AFTERNOON SESSION
THE MARSHAL: Take your seats, pleas.
The Tribunal is again in session.
GEORGE LOERNER - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued)
MR. WALTON: In the morning session it was discovered that Document No. 2128-A was left out of Document Book 12, in the German Document book. I have enough copies in German. I would like the Court to consider Document NO-2128-A in Document Book 12, Exhibit 331, on page 12.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q Witness, will you indicate when you are ready to be questioned on that document?
A I am quite ready.
MR. WALTON: Your Honors, this document is a decree from Pohl which was approved by Himmler on a reorganization of the Economic and Administrative Office of the Higher SS Police Leaders in the occupied territories, which included the General Government.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q Do you remember having seen this document before?
A Yes.
Q Then I invite your attention specifically to paragraph 6 of these regulations which on my copy appears on page 4, and I assume that is on page 5 of the original. Now, I ask you whether or not your office in the WVHA exercised any supervision or control over the establishment or the restarting of manufacturing plants for clothing in these territories outside the Reich?
A This decree was to prevent that the troops would independently use any raw material or even waste it. It was to be achieved through this decree that raw materials which were at the disposal of troop units of SS economists should be utilized to the fullest degree. For that reason that decree was issued. I would like to point out right from the beginning that Globocnik's enterprises were not concerned with this decree because Globocnik had in this respect the special order from the Reichfuehrer-SS, and the SS economists also had no influence on these enterprises.
Q Was not this an attempt to get all processing of materials from the occupied territories away from Globocnik's enterprises in Lublin and under the control and supervision of the WVHA?
A No, that had nothing to do with that because Globocnik in this case had a special order and was not touched at all by this order.
Q Then I ask you again, did the WVHA exercise control over the establishment or restarting of manufacturing plants for clothing which this decree was supposed to cover in these territories outside the Reich?
A I cannot recall any such enterprises.
Q Did your office ever receive any reports from the factories in the occupied territories of the east on their production?
A I know nothing about this. I cannot recall such reports.
Q If they manufactured clothing would it be likely that this clothing would come back to your warehouses in the Reich, or a part of it, for distribution?
A No, that is not correct, because these enterprises only worked for the armed forces, no orders were not issued by us.
Q Did you state on cross-examination - I am sorry, on direct examination, that your office had the duty of supplying all troops in garrisons, all troops of the Waffen-SS in garrisons, or until such time as they were committed as fighting troops?
A The clothing of the Waffen-SS was supplied by us, including the units at the front, but this clothing came from Germany, and the responsible agency there was B-II in the clothing factory.
Q Then is it possible for shipments of clothing to be sent to the troops from these enterprises who were under the direct control of the SS Economic Administrator, the representative of the SS Economic Administrative Office, in the occupied territories?
A No, all supplies, including clothing for the Waffen-SS, went according to the orders and decrees of the OKH, and all supplies for the troop units were also effected by the clothing factory to the troops direct. It is possible that the troops had clothing which had to be repaired sent to such factories. That is possible, but that would have been up to the troop units themselves.
Q I should like for you to consider paragraph 9 in this same report next. Now this paragraph states that all raw material control is vested in the SS-Economic and Administrative Main Office. Does that include the raw material in the conquered territories of the east?
A Here we are concerned with raw materials which were in the possession of the Waffen-SS of the individual units. The raw materials which were acquired in the occupied territories we were unable to administer at all. That was entirely and exclusively up to the governmental department set up by the ministry of the Eastern Territories. We are here always concerned with raw materials which are already in the possession of the troop movements, and the idea was that the troops would not have clothing or anything else manufactured through black market activities, and it is especially stated here that the Government General is exempted in paragraph B.
Q. That is correct, but in other territories besides the Government General, should the troops capture raw materials, would this be turned over to your office or to the Reich Ministry of Economics?
A. I can not recall that any important quantities were delivered by the troops. If any had arrived, we would have passed them on to the Reich Ministry of Economics, because any processing without permission of the Reich Ministry of Economics was quite out of the question. The supervision of the Reich Ministry of Economics and its sub-departments over the economic enterprises, that is to say, the manufacturing enterprises was so strict and severe that an enterprise could not carry out the processing without permission of that ministry.
Q. Did you at any time or did the Economic Administrative Main Office order the construction of any factories in these occupied territories -- clothing factories or textile and leather goods factories?
A. I know nothing about that. I have no information.
Q. The Prosecution at this time would like to discuss with the witness Document NO 544, which is found in Document Book 14, Exhibit 398, and on Page 72. Witness, this is a copy of the registration of the firm German Economic Enterprises, Ltd., in the District Court in the commercial Register, Section B, 22 November 1942. I ask you to look through that and see if, through your connection with the German Economic Enterprises, this represents a fairly true picture of the number of enterprises under the DWB.
A. The list is correct, as far as I can see.
Q. Now I ask that you turn to Page 5 of that document, which is Page 5 in the English copy also, and ask whether or not you were ever manager of the DWB.
A. Yes. That becomes clear from the document, and I also described precisely in my direct examination how this thing was handled.
Q. Now, you became co-manager with Pohl, officially, on 22 November 1941, did you not?
A. No, that is not quite correct. On 23 July 1941 I became a manager. That becomes clear from this document.
Q. But officially, when it was registered on 22 November, you still were manager or co-manager of the DWB.
A. I was a manager from 23 July 1941 until the end.
Q. Now I should like to call to the witness's attention in Document Book 14, Page 79, Exhibit 384, Document 1039.
THE PRESIDENT: Page what?
MR. WALTON: Page 79 in the English.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not the same document.
JUDGE MUSSMANO: What is the number of the document?
MR. WALTON: The document is 1039 in your Document Book. The Exhibit Number is 384.
THE PRESIDENT: No. 384 is on Page 19.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry, sir. Again my information was in error.
BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Does the witness have this document before him?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, I believe that you stated in your direct examination that you never had anything to do with Staff W and that you can give no information concerning it because it was exclusively Pohl's agency. Now, you also stated that you were listed on the corporation records of the Reich as one of the co-managers of a German Economic Works. Now, Dr. Hohberg's survey of the Economic Enterprises shows that Staff W was concerned with the DWB industries, according to this survey. Is that not correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, on Page 5 of the Document Book, in English, there is an address to the Reichsfuehrer submitting for his information a survey of the Economic Enterprises of the SS Economic and Administrative Office in their present state, so I ask you this question, witness:
Your position as co-manager of the DWB placed you in Amtsgruppe W, did it not?
A. I was Pohl's representative and deputy with Amtsgruppe W.
Q. Now, this survey shows that a number of subsidiary companies were owned by DWB. Was the Ost-Industrie one of the subsidiary companies under DWB?
A. No, it did not belong to DWB.
Q. Do you see those marks in the form of the letter "T" opposite each one of those names, which indicate that it is a subsidiary of DWB?
A. Of what company are you speaking now?
Q. it states right under the paragraph "Staff W", "German Economic Enterprises, Ltd., Berlin"--abbreviated, DWB. "Parent companies of the subsidiary companies hereinafter marked 'T', the enterprises of the head office are guided from here, particularly with reference to taxes and prices." Do you see that?
A. Yes, I can see that.
Q. Now, public Utility, Dwellings and Homestead, Ltd, in Dachau is a subsidiary company of the DWB, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. Also, the German Medicines, Ltd., located in Prague, was a subsidiary of the DWB; is that right?
A. I am bound to assume that from this document. I did not know it.
Q. Right under the German Medicine, Ltd. it lists the East Industry, Ltd., of Lublin. Was not that industry commonly known as Osti?
A. Yes.
Q. And that was a subsidiary of DWB, according to this survey.
A. I can see that from this document here. Up to this moment I always thought that Osti had not been a subsidiary company of the DWB. Either I made a mistake or the author of this document is making a mistake. I do not know which is the case.
Q. Then I can only ask you to testify according to the document and then you can give what comments you wish afterwards. According to this document, from Public Utility, Dwellings and Homestead, Ltd of Dachau through Osti Industrie, five separate industries were under Staff W; is that correct?
A. Yes, quite.
Q. Then you were, whether you knew it or not, connected with the Staff W industries in the WVHA?
A. Not with Staff W, but with the DWB.
Court No. 2 Case 4 page I
Q. Well, was not the DWB a part of the STAFF W industries according to this survey?
A. No. The DVB was a commercial company with limited liabilities duly registered, and the Staff W was an institution where experts belonged who advised Pohl when he led these enterprises. But the DWB was not part of Staff W.
Q. Are you not one of the founders of the Osti Industry with Pohl, having 25,000 shares in your name?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you interested either administratively or actually in another of the subsidiary companies known as the German Earth and Stone Works' the Dest.
A. No, I cannot remember that.
Q. Where was the labor for the East Industry Works obtained?
A. I don't know that. I was ordered to found the Osti Industry just as I was ordered to found the DWB. The management of the DWB or the Osti was not part of my duties.
Q. Were you interested in any of the companies listed from W-I through W-VIII in this survey?
A. I said on direct examination what I am unable to say in detail whether I had taken any part in the foundation of this or that company. I know that it was so in the case of the textile and leather works, but otherwise I am quite unable to say whether I was taking any part in the foundation of any of these many companies.
Q. I call your attention to Office W-I or W-VI, Roman numeral. This was the company for the utilization of textile and leather located in Ravensbrueck. Did you ever have anything to do with this concern?
A. I said just now that when that company was founded I took part as a foundation member. That happened in about 1940 and 1941 in May or June. That company also was absorbed by DWB on which occasion I left as a shareholder.
Q. In any of the other industries mentioned here, not covered in this cross examination, were you a co-founder or a co-manager of that company?
A. I said just now I may have participated in the foundation of this or that company, but which ones they were I am quite unable to say today. It was purely the act of founding this company and I had orders to participate. I gave my signature under the foundation document and after that usually the signature under the document which transferred the shares to Pohl, and that was as far as the matter went.
Q. I should like next to call the witness's attention to Document Book 15. This document NO-1289 is found in the English document book on page 4 and is prosecution exhibit 406. Witness, do you have that document before you?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, this document is a directive for new wage scales for prisoners employed in economic enterprises; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And according to the distribution list the Amtsgruppe W subdivisions got them and your office received a copy for information. Were you interested in this setting of the wage scales for the prisoners in both Amtsgruppe B and Amtsgruppe W?
A. Why that letter reached office group B I do not know, nor do I know why office group A was given a copy. I assume it was passed on for purely informative purposes. The actual reason I am quite unable to see. It might have been because in our troop warehouses some inmates were working and for that, of course, we had to pay. Therefore, we had to hear about the new wage scale. That might have been the reason.
Q. At the end of the year 1942 was any of this money set out in the wage scale, so far as you know, ever paid to the concentration camp inmates?
A. I am unable to say much about this because at that time I was not very precisely informed about payment of inmates.
All I know is that if they received something they received only a small part, in the shape of bonuses. Most of the money was transferred to the Reich.
Q. I should like to call the witness's attention next to Document Book 17.
A. I have not got Book 17 here.
Q. The document to which I refer is Exhibit 454 and is found on page 156 and is Document NO-1221. Do you have that document book before you now, witness?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And in the Document 1221 please turn to page 4 of the German text, page 3 of the English. Now, this is a report on the activity regarding the founding of a corporation, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. And who are the founders as listed in this report?
A. SS-B rigadefuehrer August Frank, and SS-Brigadefuehrer Loerner, Georg Loerner.
Q. And that Georg Loerner is you, is it not?
A. Yes.
Q. And this firm was that leather and textile processing firm which we spoke about in a previous report shown to you; is that not correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, it states down there in Article 4 that out of the capital of the corporation each one of the two partners was to pay 10,000 Reichsmarks. Where did that money come from? Was that from your own fund or did it belong to the WVHA?
A. Here I should say quite generally that in the case of all these foundations it was not the founders who invested their own capital. They were only trustees. The money came from the WVHA.
Q. Now, since you are a founder of this firm, did you or did you not receive a copy of this report?
A. I don't know that anymore. I assume that I received the report.
Q. If you had received this report would you have made any suggestions or suggested any ideas about the conduct of business to Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl?
A. I am not able to say that at this point. In any case the manager, Lechler, was such an expert in this field that I couldn't have imposed on his suggestions.
Q. Did Lechler ever report any of his activities in connection with this or other firms of which he was manager to you personally?
A. As long as I was a shareholder, yes. That was the case until 1941 which becomes clear from one of the later passages of this document.
Q. Now, I will call your attention to page 8 of the original which is the next to the last paragraph on page 5, the end of section 3; it states that the capital of this concern was increased from 20,000 Reichsmarks to 1,720,000 Reichsmarks. Can you give me the explanation for the sudden increase of capital from June of '40 to June of '41?
A. In the same paragraph it also says that on 10 June 1941 a full meeting was held where this capital increase and the basic capital of 20,000 Marks was taken over, and that Frank left on the same date. The increase of capital was necessary because the establishment of a weaving plant and a large clothing factory had become necessary, for the reason which I have given on direct examination, which was that at that time the private firms which had manufactured clothing for inmates were so overworked with Wehrmacht orders that they were no longer able to carry out these orders with the result that by the increase of capital it became possible to extend the factory thereby making it possible in 1943 and '44 to have material which formerly we had to receive from the Reich Ministry of Economics processed.
Q. Even though subsequent to July of 1941 you state that you were not connected officially with this concern, were you not interested as Chief of Amtsgruppe B in the production of this firm?
A. Oh yes, I was.
Q. That was one of the sources of supply for manufactured goods for reissue to the units and the prisoners under your office?
A. Yes, in '43 and '44 it was the only enterprise even which still was in a position to deliver clothing for inmates to us.
Q. I should like for the witness to obtain Document Book 19. This is Document Number 1270 which is prosecution exhibit 61 and which is found on page 66.
THE PRESIDENT: Of Document Book 3?
MR. WALTON: Sir, my information is that it is Document 1270 found in Book 19.
THE PRESIDENT: It's in both books.
MR. WALTON: I see.
THE PRESIDENT: And it is Exhibit 61 in Document Book 3 but it is also in Book 19 on page 1. It had been offered in the previous book.
MR. WALTON: Yes sir. Is this a conference held on 13 February 1943?
THE PRESIDENT: This is a series of questions about Osti.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry. Apparently this is on page 1, the document to which I refer, page 1, NO-1270, Exhibit 61.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, they are both the same.
MR. WALTON: Yes sir.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) Now, witness, I ask you if you stated in your direct examination to the effect that this document is not a true picture of the actual occurrence? In other words, were you present at this conference mentioned in this document?
A. Yes, I was present at that conference.
Q. Now, this was on 13 February 1943 and you discussed such questions as the Jewish manpower available to Osti Industry, did you not?
A. Yes, I said on direct examination that these questions were not debated. Shortly after Horn had begun to put questions he was cut short by Pohl, who told him in fairly clear terms that that was not a routine task for a conference but that was up to the managers who had to convince themselves on the spot how matters stood and then make their decisions.
Only when they didn't know what to do next they could come back, but until then he did not wish to be bothered in this matter. That roughly was how this conference went. That Horn, in his file note, didn't put it quite like that, of course, should be understandable.
Q. And according to your statement only you and Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl were empowered to discuss these questions as set forth in this document; is that correct?
A. No, only Pohl was authorized to decide or to raise such questions. I was only consulted just like the other two participants, because I had taken part in the foundation of the Osti. That was the real reason. Decisions were only up to Pohl in all economic matters. I cannot recall a single occasion where a decision concerning Amtsgruppe W was made by me.
Q. Did Pohl request at any time on the Osti any suggestions or thoughts you might have had on a particular phase of these industries?
A. I am afraid I didn't quite follow you there.
Q. Did Pohl ever ask for your suggestions in regard to the East Industries?
A. From me, certainly not.
Q. Did he ever ask your advice concerning any phase of the East Industries?
A. No.
Q. Then you mean to tell us that you would go to these meetings and be perfectly silent and have nothing to say during the entire meeting?
A. That is just what I want to say.
Q. Now, at this particular time, in February of '43, is it not true that the labor potential of the German Reich was growing steadily weaker?
A. I know nothing about that.
Q. Is it not true that the East Industries together with the other industries owned by the WVHA were in a bad way for lack of manpower?
A. I don't know anything about that either.
Q. Now, I should like to call attention to Document Book 19. Does the witness have Book 19 on his desk?
A. Yes.
Q. Document NO-1265, which is prosecution exhibit 482 and found on page 7. Witness, I desire to ask you about the written words within the box on the right-hand side of the page. Is that or is it not a distribution list?
A. In this document I cannot see any such remark.
Q. On my document on the right-hand top of the page, under the word "stamp" it says "received 8 March 1943" and then appears "Staff W" five times and then the word file. Do you see that?
A. No, nothing of that sort is on my document.
Q. I withdraw the question then since his document doesn't contain this particular designation.
Now, this document is a letter from Dr. Horn to Dr. Hohberg. Who was Dr. Horn in the WVHA?
A. I don't know what he was in the WVHA. All I know is that Horn was appointed the second manager of the Osti. I believe he was an auditor before, but I am not quite sure.
Q. Now, in the first paragraph on page 2 of the original it states that you are slated to be one of the co-founders of Osti, as you have testified. I will ask you whether or not you knew that Osti was establishing factories at Trawniki?
A. No. No, I didn't know the locations of these individual factories. I was of the opinion that the foundation of the Osti was based on the fact that the Reichsfuehrer saw that Globocnik alone was not a very good economic leader, which is the reason why I think Himmler ordered Pohl to supervise all the factories which Globocnik had established. That was how I saw it, why the Osti was established. What other factories Osti had under it and how many I did not know nor did I see a single one of these factories.
Q. And you never were sufficiently interested in finding out just what the physical assets of any of these companies were of which you were co-founder?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, it may sound funny to you but it was really the fact. This participation in foundations of boards of directors I considered to be an order of Pohl. I carried out that order just like any other order, but to call me an important official in those things would be wrong. I only regarded myself as the man who was kept in reserve in the event something should happen to Pohl. I could then take over until Himmler had appointed a new successor.
Q Does the witness have before him the Document 111?
A Yes.
Q I should like for you to turn to Document NO-599, which is Prosecution's Exhibit 63, and I shall have to request the Court -
THE PRESIDENT: Page 74.
Q Thank you. Witness This is the minutes of a meeting at which you are supposed to have been present on September 7, 1943, is it not?
A That is correct, although I cannot recall the conference, but according to files I took part in it.
Q Now, do you remember anything in your career that concerned ten labor camps in the Lublin district?
A Mr. Prosecutor, I assume that this conference was a result of the foundation of the OSTI, and secondly it was the consequence of the transfer to Trieste of Globocnik. Globocnik was informed at the time that the camps which had been under him were now transferred to Office Group D. The actual management of these labor camps was not changed I assume; earlier they were under the direction of Globocnik and afterwards they were under Office Group D.
Q Then, this is the source of supply of labor for the East Industries, is it not?
A Yes, I assume that certainly.
Q Now, I should like to refer again to Document Book 19, Document NO-1271, which is the Fischer affidavit. I shall be very brief in since there are only one or two questions I want to ask the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the number?
MR. WALTON: Document NO-1271, and it is Exhibit 491. I think the Fischer affidavit -- audit -- also appears in two or three document books.
THE PRESIDENT: This isn't an affidavit that we have; this is an audit.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry; I meant to correct the term that I used. It is an audit.
Q Does the witness have the document NO-1271 before him?
A Yes.
Q Now on page 1 of the original, the third paragraph, it states that the supervision of the company management, the charter provides for the board of directors, whose consent is necessary for certain legal transactions. During the life of OSTI, you were on the board of directors of this corporation, were you not?
A Not on the board of directors, but on the supervisory board.
Q The next line says that the partners of 19 March, 1943, the following board directors were appointed, and your name appears.
A Yes.
Q Then, you were a director in this concern, were you not?
A No, not a director. We did not have any directors. We had managers which is what you call directors. The board of directors had nothing to do with the actual management of the enterprises. That was the task of the manager.
Q Did you know when the East Industries were dissolved?
A Weel, they were dissolved in the autum of 1943.
Q What reason do you know that they decided to do away with the East Industries?
A The reason which was known to me at the time, I have already stated in my direct examination. I saw the reasons at that time in the transfer of Globocnik. The reason given here in this document, which I saw here for the first time, had never been known to me before.
Q Which reason are you inclined now to believe -- the one which is set up in the audit, or you onw reason that you formed at the time of the dissolution of the OSTI.
A I think both reason will have to serve.
Q Isn't it true that one reason which does not appear here, but which is fact and in truth was the main reason for the dissolution of OSTI, was that there was not enough concentration camp inmates to labor under the East Industries set-up?
A I did not know that reason, and I came across it for the first time in this trial.
Q Now, in Document Book 19 which you have before you, there is a document NO-1906-A and 1906-B, that is found on page 90, Prosecution Exhibit 493. Has the witness found the place?
A Yes.
Q. Now, there are minutes of a company meeting of the East Industries on 1 March, 1944. Do you remember signing these minutes?
A I cannot recall this occasion because such records I would sign so quickly that I am quite unable to recall it now. It usually happened that it was called up by the adjutant and asked if I would come over in the afternoon, or any other time, and see Pohl because I had to give a signature. Then I went along and was called in. The notary official was there; he read the transcript, I signed it, and I disappeared again. That was my entire activity as a shareholder or a member of the board of supervisors of the OSTI, and that was exactly what happened in all other cases too. These are three transcripts of notary records of the OSTI.
Q This is a particular meeting which should have impressed itself upon your memory. This was a meeting for the dissolution of the East Industries. Do you remember anything about this meeting which was different from the majority of meetings you attended?
A I do not know, Mr. Prosecutor whether you actually said conference or whether that was only in the translation. This was not a conference. As I have said before, I went to Pohl, the notary road the documents and both of us signed. No discussions took place but it also becomes dear that in the same breath when Globocnik had been transferred, the OSTI is being dissolved.
Q Now, I ask you to turn to Document Book XV, Document NO-514 page 40 of the English translation; it is Prosecution Exhibit 414.
A What is the number of the document please?
Q 514. Do you have the document?
A Yes.
Q On this document it says a conference for the preparation of a new wave scale for prisoners was hold at Pohl's office; is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Now, according to these minutes, in the last paragraph, or rather the next to the last paragraph, it states that you participated in this conference, and you pointed out that it might be advisable to examine whether these rates could be afforded by the individual plants; and you were supported in this contention by the chief of Amtsgruppe W. Why were you cautions at this time about fixing the rates to be charged for inmate labor?
A I do not recall this conference -- whether the remark contained here in the file note is correctly reproduced, I am unable to say. I believe that if I had taken part in the conference which is proved by the document, I might have pointed out that the wage scale for inmates should be adjusted individually, according to the work done, and not that everything should be done in a uniform manner. That was my opinion.
Q Do you recall in March of 1944 or not the concentration camp inmates were then paid a regular wage?
A Baier told me about these wage scales for work. Whether they were actually paid at the time or whether that stage of affairs was ever reached, I don't know; but the document also shows by the fact that Baier especially points out my presence that this was an exceptional event and not a routine matter, because had I always been present in that sort of conference, Baier would not have made a special note of my attendance.
Will the witness turn to Document NO-1287 which is Prosecution Exhibit 389 and found on page 46. What was your functioning in the discussion which took place regarding the founding of the Volkswagen works at Fallersleben?
A. I said before on direct examination that I did not take part in this conference. I pointed out that the remark made in the third document - or rather in the document following this document which is signed by Dr. Hohberg - was made on 29 January, on the day of this conference.
Dr. Kammler's final note is dated five days later. As far as I know Dr. Hohberg at all, I think it is quite impossible that he would have said I had participated if I had not participated, but he can be asked about that when he is on the witness stand. I cannot recall this conference, at any rate, nor do I know why I should have taken part.
Q. At this time it would have been necessary to create another corporation to take over the property at Fallersleben. Do you know anything about that?
A. No, I know nothing about it.
Q. Document 2133 contained in Document Book 14, Prosecution's Exhibit 387, on page 41. Witness, what connection would you have with the establishment of industries at Stutthof?
A. I had no connection at all with the establishment of industries in Stutthof. This letter was sent to me for informative purposes. It is dated 24 January 1942 when I was chief of Office I. As chief of Office I, I had under me the Main Department I-1, the task of which was to buy land for the Reich. Excuse me; this is a mistake. It should be I-2. In this report it says that the Reich was to buy a piece of land and therefore that document was passed on to me. Also the date, 24 January 1942, shows that this matter was not carried out because on 1 February the WVHA was founded and there I had nothing to do with the purchase of land. The next document, 2159, proves, incidentally, that this piece of land had not yet been bought in 1944.
Q. Now I ask you to turn to Document NO-2116 which is Prosecution Exhibit 383 and it can be found on page 14 of Document Book 14.