A: I myself, no, certainly not, because I regarded myself always as a military administrative official, and I think I can say the same of Goerg Loerner. I believe his economic activities set in without his realizing it or without his wishing to do so, because he was also knee-deep in administration tasks for the Waffen-SS. And I believe it was more his official rank and the fact that Pohl had discovered that Loerner had a commercial high school training behind him that tempted Pohl to have Loerner as a sort of liaison officer and on paper as his deputy. It is not my impression that Loerner was very busy economically speaking. It is very difficult for me to say this clear because I had very little insight into Office A, which becomes clear from my affidavit also.
Q: You mean B, B for "Bertha"?
A: Yes, yes, yes, because if I had precise insight into these things I would not have said all this nonsense in my affidavit.
Q: That is very interesting what you say just now because it sheds a light on the clear distinction between the various groups within the WVHA. Did you and Loerner or any other office chiefs in the same position have joint talks and conversations, on frequent occasions did you discuss your duties and tasks, or were the office groups working almost separately?
A: I and Loerner at long intervals of time, we discussed what we called "top" matters. That means Loerner would tell me roughly about what he would have to spend in the coming year, because as a budget official I was interested in this. The Reich Minister of Finance, after all, had to have a vague idea at least of the money he had to earmark for us, but five million here or ther would not play an important part. But he had to know more or less, would he have to earmark 300 or 500 million or a thousand million.
THE PRESIDENT: Your see where you are going, Dr. Haensel? You asked had he and Loerner or the other department heads ever had conferences.
DR. HAENSEL: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Then look where he is now.
DR. HAENSEL: He said no, and I think my question has been dealt with. He merely give a little addition of his own.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, not a little addition. Try another question, Doctor.
Q: (By Dr. Haensel) Tell me, we are agreed, that the concentration camps were not part of the military sector as far as the food was concerned, they were part of the civilian sector. Did you regard the administration of the concentration camps, and reference has been made to the Inspectorate of the Concentration camps on numerous occasions, as an organization which was a foreign body, as it were, in your administration of military tasks; one which you disliked?
A. Administration of concentration Camps were Reich administrations, just as the troop administrations were. I am even of the opinion that the administrative official of a concentration comp had a very special task to be industrious, honest, and efficient. Thousands of human beings were in his care who were unable to look after their own rights as the troops were, by which I mean that if a soldier did not have enough to eat, they complained; they would raise hess; whereas if the concentration camp inmates did not have enough to eat they could also complain, but I think that was an academic activity.
Q. Witness, I believe we should stick to our subject. I am not interested in the general moral points, what the men in the camp should have done. It was about your and Loerner's attitude. What was your attitude?
A. Doctor, in that case you shouldn't have asked me whether I disliked the agency. If you ask me that question I have to say something.
Q. Excuse me. Likes and dislikes, I mean your personal attitude, not what it was like objectively, because that we know. We want to know subjectively what your own personal attitude was. Was it your tendency not to be bothered with it?
A. You mean myself, doctor?
Q. Yes, I do, and from your attitude I wish to make conclusions about George Loerner's attitude.
A. I don't quite see the point of the question.
Q. Tell me when were the concentration camps taken into the WVHA? When?
A. I believe it is a well known fact, in April 1942.
Q. Was at that time the administrative office in full swing?
A. What administrative office?
Q. The WVHA. Did it exist at the time?
A. Yes.
Q. Concentration came later on, didn't they? In your circle among the higher chiefs did you approve of that or were you opposed to it, that concentration camps were added to your organization?
A. Doctor, I said that once before.
Q. Yes or no?
A. We did not like it.
Q. Why did you not like it?
A. Doctor, I can't give you an answer in one brief sentence, as you seem to expect.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: And as the Court desires.
WITNESS: Please?
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead, the two sentences then. Go ahead.
BY DR HAENSEL:
Q. Once again we will discuss likes and dislikes, which I want you to tell us something about. Why do you tell us you didn't like it?
A. Doctor, why I disliked it very much--we all of us disliked it very much. Who wanted to have anything to do with inmates of prisons ever? I even maintain that all those who volunteered for concentration camps as guards or officials were somehow pathological types. I never would have volunteered for this. It is a hateful activity to supervise a man who is locked up. And I believe that the principle of the whole matter is that any normal instincts, negative instincts, that is, are being awakened by the knowledge that I am confronted with a man who cannot hit back. And I see that particularly clearly here in this American prison, how careful the American prison authorities are to see to it that no such instincts will ever be awakened. We have seen American soldiers for instance, who were perhaps not always entirely correct towards us, and they were immediately relieved. And that is what I missed in our organization, that these bastards who got rid of their pathological instincts were not immediately sent away again and replaced by decent people. And now let me talk about the administrative official.
An administrative official could do a lot of good and he had quite a bit of power at hand. Time conditions prevented him from supervising these people in the way in which it would have been necessary. I believe that goes far beyond likes and dislikes. And as far as Loerner--to talk about Loerner--he was sitting in Berlin. What could he do? What could he change? What could he improve? He would have had to take his car and drive about all the time, which he was unable to do, and I was unable to do. And the inspectors were missing, a sufficient number of people were missing to inspect concentration camps all the time is, I think, the most fatal piece of economy ever done by Himmler.
Q. My dear Herr Frank, you have a terrific prejudice against the terms "likes" and "dislikes". I did not mean it maliciously. I can dislike something, for instance your description of the concentration camps. If I have to use that word for the record, you disliked the concentration camp. Now from that it become clear, as you hinted yourself, and which is the point I was aiming at, the fact remains that you keep things which you dislike at a large distance from you, if you can. You don't bother about these things unless you absolutely have to. And that, perhaps, may be the key for the understanding for the reply which you gave and which George Loerner keeps giving me, that of certain events and incidents in these concentration comps you had no exact knowledge of. But you must admit one thing without endangering your veracity, or otherwise you must shake your veracity. You must admit that these were dislikes and that it was known generally that brutalities and other things did occur.
A Doctor, that concentration camps were not a school for girls is beyond all doubt, of course. An intelligent man once said, "Mistrust is the salt of democracy." I believe we were lacking in that. We were all blindly confident, and we all subscribed to the opinion that the higher ups will make everything correct. That they did not do so we have seen today.
Q. Well, well, as you quote I am reminded of another quotation. The British have created something wonderful in the 18th century, which is the Beggers Opera. That is a story of Mackey and his henchmen who are about to found a state. It is a piece of a most moving relevance to the Nazi period and most excellent version. It has been produced by Bert Brecht and music has been composed by Kurt Weil. It was a great success in Germany before '33, and that version was shown on all stages of the world. The wonderful ditties.
THE PRESIDENT: It is now in Now York, doctor.
DR. HAENSEL: In New York?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q . I wish to recall one ditty from it, which goes, as I recall it---Who would not like to be a good man? We all would be good instead of being brutal, but conditions are different. That is what applies to concentration camps. A situation or condition existed, and it cannot lead to anything good no matter when or where or who establishes them, and now it is a human reaction for a military official, whether he is called Frank or Loerner, to keep away from these things as much as possible, deals with them only if he is forced by orders given from above. Therefore the question with which I opened my examination is so important. Was George Loerner from a point of view of his authority, was he forced and compelled to see to it that these inmates be fed and clothed? You said no yourself, and I only summed up right now.
THE PRESIDENT: Doctor, shall we catch our breath for a few minutes and take the recess?
(A recess was taken.)
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. HAENSEL (Counsel for the defendant Georg Loerner):
Q I wanted to refer once more to one detail, briefly, and that is Lublin. In Document Book 11, there is document NO-3031. This is on page 28 of the German document book. It is a decree by Himmler and there are various points which he ordered. One point deals with the fact that the officers clothing shop of the SS was to draw its entire clothing requirements from the plants at Lublin, the workshops there. And it was to establish a branch agency there which was to regulate the entire clothing requirements in question.
Did you ever have anything to do with this clothing shop-that was the clothing shop of the SS?
A Yes.
Q When was that?
AAs long as I was chief of the troop administrative office.
Q And what did Georg Loerner have to do with this treasury?
A I believe it was subordinated to him. After it was incorporated into the WVHA. However, I cannot say that with a hundred percent certainty.
Q Will you please briefly tell the Tribunal just what the clothing shop of the SS means?
A It can be described as being a service, a facility for the officers. It was an enterprise from which all officers in the Waffen-SS drew their requirements in clothing. That is, they were able to purchase uniforms there: clothing, underwear, and whatever was part of the equipment of officers.
Q And in order to enable them to cover their supplies this decree of Himmler's ordered that these requirements were to be drawn from the workshops at Lublin. Well, was it possible now that the clothing shop of the SS constructed this clothing from old material which had been previously used?
A No, that was not the idea at all.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Does this mean that the concept of Lublin was much more extensive than that of a collecting point, where old material was collected of doubtful origin?
A I don't think that I have to emphasize that particularly. One has only to look at Document 063. This is an annual report by Globocnik about the activity--just a moment please--about the clothing plant at Lublin.
In this document he writes that beginning the first of January, 1943, up to the first of October 1943, more than one and a half million pieces of clothing were newly manufactured. Of these there were civilian orders alone for 3,000,000 zlotys--that is one and a half million Reichsmark. And this shows beyond any doubt that Globocnik had extraordinarily large tailoring plants there.
Q Is Lublin now identical with Globocnik? What I mean to say is Lublin--in order to help you somewhat--isn't Lublin a sort of a central agency of the manufacturing and clothing industry which was located in the East? That is, aside from the period of time when Globocnik was there.
A I think I can make a very brief statement on that. After the campaign in Russia had begun workshops had to be established in the East with the troops, where the troops were able to have their equipment repaired quickly without first having to send them back to Germany. At the time I myself sent an expert to the East in order to examine the possibilities of establishing such repair shops. And in order to have plants established where underwear could be manufactured. On this occasion this man happened to go to Lublin. It was required by military orders to report it to the SS and Police Leader. This had to be done for military reasons. Globocnik at the time asked him just what he wanted in Lublin, and he answered him very briefly: He was looking for an opportunity to establish a repair shop for the troops where shirts and so on could be manufactured. Globocnik told him, as far as I can recall, "Oh, that is an excellent matter. I have several Court No. II, Case No. 4.thousand sewing machines at my disposal here.
We can manufacture everything you want to; whatever you need, will be manufactured here. We have a big manufacturing center here, bigger than can be found anywhere in the East."
That is the first point we had any contact with Globocnik.
Q. Accordingly, do you have to assume that the turn-over in clothing and the deliveries from Lublin, which came to be known to Amtsgruppe B, had a very large extent?
A. I want to refer once more to this affidavit.
Q. I mean to a large extent outside of the so-called "Action Reinhardt".
A. I am convinced that at the time when the person I sent there discovered the conditions described here the Action Reinhardt was completely unknown, and I believe I can say from the documents that any action was unknown at all.
Q. When you as chief of the Amtsgruppe heard about certain disposition at Lublin, could you refer there to the regular procedure, or were you to be suspicious right from the beginning?
A. No, I could not and did not have to gain any suspicion whatever. Globocnik from 1 January 1943 to October 1943 had already reported the manufacture of one and a half million pieces of clothing, then, during the year 1942; in the year 1941 he must have reached the same amount, to the same extent.
DR. HAENSEL: I am convinced.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. Going back to the matter of food for the concentration camps, whose task was it to requisition the food from the Food Ministry for the concentration camps?
A. The Tribunal has used the word "seizure" and "confiscation".
Q. No, no. Requisition - ask for.
A. I want to give you an example very briefly. The administrative leader composes his menu for one week. Now he has to consider "Will I be able to feed my prisoners during the coming week? What will I be able to give them in beans, peas, potatoes, meat, sausage, and so on?" He therefore went to the next food office which was competent to him with his planned menu. At least that is the way I think it probably was. I myself had nothing to do with it. The Food Office told him on this occasion, "We will not be able to give you any peas.
We will give you more beans instead. You won't be able to get any meat this week; you will have to use sausage," and so on. He discussed the matter with the food office; he said, "What food can I obtain; what is on hand, and what can I get from you on the basis of the rations which I am to receive."
Q. You mean to say the Executive Officer of the camp requested the food from the Food Ministry? Then the Food Ministry allocated the food supplies to the camp?
A. Yes, that is exactly the way it was.
Q. And how often did he allocate food to the camp?
A. That depended on the interval at which he compiled his menus. If he compiled his menu for eight days in advance, then he had to negotiate about the matter every week. If, on the other hand, he prepared his menu for the coming month, then it was sufficient for him to negotiate about these matters once a month.
Q. Then it became the duty of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps to see that the food was delivered to the camps and that the inmates received the food, is that correct?
A. No, this could only be done locally. How could an agency which was located in Berlin intervene in any local negotiation of the Administration Office on one hand and the Food Administration on the other hand?
Q. There had to be someone that they were subordinated to. Who were they subordinated to - the Executive Officer of the concentration camp and the commandant of the camp - who were they subordinated to?
A. Your Honor, there were two people in the camp who had to control these matters. One of them was the commandant, and the other was the physician, the medical officer. The procedure, as far as I know - that was the procedure already in peacetime. In the kitchen there was a certain book and in this book an entry was made every day just what had been served to the people and every day the medical officer had to control and to supervise the kitchen. First of all he had to inspect the kitchen to see it was clean and whether the food was in a decent condition; whether it was edible and he had to see whether the amount which was to be given to the inmates according to the calories and so on was sufficient.
Q. Just a minute. Then the medical officer of the camp was subordinated to Lolling, was he not?
A. Yes.
Q. Then Lolling was subordinated to the WVHA, was he not?
A. Yes, but not with regard to the medical aspect. I want to point out especially here that in the purely medical questions he was subordinated to the medical office. After all, Pohl could not reach any medical decision. For example, if a physician or medical officer in a camp had determined that the number of calories was not sufficient and that the inmates would suffer physical damage, then this was not a matter of Pohl, but it was a matter to be referred to the Medical Office or it was referred to the Reich Physician SS.
Q. Now the other person in the camp was the Executive Officer in the camp. Now who was he subordinate to?
A. He was subordinated to Amtsgruppe D.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: All right, that is all.
BY DR. STEIN (Counsel for defendant Eirenschmalz):
Q. Witness, you were with the same offices at the same time as Eirenschmalz. That was from 1934 up to 1939, that you were with the Administrative Office of the SS; from 1940 to January 1942 you were with the Corps Administration of the Waffen SS, and from 1 February 1942 on you were with the WVHA. Now, I want to ask you, first of all, what were the tasks of Eirenschmalz with the administrative office of the SS?
A. He had to construct barracks for the Special Task Squad.
Q. Did he also have to occupy himself with construction in concentration camps or constructions of the Death Head units?
A. No, up to the outbreak of the war Eicke built then with his independent building organization.
Q. To whom were you subordinated at that time? Was it the construction agency in the concentration camps?
A. I have already said they were subordinate to Eicke.
Q. The Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps? Until that time?
A. Yes. I cannot say that exactly, as to the set-up up to the outbreak of the war. I was unable to follow up the further developments because I was militarily too far removed from all these things.
Q. And who was the director of this building agency?
A. With Eicke? I believe it was Hauptsturmfuehrer Riedl.
Q. Now the concentration camp construction agencies at Oranienburg, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, and others - they were not subordinate to Eirenschmalz, is that correct?
A. Certainly not, before the war and they were not subordinated to him up to 1942. Then Eirenschmalz was with me.
Q. You stated that in your opinion Riedl was in charge of this construction agency. Do you know whether this man also had the task to examine the funds for these construction projects and to administer these funds?
A. Up the the outbreak of the war Eicke had a completely separate organization. That is to say, it examined, it audited, it paid, and it carried out the construction up to the outbreak of the war; this procedure was supposed to change in one or two years. However, I cannot give you the exact time when this was taking place.
Q. Therefore, with the SS Administrative Office Eicke, according to your statement, only concerned himself with the construction matters of the Special Duty Squads?
A. Yes.
Q. How do you judge this activity, according to its extent when compared with the construction tasks of the Waffen-SS?
A. I cannot answer this question in this manner. I can only say that Eirenschmalz, as far as I know, constructed two barracks, two barracks which were known for their beauty and for their technical com pleteness.
I believe that Eirenschmalz constructed this matter 100 percent perfectly.
Q. Approximately how many collaborators did Eirenschmalz have in this office?
A. I am unable to say that.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Well, was it a big staff?
A He had a building office which had to make the drafts and which had to summon the taking of requisites. If there were 14 or 20 people working there, I am unable to say.
Q Can this activity of Eirenschmalz's be compared with the activity which later on was carried out by Kammler as Office Chief of Amtsgruppe C, or was this activity much more of a minor character?
A It cannot be compared at all.
Q Witness, do you know that Eirenschmalz in the year 1938 wanted to obtain a private position and that he made a request to work in private industry?
A I know that, yes. I believe that the reason for this was because differences existed between Pohl and him. I believe that these differences were, of course, for technical reasons.
Q Well, in 1939 to 1940 Eirenschmalz came to the Corps Admministration of the Waffen SS and he was subordinated to you. Why was he transferred?
A I don't know the exact reasons anymore today. However, the main reason probably was that he wanted to work under my leadership because he knew me, because we came from the same province, and because, as I have already stated, his relationship to Pohl was not very good.
Q How long did Eirenschmalz stay in your agency?
A Up to the 1st of February 1942.
Q What activity did he exercise there?
A He continued the construction of barracks for the special duty squads, and new constructions were only completed if they had previously been started.
Q Did he have any contact at all with concentration camps in his field of tasks?
A He could not do that because the whole office did not have any contact with the concentration camp matters at all at the time.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q The agency was then dissolved and Eirenschmalz was detached on duty with the WVHA. Did Eirenschmalz request of you that his transfer to the WVHA be prevented and did he say that he wanted to enter the troop administration service?
A Yes, I know about that. His transfer to troop administration could not be carried out because Eirenschmalz from the military point of view had too high a grade. As a colonel he would have been at least the administrative chief of an army corps or of an army group; and he did not have the necessary military prerequisites to fill that position. After all he was a specialist.
Q What was the relationship of Eirenschmalz to his superior, Kammler?
A This relationship was still worse than his relationship to Pohl. This was not a surprise because Kammler from a psychological point of view was exactly the opposite of Eirenschmalz, exactly in contrast to him.
Q How did it happen that in spite of this bad relationship Eirenschmalz became the deputy of Kammler, effective the 1st of January 1943 in the organizational plan?
A Well, it probably had to be done on paper because he was the administrative leader with the longest service record.
Q Have you ever seen any document which bears the signature of Eirenschmalz as deputy of Chief of the Amtsgruppe Kammler?
A I cannot remember that.
Q Let us assume that Eirenschmalz with this strange relationship to Kammler only represented him to a minor degree.
A With the character of Kammler I don't consider that probable at all. Kammler did all the work by himself. He was extremely explosive and did not very easily tolerate anybody to be at his side, especially in the case of Eirenschmalz. Furthermore, Eirenschmalz was ill at this time with a stomach disease and could only do half the duties that were required.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Do you know that Eirenschmalz in the year 1943 had to go into a hospital for some length of time because of the disease of the stomach?
A Yes, that is where I obtained my knowledge that he had a bad stomach.
Q When was that?
A He had already complained before he was with me about the condition of his stomach.
Q I want to know in which month of 1942 it was?
A Even in 1941 he had complained about pains in his stomach.
Q In which month did he take his leave? You don't know exactly which month he fell ill of this disease?
A No.
Q Eirenschmalz was then in charge of Department C-6? It can be assumed that first of all he took the work and completed the work which he had brought along from his previous position?
A Doctor, about the activity of Amtsgruppe C I am so little informed that since I am under oath here I don't want to make any statements on the matter.
Q Well, he was in your office; and when he left your office then it is probable that he had not completed all the work?
A No.
Q Now, concerning the remainder of the work which still had to be carried out, did he continue to deal with this work in the WVHA?
A That is quite possible. I only know the one thing--that he did the examining. That is, he carried out the technical examination of the now constructions and the buildings which had been newly erected. He did that subsequently.
Q Witness, in your affidavit you have stated that Eirenschmalz among other things audited the bills which arose from repairs carried out in the concentration camps. In your opinion does this also include the bills for the constant repair work which had to be Court No. II, Case No. 4.done there?
A No, the current repairs appeared in the general bills of the administrative officer.
Q To what agency were those bills submitted?
A Just like all the other bills, they were submitted to Amtsgruppe D.
Q Did the administrative agencies and the local administration also have to pay the expenses for the current repairs and maintenance?
A It is very difficult for me to answer that question because I don't know the authority of the construction agency. I only know that from the point of view of the Ministry of Finance, that is, from the budgetary aspect, buildings which cost less than a hundred thousand marks--in my affidavit I made a mistake and said forty thousand marks; but this changed to a hundred thousand marks during wartime. For these constructions the approval by the Ministry of Finance was not required. But what Kammler did do or what he reserved for himself or what his office chiefs reserved for themselves or what the construction Inspectorate reserved for themselves, and what was transferred to the local construction agencies, I do not know.
Q Witness, on Friday and today as an administrative expert you have made statements about the manner in which the auditing and examinations which in your Office A were carried out; and I now ask you, did the same principles also apply for the accounts of construction plants?
A Yes. To explain to me what you mean by the word "principles" you have to go a little more into detail in my opinion. What do you mean in particular?
Q I mean the auditing of the bills, the preliminary auditing which was carried out by Amt C-6. You have described it here as a subsequent auditing examination. You have further stated that in the course of the war an exact auditing of all bills was not possible any Court No. II, Case No. 4.more in particular because of the lack of personnel.
A I can only say one thing in this connection. In this decision of the president of the auditing corps in the partial reduction of the auditing system the office of Eirenschmalz was also included. Is that sufficient for you?
Q Yes, thank you, that is sufficient. Witness, since the year 1934 you worked with Eirenschmalz. Afterwards you were his superior for about two years. I now want to ask you, just how do you judge the character and personality of Eirenschmalz?
AAs a human being I esteemed him very much. He was a good comrade. He always kept his word, and I had never heard anything derogatory about him. From the professional point of view Eirenschmalz was a very, very efficient expert. In my opinion, however, from 1938 on he was no longer used in accordance with his capabilities and skills.
Q What sort of life did Eirenschmalz lead?
A Eirenschmalz was a very good head of a family, and he lived in an extremely solitary fashion and was withdrawn from the public.
Q Did he have any hobbies?
A Yes, he loved to ride on horseback very much. I did that too.
BY DR. BELZER (Counsel for Defendant Sommer):
Q. Witness, on Friday you stated in connection with Action Reibhardt -- and you have repeatedly mentioned the fact that watches were sent to Sachsenhausen. The Prosecution has also occupied itself with the deliveries of watches to Sachsenhausen, and in its opening speech made the following statement, which I quote:
"The defendant Sommer was informed about the repair of thousands of watches which originated from Jews who had been liquidated, in the warehouse of the concentration Sachsenhausen."
I now ask you, witness, what you have to say on the basis of your personal knowledge to this statement by the Prosecution.
I now ask you, witness, what you have to say on the basis of your personal knowledge to this statement by the Prosecution.
A. I have already stated in my direct examination by my attorney that one must not and can not assume that a watch came from a person who had died in the meantime. I have admitted that it was a bad master to take a watch away from a person. I believe that Sommer knew that the Jews and other inmates of concentration camps from whom these watches were taken did not receive any compensation for them. However, that they came from dead people, that Sommer could not know, in my opinion.
Q. When did you make the acquaintance of the defendant Sommer?
A. I met Sommer here for the first time, here in the prison.
DR. BELZER: Thank you, I have no further questions.
BY DR. RATZ (Counsel for defendant Pook):
Q. I have only two short questions to ask you, witness. When did you meet the defendant Dr. Hermann Pook for the first time?
A. Here in prison, the day the Indictment was read to us. That was the day I saw him for the first time in my life.
Q. Did you ever hear the name of the defendant Dr. Pook in Berlin as a member of the WVHA?
A. No.