not mind his own business, other punitive measures would be taken against him.
Q. Witness, do you know that in April 1942, Pohl issued an order whereby the commandants of camps became also the managers of the work plants, and that the work managers were purely their assistants?
A. Yes, I know that.
Q. I shall now hand you Document R-129, which is Exhibit No. 40, and I would like to tell the Court what effect this order had on the local management. Have you read it?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the effect of this order?
A: What I know is that in 1941 or 1942 the Camp Commandants were appointed managers of enterprises. As far as I know the effect was not a very good one as far as we were concerned. The Commandants continued to care very little for technicalities of an enterprise nor were they in a position to do so because any business matters and economic matters were a closed book to them and it was, therefore, much better if they did not interfere in such things. It was necessary and hoped at first that the mail of the enterprise should be studied by the Commandant but he discontinued that himself as he saw that he knew nothing about any business matters.
Q: But, quite generally did this not increase the power of the Commandants?
A: Yes, if did.
Q: My final questions. Now, witness, in the many years of your work you had occasion to observe the defendant Mummenthey?
A: Yes.
Q: You said yesterday that Memmenthey was a social minded person as far as inmates were concerned?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know anything about the efforts Mummenthey made to improve the lot of inmates as far as he breaking down of inmates into various categories was concerned? Did he make any suggestions about that whereby political prisoners were not to be kept with criminal inmates, that some labor camps were to be established for criminal inmates? Do you know anything about that?
A: Yes, I do. Memmenthey always made efforts for criminal and political inmates to be segregated from each other. As far as I know he succeeded in doing so in certain instances.
Q: Do you know that Dr. Engler, who was a witness here, went by order of Mummenthey and wrote a memorandum about that and sent it to his superior agencies? Do you know that?
A: Yes. I read the memorandum myself. At that time Mummenthey ordered Dr. Schneider, who was working in our legal department, to get Dr. Engler to give his impressions why the work done by an inmate was less than that done by a man sentenced by judicial administration. He wanted to find out what the causes were. That memorandum was passed on by Mummenthey to some agency.
Q: Is it correct that Memmenthey in all other cases, when he heard of bad conditions affecting the inmates, as far as the DEST was concerned of course, at once made objection to the agency concerned?
A: Yes. He always was extremely active in these things. Whenever he heard about those conditions he endeavored as far as he could to improve them.
Q: Did Mummenthey go to the bottom of these things or did he only act superficially?
A: He was well-known in his office as a man who worked with clock-like precision, if I may call it that. He was extremely energetic and whenever somebody made a suggestion and approached Mummenthey you could always be certain that he would do what he could to go to the bottom of these things. One can say that he really took the greatest care.
Q: Do you know, witness, anything about the fact that the defendant Memmenthey took part in plans which were aiming at the extermination of Jews?
A: No. I know nothing about that.
Q: Do you know anything about Mummenthey's attitude toward the Jews?
A: I am afraid I have no idea. We didn't discuss such matters.
Q: You didn't discuss them. Now, I have this question. In the last few days, when the defendant Volk was being cross examined by the Prosecution, he was shown a document which was concerned with what is known as Slate Oil Company. Do you know that term?
A: Yes.
Q: You were mentioned in that document as a manager of the Slate Oil Company.
A: Yes, I was that.
Q: Can you explain this to the Court?
A: Yes, I can. In 1943 when I was on an official trip a telegram by Pohl reached me that on such and such a date I was to go to Stuttgart. From there we went by train to Schoenberg where the Slate Oil Research Company had established a testing plant to see whether from slate oil could be made. After about six months I and a man called Captain von Kruedener, who was an expert in slate oil, were ordered to go and see Pohl and we were told that in the near future I was to be the manager of the German Slate Oil G.m.b.H. I told him at the time that I knew nothing about such matters and I asked not to be appointed manager. The defendant Pohl thereupon said that this was only a temporary solution and I was only the front man because shortly a man would be appointed permanent manager and I would not have to bother about the work, -- it was to be done later on. After about 2-3 months an elderly gentleman appeared who was called Frank, or something like that from Munich, who appointed. manager of the German Slate Oil Company in Schoenberg. I myself thereupon wrote to Dr. Volk on Staff W on several occasions and asked that my name be stricken from the Commercial Register.
After about six or 8 weeks I was informed by Dr. Hoffmann on the telephone that the gentleman who had been appointed manager of the German Slate Oil Company, G.m.b.H. had had a car accident in Munich and lost his life.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take the recess, Dr. FROESCHMANN.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN (Counsel for Mummenthey):
Q Witness, I now have a few concluding questions. I forgot to ask you one question before which referred to the additional food rations which the inmates received. Is it correct to say that the inmates in the factories of the DEST, upon the suggestion of the subiness manager of Mummenthey and their works manager, received additional food in the so-called heavy-heavy and long workers food?
Is that known to you?
A Yes, it is. As far as I know the enterprises had to state the number of all the workers who worked very heavily, and for a long time. And the camp administration requested those additional amounts of food from the food offices which were competent, and the food was added to their normal food.
Q Were the inmates placed in the same level in this connection as the civilian workers?
A Yes.
Q We also spoke about Mummenthey's attitude before, with reference to the inmates, but we spoke about it in general terms. I do not want you to speak too much in detail, but maybe you could tell this Tribunal in a very few words, based upon your own observations what Mummenthey's attitude was, generally speaking, with reference to the treatment of the inmates in the stone quarry enterprises.
A Herr Mummenthey himself was of a social character. If some man came to see him, regardless of whether he was a worker or an inmate, he would try to help him with suggestions and with advice. If it was within his power he tried to help at all times, and he did that at all times.
I explained to you before the recess with examples that he male a suggestion for the betterment within the enterprise, and he also succeeded in doing so