A I am unable to tell you that; I do not know; I do not know who was in charge of that camp. I assume that it was a branch camp of Oranienburg and subordinated to Oranienburg.
Q Were you present when one of these -- I am sorry -- were you present in your office when one of two of these concentration camp inmates were caught stealing bread from the cellar of one of the office buildings?
A I know nothing about this.
Q Then you as one of the senior officers in the WVHA had nothing to do with their punishment or disposition, is that true?
A Punishment of inmates? No.
Q I will ask you whether or not you were standing at the window of your office when these two inmates were hung in the courtyard of this building.
A I know nothing of this incident.
Q Have you ever heard of an instance where this small sub-concentration camp executed men for stealing bread or stealing food?
A No. I know nothing of this.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q Witness, I understood you to say that during the year 1940 that you had had a private agreement with Gluecks to take over the duties in sofar as the concentration camps were concerned prior to the official transfer of Office 15 to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camp, is that correct?
A Yes, we had that agreement, and we concluded, it in the spring of 1941.
Q When did you have an agreement with Gluecks -- this private agreement?
A The spring of 1941. I should say roughly in March or April of 1941.
Q So you contend that between March or April, 1941, until the official transfer of Office Group 15 to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camp, that you had nothing to do with the operation or allocation of labor of the concentration camp?
A What I said, your Honor, in March or April, 1941, from that time onwards, I arranged with Gluecks that he would take over the management of 15 particularly with reference to the collaboration of the concentration camp. Officially I remained in charge until the official transfer was effected into the Inspectorate of Concentration Camp.
Q That is correct; and there is no order, or nothing in the records, to indicate any agreement that you had with Gluecks prior to September 1941.
A No, there is nothing in the documents about this.
Q Do you have any other evidence which would corroborate your contention that during the summer of 1941 that A-5 had nothing to do officially with the concentration camps and particularly with the allocation of labor?
A No, I have nothing.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: That is all.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q May it please the Court, may I ask one question along the line which Judge Phillips was pursuing.
Q Witness, did you not feel yourself responsible for the conduct in Department 15 until such time as Gluecks officially took over?
A I said before that officially I remained chief of that department until September, 1941, but from the spring of that year onwards I did not have very much to do with these things, because, as I said on direct, it was entirely impossible to direct these things from Berlin without having Gluecks' closest collaboration, because Gluecks from the beginning sabotaged that work until he was finally in charge. He was furious that task had not been given to him by Himmler, but to me, the Main Office Building and Budget.
Q When you had the agreement with Gluecks to turn this department over to him, you in effect washed your hands of the whole affair.
A That has nothing to do with washing one's hands of the whole business. It was technically quite impossible to do this work without the Inspectorate of Concentration Camp. Commanders from the beginning opposed this measure. If you read Grimm's affidavit now he had been received by Gluecks, this becomes quite clear; it was entirely impossible to do this work unless you did it from the Inspectorate of Concentration Camps.
Q I should like to call to the witness' attention Document NO-1530which is in Document Book V, on page 143, Prosecution's Exhibit 148. I have two questions which I would like to ask on this document -Document NO-1530, Book V, page 143, Prosecution's Exhibit 148. Now, witness, your stated in your direct examination, that one the concentration camp inmates clothing reached the supply rooms of the concentration camp, it passed under the control of Amtsgruppe D; is that correct?
A I didn't quite understand that question; could you please repeat it?
Q You stated in your direct examination that one concentration camp inmates' clothing the supply rooms, the actual supply room of the particular concentration camp, it passed under control of Amtsgruppe D of the WVHA.
A Yes.
Q On the second page of this document --NO-1530 -- the chief of the central office sends directions to the camp commanders of the concentration camps with regard to the clothing of prisoners. Do you see the date of that document is 9 February, 1943?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: 26 February.
MR. WALTON: The second page your Honor.
A It says 5th February on my document.
Q Very well, then; the 5th February, 1943. You have the document?
A Yes.
Q That was the only reason for quoting the date. You have it?
A Yes.
I call your attention and ask you to explain what is meant by the first sentence of the first paragraph of this document. "With the consent of the Chief of Office Group B it is ordered that clothing belongin belonging to Polish and Russian prisoners in concentration camps will be used as prisoners' working clothing where the prisoners' clothing provided by the camp is not sufficient."
A Oh, yes, quite. Yes, I see it now. The connection here is as I said on direct examination that we - that is Office Group B - as early as the beginning of 1943 - had ordered that if inmates' clothing is not sufficient they will be allowed to wear civilian clothing. That order was issued by us because there was a certain amount of opposition in the beginning with the Inspectorate of concentration camps. The xentence "by agreement with Office Group Chief B" refers to that order as does the reference up on top of the page, SS-WVHA B2 Lb/Kr, and so forth. Also the date 1st of February can not be correct because reference is made to that of 6 February.
Q Were these
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, we will take a recess now.
(A recess was taken.)
20 June 47 M-8,1, pkp Hoxsie (Int. Garand)
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, please.
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Witness, before the Court suspended for the recess we were discussing Document NO- 1530, and particularly the document which is dated on your copy 5 February 1943 and on the English translation it is dated 9 February 1943. At the morning session we were discussing that you had given your consent to issue clothing belonging to polish and Russian prisoners in the main concentration camps in the heading of this order. I will ask you to state whether or not these Polish and Russian prisoners at one time were prisoners of war either before, during or after they reached these concentration camps?
A. First of all I must say that the permission for the wearing of civilian clothing did not only refer to Russian and Polish prisoners, inmates, but all inmates, I cannot give you any information about the origin of the Polish and Russian inmates because I don't have any information about that
Q. Why did you specifically consent then to the clothing that belonged to the Polish and Russian prisoners being used as prisoners' working clothes?
A. I did not agree in particular that this was only to apply to Polish and Russian workers, inmates, but this extended to all of them.
Q. Well, was any mention made to you of Polish and Russian prisoners by the Chief of the Central Office when he obtained your consent?
A. No, I cannot recall that the Chief of the Central Office discussed the matter with me. I assume that he took this agreement from the order of the WVHA which is mentioned above. In any case I don't know anything about the matter.
Q. You do not recall that order of the WVHA which is mentioned in the reference above by that number?
A. What the exact text was I don't know any more today.
Q. Do you recall any of the terms of that order?
A. No. I only know that here the permission was given that civilian clothing could be used as prisoner inmate clothing, and the reason for this was that the inmate clothing could not be provided to sufficient extent by the concentration camp as a result of the lack of raw material.
Q. Then you were in a position to get clothing from whatever source you could find in order that the prisoners could be clothed at this particular time. Is that not true?
A. This interpretation is not quite correct but we only gave the permission that civilian clothing which was located in the camps could be used and could be worn by the inmates.
Q. But it says clothing belonging to these prisoners. Was the Camp Commandant authorized to take from him that hath not even that which he hath under this consent of yours?
A. That had nothing to do with my permission. What happened in the camps was exclusively the task of the camp commander. However, as long as the clothing was there to sufficient extent for inmates the inmates had to turn in his civilian clothing and he had to wear the prisoner's garb.
Q. Then this was the clothing which the inmate had turned in and had stored for him pending his release. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. I invite your attention also to document book 5, to document 1166-PS which is prosecution Exhibit 113 and which is found on page 145 of the English Document Book.
MR. WALTON: Ray it please the court, is that in the English translation? Has the court located that document?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. WALTON: There is some confusion as to whether it is in the German or not.
THE INTERPRETOR: The witness indicates that he has found it.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Witness, since your office in Amtsgruppe B was in charge of clothing for concentration camps as well as the Waffen-SS units, by glancing over this report is this a general type of report which was received from Office D by your office?
A. Yes, I can recall it.
Q. What other department besides your department could have been interested in the stocks of clothing in the concentration camps?
A. Probably the Reichsfuehrer SS might have been interested.
Q. Any others?
A. I don't know; I can't think to whom else this report should have been submitted.
Q. From a clothing standpoint, even in August, 1944, would you not have been interested in the clothing stocks of the concentration camps, especially when they were expecting the arrival of 612,000 prisoners?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, in my direct examination I have already referred to this letter and I have stated there that this letter above all was written by Burger and he will be able to confirm that because he is here after all, in order to enable me to once more make an energetic advance there for the procurement of raw material and in order to give me a basis to once more submit a detailed report to Himmler with regard to the situation of the field of the inmate clothing.
THE PRESIDENT: This letter appears to be signed by Burger. Should it be Burboeck?
MR. WALTON: No, this was the chief in Amtsgruppe D, under Amtsgruppe D, under Amtsgruppe D-IV.
THE PRESIDENT: The translation was Burboeck. It should have been Burger.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Is the witness through with his answer to the previous question?
A. Yes I am.
Q. Now, do you recall whether or not on the basis of this particular report in view of the large number of prisoners concerned you did go to the Reich Ministry of Economics and make a request for additional raw materials?
A. Yes, I recall that.
Q. Now in the document itself Burger mentions the Hungary program and it is just below the itemized list of clothing which he says he has on hand. That would be, your Honors, on page 3 of this particular document. Will you explain to the court what you know to mean the Hungary program?
A. I didn't mean anything by that. I thought as I have already said in my direct examination that this was the resettlement of Jews.
Q. Then you thought it was yarn and textiles confiscated from the Jews which were to be resettled. Is that what you mean to say?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you make the same answer concerning the Poland action mentioned on the last line of the second paragraph under the numeral IV where it says, "Precious little can be expected from other useful articles received from the Poland Action (Warsaw)." Do you make the same answer as to what you thought when you first saw this report it referred to in the matter of textiles?
A. Yes.
Q. Have you changed your mind at any time since as to what these programs were?
A. Today I know that this was the extermination program.
Q. Did any other department of the WVHA but yours have the authority to obtain these articles from the Reich Ministry of Economics?
A. I didn't quite understand your question. We did not receive our clothing material from the Reich Ministry of Economics but only got our raw material for that and only B-II was competent for that.
Q. I think he has answered the question even though he misunderstood it. Now I should like at this time to call the attention of the witness to Document Book XI. This is document 2105 which is Prosecution Exhibit 313 and which is found in the English translation on page 103. Now, in your direct testimony yesterday you stated that you knew nothing of this letter from SS Untersturmfuehrer Grimm and you further commented that this letter refers to an order from the concentration camp Inspectorate and on your cross examination yesterday you stated that the Labor allocation officer in the concentration camp were in the year 1940 under your main department 1/5 under Budget and Construction.
May it please the court, I do not know whether the Tribunal made the correction which was pointed out by counsel for the defense as to the date of the face of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. WALTON: I shall treat it then as the corrected date 1940.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Why then did this office address the complaint to your office in Berlin rather than to the Inspectorate of the concentration camp?
A. I don't quite understand your question.
Q. Why do you suppose that this complaint came to your office or was addressed to you as chief of Department I, rather than to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps?
JUDGE PHILLIPS: The Inspectorate of Concentration Camps had not taken it over at that time.
MR. WALTON: That is quite true, Your Honor.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: According to the testimony the Office I/5 was transferred to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps on September 1, 1941.
MR. WALTON: I withdraw that question.
Q. Now, then, this complaint was addressed to you as chief of the Department I in the Main Office for Budget and Construction, was it not?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall having received this letter?
A. No, I can't recall that at all. I have already stated that in the course of my direct examination. I stated that at that time I could not recall this letter and I believe that I did not read it, because the contents were such that I certainly would remember them, if I had read the letter.
Q. Wasn't your policy in 1940 to have unusual and extraordinary occurrences reported to you directly?
A. Yes, that is correct. It is possible that I was away on a trip at that time and that Burboeck on his own initiative took this letter. I really can't say exactly anymore. Furthermore, the contents of this letter show that the work of the labor allocation officers in the concentration camps was constantly sabotaged by the concentration camp administration, and that is the main contention of this letter. Grimm makes a very detailed and precise complaint in this letter.
Q. But Grimm's main complaint is against the labor allocation officer in Dachau who also was under your Main Department I/5, does he not?
A. Well, I assume that the labor allocation officer at Dachau was just as influenced by the commander as was the case in all other instances.
Q. If this matter had been reported to you, what action, if any, would you have taken, particularly with respect to the condition of the clothes of the inmates who arrived at Buchenwald from Dachau?
A. First of all, I must say, Mr. Prosecutor, that it is difficult today to say what I would have done at the time if I had know that. Secondly, with regard to the complaint about the clothing, I must point out that at that time there was not as yet a lack of clothing and that the inferior clothing equipment of this transport was only negligence or it was intended to be that way by Dachau. Otherwise, I cannot explain that at all.
Q. If this matter had been called to your attention, would you have had the power to make your own investigation to find out just where the fault lay that these prisoners arrived in this condition?
A. No, it was not within my power, because in order to enter a camp I had to have the permission of Gluecks. I probably could have taken up the matter exactly as Burboeck did and then I would have discussed it again with Gluecks, because he was the only man who could correct the situation and perhaps he would be able to punish the people whose fault the situation was. I myself was unable to do that.
Q. Then at this particular time you did not have supervisory control or disciplinary control of Untersturnfuehrer Stumpff and the labor allocation officer in Dachau, did you?
A. That is something quite different. I had, disciplinary authority over Untersturmfuehrer Stumpff and Grimm, but I had no authority over the personnel of the concentration camps.
Q. Could you not have made an investigation on this account through your labor allocation officer in Dachau?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I don't know how I should answer your question. After all, I didn't know anything about the whole matter. What I would have done at the time - well, I know that my testimony is important and I can't say any more today how I would have acted at that time under certain condi tions.
Q. Witness, I believe you stated yesterday, or in your direct testimony, that Pohl in his affidavit stated that you were interested in keeping the inmates alive, well fed, and well clothed. Now, in my mind, and I assume in the mind of the Tribunal, it is difficult to reconcile a statement like that with what you have to say concerning the Grimm letter, which is now before you. I am trying to determine the policy of your office where such occurrences as these took place and where your office was formally notified and I am also trying to determine what action, if any, your office would or could take. Do you wish to comment on that?
A. I can only say on that subject that with regards to clothing at that time we were not facing any shortage, as I have already said. If any bad conditions existed here, then this was only the fault of the competent administration of the concentration camp. The only thing that could be done against that would have been a complaint to the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps. The labor allocation officer had nothing to do with the clothing of the inmates. That was exclusively the task of the administration of the concentration camp and this matter was exclusively subordinate to Gluecks, the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps. Therefore, only Gluecks could have settled the matter.
Q. Prosecution next desires to discuss with the witness Document No. 2128-A, which is in Document Book 18, Prosecution Exhibit 331, and is found on page 12.
THE PRESIDENT: What is your exhibit number?
MR. WALTON: Exhibit No. 331, sir, page 12.
THE PRESIDENT: Not in Book 18. The first exhibit in Book 18 is 457.
MR. WALTON: You don't find in Book 18 Document No. 2128. My information evidently was in error.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: It's Book 17.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry, sir, Book 17.
THE PRESIDENT: It's in Book 12.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Book 12, page 12.
MR. WALTON: I apologize to the Tribunal. My information was supplied by someone else.
I wish to cross-examine the witness on only two paragraphs of this particular document, paragraph 6 and paragraph 9. The first one, paragraph 6, headed "Clothing Economy", is found on page 4 of this document and on page 5 of the original.
For come unexplained reason we are having difficulty in trying to locate it in the German document hook.
THE PRESIDENT: Book 12, page 12, in the English.
MR. WALTON: In order to save time we will forget that until this can be straightened out and take up another matter.
Will you get Document Book 7 in the German, please?
May it please the Tribunal, we will next discuss with the witness Document NO-422, which is found in Document Book 7, Exhibit 202, on page 35.
Q. Now, witness, yesterday you denied knowledge of Ahnenerbe, but for the benefit of the Court, I ask you to took at this document and particularly paragraph 5 thereof and from your knowledge of the procedure followed in the WVHA, to whom would Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl refer Sievers when he made inquiries as to the cost for the establishment of this institution?
A. That is NO-422, isn't it?
Q. That's right. NO-422 is a letter over the signature of Himmler, which is addressed to the Reich Manager of the Ahnenerbe, SS-Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers. Is that the same document?
A. Yes, it is.
Q. I particularly call your attention to paragraph 5 where Himmler states that in order to establish this he orders the chief of the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office to be contacted with regards to the cost, which can be borne by the Waffen-SS. Do you see that, paragraph 5?
A. Yes.
Q. My question is: From your knowledge of the procedure which was customarily followed in the WVHA to whom would the Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl refer Obersturmbannfuehrer Sievers when he made inquiries as to the part of the cost which the Waffen-SS must bear?
THE PRESIDENT: May I condense that question both for the sake of the witness and ourselves?
MR. WALTON: Certainly.
THE PRESIDENT: Whom did Pohl ask about this?
A. Pohl would have asked the man who had to do with the financing of the Waffen--SS. That would be my brother in A-I.
Q. Do you know whether or not your brother was ever asked about this matter?
A. I don't know that.
Q. Now, on the next page, which according to my information is Document Book 7, page 36, and is Document 920, Prosecution Exhibit 2-3, on the subject of the Financing Department for Military and Scientific Research, Witness, I ask you in lieu of your testimony on this document that the name was wrong, that it should have gone to the SS- Brigadefuehrer Loerner, or your brother, did you in fact receive this letter, since it was addressed directly to you?
A. First of all, I must point out that this is not a letter, but this is a file note, which was issued by the Ahnenerbe and which remained in the Ahnenerbe. I have testified that this information that this man Wolff who signed it, received, probably referred to the fact that before as Chief of Office A-1 in the Main Office, Budget and Construction, I had something to do with the the questions of finances, but from the 1st of February, 1942 on, the WVHA was established and in this Main Office I had nothing further to do with questions of finance. It is also shown by the other documents that this matter was actually dealt with by my brother and Sievers, who is defendant here in the medical case, could also be asked and he will have to admit that he never discussed the matter with me.
Q. You further testified that you did manufacture in the clothing factory at Dachau certain experimental clothing. I ask you now whether this Department for Scientific Military Research ever sent an order to you or to the clothing factory at Dachau for any experimental clothing?
A. The Ahnenerbe was unable to give me any orders. I never received an inquiry, request, or demand for the manufacture of experimental clothing. The clothing which I have referred to in my direct examination was only test uniforms for the troops which were to be taken and tested. Himmler always had new ideas about the clothing and the uniforms of troops and therefore we had to manufacture a different type of clothing and we had to send it to a division in the field in order to have it tested under combat conditions. These were the only test clothing which we manufactured. With scientific experiments this has nothing whatever to do.
Q. Then you never manufactured any clothing?
A. I don't know anything about it.
Q. A moment please. Then you never manufactured any clothing upon the request of Dr. Rascher, is that correct?
A. I have already stated that I do not know anything about that. It is possible that the clothing plant manufacured the clothing for it in order to have the heating bag placed there. However, I don't know anything about that and I can't testify about it here. However, we never manufactured clothing for experiments on human beings. The document to which I have referred also shows that the experimental clothing was manufactured by the Textile Institute at Munich-Gladbach.
Q. Let me call to your attention, Witness, Document Book 7, which you have and Document NO-287. It is found on page 104 of the English Translation. It is Prosecution exhibit 212. You have that document no, Witness?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. This is a letter from Brandt, which is addressed to Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl and in which he requests Dr. Rascher to be assisted as much as possible in his experiments at Dachau. Now, in the last paragraph of that letter he states, "Will you please give orders that the clothing plant in Dachau assist SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher by producing the necessary experimental clothing." I do not mean to read into this letter that it was for medical experiments on human beings but I wish to refresh your memory to the effect that as far as you know, you knew nothing about experimental clothing. Did you receive a copy of this letter?
A. No, I cannot recall ever having received a copy.
Q. Was this information conveyed to you by Pohl, or this request conveyed to you by Pohl?
A. I don't know anything about it.
Q. In the normal course of events, is it possible that your office received a copy of this letter or that the clothing plant at Dachau reported to your office that it was engaged in such a project?
A. The possibility exists, yes.
MR. WALTON: May it please the court, since we are unable to discuss what I consider a fairly important document because of our inability to find the German copy, I find myself having reached the stage in the case where I desire to cross-examine the witness on the so-called SS-Enterprises, of which his office or he himself was more or less directly concerned.
It is different matter than we have discussed so far in the cross-examination. Furthermore, it is at least equal to half of the examination and I hope to finish this afternoon. I await the court's decision in the matter of time, because I hesitate...
THE PRESIDENT: What do you want to do? What do you want? What is your plan?
MR. WALTON: I hesitate to get started on this and be interrupted right in the middle of the discussion.
THE PRESIDENT: What is your plan? Perhaps we won't need any apology at all. Would you like to recess and start afresh this afternoon?
MR. WALTON: I should like to-
THE PRESIDENT: We are quite open to a direct approach Sir. Come right out.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Might I suggest though that during the recess you attempt to organize the cross-examination in a way that we won't lose the time that we did this morning. I don't say this unkindly, but I do believe that there was a great loss of time this morning.
THE PRESIDENT: I shall do my best.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess at this time, but we will resume at 1:30, which gives the same interval -instead of 1:45.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1:30.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)