THE PRESIDENT: "Camp" instead of what?
MR. WALTON: I should like the privilege of asking that question over again, sir. I think it was totally misunderstood.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, all right, go ahead.
Q.- (by Mr. Walton) I notice that your department, B-I/2 handled supplies allocated from OKH and the army supply officer. I would like to know if your statement of the word "supplies" in your affidavit referred only to food supplies or to other supplies?
A.- It only refers to food and post-exchange goods, because they were of a similar nature.
Q.- Then what was the flow of quartermaster material to the troop economic camps, was that also food and past-exchange supplies?
A.- You mean clothing and accommodation requirements?
Q.- I can only state what the translation of your affidavit shows in Document Book 1, aid it is No. 1564 on Page 39. The affidavit which you signed states that Office B-I/2 had four separate fields of action. It handled supplies allocated from the OKH and the army supply officer. Second, it handled the flow of quartermaster material to the troop economic depots.
A.- Yes. The expression "quartermaster material" perhaps differs from the German meaning of that word. In the German army by "Quartermeister" we understood a general staff officer who was competent for the general supply of the troops. That is to say, besides food ho was also responsible for the clothing, accommodation requirements, fuel for motor vehicles, equipment of vehicles, the equipments of horse-drawn vehicles, and he was also responsible for the ammunition. These were the tasks of the "Quartiermeister" in the German meaning. However, this translation does not cover the activity of an administrative officer, which, according to the german concept, went much more into detail and it was little to do with my activities as the man in charge of B-I. In my field of of tasks I only had to take care of food, and as I have already stated, post exchange goods.
Among them there were cigarettes, chocolates, and small toilet articles, soap, and those goods which can be purchased at a post exchange.
Q.- Then the third function which your office performed was that of depot balancing. Now, that means an equalization, according to your affidavit, of shortages and surpluses. Did that depot balancing extend, so far as this section of your office was concerned, down to the individual Waffen-SS troop installation, or did that extend only so far as your office was concerned, down to these food depots?
A.- That only went down to the food depots. May I give a short example in this connection?
Q.- That answers my question. Now, at my time you knew the status and you knew when you had a shortage, is that correct?
A.- I found it out by the demands of the man in charge of the depot when he received new units which he had to supply. If he did not have enough food at his disposal in order to supply them, then, of course, he immediately telephoned to my office, or he sent a telegram.
Q.- However, you knew by the same way when you had accumulated a surplus, or too large a surplus, is that correct?
A.- Yes, that is correct.
Q.- Where did you report an excessive amount of surplus?
A.- First of all, if I had a surplus in a certain depot then it remained there unless it was needed elsewhere, and if within a short period of time we dad not think that this surplus would be used up again through supplies to new 14 arrived units, then I had to return this food to the army again, because the army was much larger, and it was always able to have this food consumed. We could not afford, to have food spoiled.
Q.- If at that time you received a normal informal request for food from a concentration camp, could you have turned it over to the concentration camp rather than the army?
A.- No. way I point out that these cases occurred very rarely, and secondly, I was not entitled to this anyway, I did it in this one particular case where I saw that an emergency prevailed in a concentration camp.
Q.- Now, your office B-I/3, which in your affidavit you state handled personnel matters of your troop economic depots and handled other matters, does that mean that this office supplied the various economic depots with personnel which exclusively handled food?
A.- Yes, that is correct.
Q.- That means then that your liaison between the economic camps and your office was close at all times?
A.- I was the direct superior of these depots.
Q.- What were the other matters, which your affidavit does not state in detail, about which Office B-I/3 was concerned?
A.- Well, it had the utmost variety of tasks which has accumulated accidentally. However, I cannot describe that any more in detail today. The experts of this Department 3 had orders to sometimes keep unwelcome visitors away from me. They had to take care of some of the antechamber tasks in my office, because it was natural that with the prevailing food shortage many requests were submitted to me for some improvements or additional rations, perhaps for the troops, or sometimes these requests were even of a personal nature.
Q.- Then you added the additional section B-I/4. -I believe that you state that that was an order-storage department where back orders were kept, and after it was discovered that those orders could be filled on a foreign market, this department handled the placing of orders on the foreign market for food stuffs, is that correct?
A.- It was done in this way: When we had such a request approved by the Reich Ministry of Economy and if we realized that we could not meet our requirements in Germany, and if we discovered that these goods were on hand in some foreign countries, then again with the permission of the Reich Ministry of Economics these orders were transferred abroad.
That is why we called this department the "transfer of orders." It was a purchasing department abroad.
Q.- Now, did you deal with these foreign agencies, or rather did this section deal with these foreign agents directly, or through an intermediate agency?
We had purchasing agencies abroad. They were located in Paris, in Brussels, in the Hague, at Prague, Czechoslovakia----
THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO): Mr. Walton, how is this relevant the fact that he communicated with Brussels and the Hague?
MR. WALTON: I want to show, sir, that he handled foreign currency; and I want to see if I can ask him whether he knows where this foreign currency came from and who delivered it to him. I'm trying to make a connection with some of the matters which have been brought out here.
A. Whenever a purchase abroad became necessary, this foreign exchange was furnished by the Reichsbank.
Q. You had no other connection than that you drew the funds from the Reichsbank and paid it over to these agents, who made the purchases in the foreign countries; is that correct?
A. No.
Q. Now, there is before the Court a chart which covers the same period about which you testified and which shows a slightly different function of your office. In this chart there is a designation known as Control Staff B. What was the function of this Control Staff B?
A. I have explained that before. In the case of the troop economic depots we had the so-called examining Staff B which was with Loerner the Chief of Amtsgruppe B. It consisted of the three SS officers whom I have mentioned before, and they would inspect the troop economic depots. They exercised the supervision there which actually only Loerner, I or Lechler could have carried out personally.
Q. Was the office of the food sector of the Waffen SS under this Control Staff B?
A. No, it had absolutely nothing to do with it. One cannot even speak of a coordination in this case. It dealt with completely different tasks.
Q. Now, I believe that you have gone into detail concerning your relationship with Dr. Schenk. Would you say that the information which Dr. Schenk gave to you was for the most part formal or official information, or was it given to you through friendship and given to you informally?
A. I can call my relationship with Dr. Schenk a good professional relationship. He did not have to submit any reports to me. But whenever he had made a new discovery, he would come and see me. He asked me to come into his laboratory, and then we gave a mutual diagnosis on the things which he had discovered. Then we would discuss them.
Q. Did he ever according to your recollection file any written reports of his activities with you as a matter for your attention and interest since it pertained to your field?
A. Schenk never submitted any written reports to me, nor did he ever report to me about his trips. Occasionally he would tell me some of the interesting details; but that was not a report of the kind which he would submit to a superior. It only depended on his good-will what he told me and what he considered worth-while telling me.
Q. Did you ever discuss with him his food experiments which were carried out by him at Oranienburg, Dachau, and Beneschau?
A. As I have already said before, no -----
THE PRESIDENT: You answered it; you said, "No."
Q. Did you ever see a report made by Dr. Schenk on his food studies that he made during his campaigns in the West, the South-east, Norway, and Russia, which he compiled, and which were printed in three separate pamphlet forms?
A. On one occasion I saw several little pamphlets by Schenk. I cannot even recall the title of these book anymore. I must confess honestly I did not even have enough time to read these matters. I know that by virtue of his travels he wrote several ---
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. You've answered the question. You have answered it; now stop. Next question.
Q. Did you ever see reports made by Dr. Schenk on food experiments at the concentration camp Mauthausen?
A. No, I have never seen them.
Q. Did your department maintain and supervise training kitchens at Oranienburg, Dachau, and Beneschau?
A. We had three training kitchens, one at Dachau, one at Oranienburg, and a third one located at Beneschau, near Prague. These three training kitchens were also subordinated to me. I was the immediate superior; and I visited these three kitchens. I supervised and directed the training curriculum there. That was the special task of my collaborator, Drey. I just remembered that.
Q. In this connection, since you supervised the training, you still state that the expression "the house of bad troop feeding" in the letter which was referred to today is still an exaggeration?
A. Yes.
Q. Did this course include instruction as to how not to prepare food?
A. Yes.
Q. A house of bad feeding then would be a good example for your student cooks to have as the lesson how not to feed the troops, would it not?
A. Yes, that was the idea. The idea was the expression of the will of the Reichsfuehrer that troop commanders or cooks who cooked very badly and who did not care for the troops sufficiently were to be locked up there for six weeks.
For three weeks they were to be given bad food. They were to be given burned, salty food, and spoiled food. The other three weeks the counter-demonstration was to take place so that they were given good food then. Then they themselves were to stand at the cooking pot and learn how to cook and how to prepare food. That was one of Himmler's ideas.
Q. Now, a chemical laboratory for food research was also located at Oranienburg, was it not?
A. No, the food chemical laboratory of the Waffen SS also belonged to my office. However, at my time it had been transferred to Baden-Baden because of the danger of air attacks. Baden-Baden is a well-known resort town.
Q. Did you exercise direct supervision and control over this food laboratory?
A. Yes, as far as the distance between our agencies permitted it. I constantly received diagnoses about the food which had been submitted there for examination. These tests were constantly taken from the troop depots; the food was tested in the laboratories with regard to its storage and its calorie value.
Q. Did Dr. Schenk, who has been mentioned here, have access to your laboratory in Baden-Baden?
A. Yes. He was able to go there; but actually he was not allowed to give instructions in the laboratory. I was its superior. However, since he was a scientist and since the chemists who worked there were also considered scientists, they frequently came into contact and discussed various matters.
Q. They then exchanged information, Dr. Schenk and your chemists, in this laboratory; is that correct?
A. I beg your pardon? Not experiments, but tests.
Q. The question was whether the chemical laboratory or the staff of the chemical laboratory for food exchanged information with Dr. Schenk. Is that correct?
A. No, they did not do that. Well, to express myself more correctly, Dr. Schenk perhaps told the scientists the result of his research, perhaps about this biosyn-mycel product which we have referred to repeatedly; and perhaps he also had it tested in the laboratory by a chemist; for example, perhaps he had it examined as to its contents of albumin or as to its contents of acids, or whatever may have been contained in it. I therefore am of the opinion that Schenk did not even have to test the harmful effects of such a drug on human beings. Every chemist could do that much better with much less of a risk.
Q. Did these chemists make experiments in food and diet on human beings to your knowledge?
A. That is completely out of the question. Otherwise I would have known about it. They did not even have the opportunity of doing that.
Q. Now, I'd like to direct your mind again to the Mauthausen or Dora incident. I believe that you stated in your testimony and in your affidavit that in the winter of 1943 to 1944 this occasion was the one upon which you visited Mauthausen. Is that correct?
A. I beg your pardon; that was at Dora, near Buchenwald.
Q. At Dora, yes. Do you know Barnewald, a former SS Sturmbannfuehrer?
A. Yes, I know Barnewald.
Q. Would you believe his testimony under oath?
A. No, not completely. I have already stated before that Barnewald made a mistake in saying that upon his representations or the representations of Dr. Kahr, I was---
Q. Witness, allow me to interrupt you. I asked you, "Would you believe his testimony under oath?" and you answered "Not completely." That was the complete answer that I wanted. You will be given an opportunity later. I am sure the Court will allow you then to make whatever explanation you desire. I would like to proceed to the next question without such a detailed explanation at this time.
DR. PRIBILLA: Your Honor, I object to this question. It certainly is not the task of the defendant to testify as to the veracity of the witness Barnewald.
THE PRESIDENT: We were just commenting on this categorically broad question, "Would you believe his testimony under oath, no matter what he said?"
MR. WALTON: No, sir, I -
THE PRESIDENT: That is what the question implies, you see.
MR. WALTON: I am sorry. I see.
THE PRESIDENT: Judge Musmanno just suggested if the witness said something that he believes, he would be committed to disbelieving him by his prior answer.
MR. WALTON: I can rephrase the question.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: What I said was if the witness would say certain things which were true about me, I would not believe it.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, Go ahead.
Q Then, would you say that the man, Barnewald, could generally be believed under oath?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Why not just confront him with whatever this other witness said without anticipating it?
MR. WALTON: Yes, sir. I will go a little further.
Q I did not catch your answer when you stated whether or not the witness, Barnewald, was with you on this inspection trip to Dora or was in your vicinity or in your presence. Was he?
A Do you mean the statement of Barnewald according to which I am alleged to have stated -
THE PRESIDENT: Was Barnewald with you at Dora?
THE WITNESS: I have already stated that before.
THE PRESIDENT: The answer is yes, then, is it not?
THE WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: That is it.
Q How long were you at Dora on this duty of inspection?
A I was there on one evening and the following morning, that is to say for approximately six hours.
Q Now Barnewald states that you told him at Dora that the insufficient delivery of the requested detainee clothing was due solely to Office B-2 of the WVHA. Is this true?
A No. That is not correct. It is not correct. I have never said that.
Q Barnewald, further states that Georg Loerner, as the chief in food matters was the actual responsible person for the deplorable state of the labor camp, S-III, at Ohrdruf. Is that true?
A I believe that this question has already been clarified by the testimony of other witnesses. Loerner never had the title of Food Chief, not according to the situation as it has been explained so far. He could never be responsible for that. He could not be responsible in the case of Ohrdruf S-III.
Q When you reported to Pohl back in Berlin, did you suggest to him that there possibly were other concentration camps in a similar or worse condition?
A No. I could not do that. How should I have obtained that knowledge. After all, I only saw Dora.
Q Did you ever think that your department would ever be called on to help out in similar emergencies for other camps?
A I beg your pardon? I have not quite understood your question. Could you please repeat it?
Q You came back to Pohl and told him you had been of assistance in this emergency. Did it ever occur to you, at that time, that your department would be subsequently called on to help out in another or similar emergency?
A I already explained before that I have also helped in so many cases, that is to say, I also helped troop units in combat, so that it would not have surprised me if on a later occasion, my help would have been requested again in a similar case. However, if the state of affairs had been as bad as it was in the case of Dora, then, of course, I would have become suspicious and I would have assumed that such conditions were customary or that such conditions had reached a very large extent.
I would not have limited myself to helping if I had been able to do so, but, of course, I would have pointed out these things to Pohl.
Q Then when you came back to report and you found or you thought that you might be called on you felt that it was necessary to accumulate extra food stocks in order to help out, if you were called on. Is that correct?
A No. I did not have such an opportunity.
THE PRESIDENT: Nein.
Q Then when you were called on three or four times, did it not occur to you that other camps were in as deplorable a condition as the Camp Dora?
A No. I did not have any reason to believe that.
Q When you helped out the people at Dora, you stated that you got the food moving. Did you ever make a check to see whether this food had arrived at Dora or not?
A Yes. I even received reports about that.
Q Then you know of your own knowledge that the detainees received this food after it reached Dora?
A I received the report that the food had arrived at Dora. I telephone with the administrative officer. I made it his duty to take care and to see that the inmates really received this food.
Q A question was asked you which I did not get. Who was responsible for this condition at Dora? Do you know of any one name or several names who were responsible for the condition existing at Dora when you made your inspection there?
A I have already stated that before.
Q What was the name, or names? What was his name or their names?
A I did not speak about the responsibility of persons. As Camp Commander, Sturmbannfuehrer Foerschner was assigned there. Foerschner excused himself because of the conditions.
He made the excuse that transportation difficulties existed, that he had not been given sufficient time to make the necessary preparations. I have already stated that in my opinion the fault did not lie with the persons, but it was rather the unfortunate conditions and unfortunate circumstances that existed.
Q Did you not consider the responsibility for the feeding and clothing of inmates after this trip was merely one of all the WVHA; rather than being actually that of Amtsgruppe-D?
A No. That could not be the case. After all, the clothing was there, but it was not turned over to the appropriate agencies on the lower level.
Q As a member of Georg Loerner's staff, were you ever during your career in attendance at a WVHA conference of concentration camp commanders?
A No. Never.
Q Was not your advise ever asked as a food or a Administrative expert for one of these conferences?
A No. They had their own expert for that. That was Sturmbannfuehrer Burger.
Q Did you ever know whether or not Pohl attended one of these camp commander conferences?
A No. I cannot judge that. After all, I could not supervise the chief of the main office.
Q Did you ever know whether or not Georg Loerner ever attended one of these camp commandant conferences?
A He never discussed that with me, and I do not think he had any reason to do so.
Q I believe that you have given some direct testimony concerning the affidavit of Hermann Pister, a former SS-Oberfuehrer. How long have you known Pister?
have you known Pister?
A I met Pister at Dora when I made my visit there with Kammler. That was early in November 1943.
Q Have you formed an opinion as to whether or not Pister is able to be believed in a statement under oath?
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think that is very proper.
MR. WALTON: Sorry, sir. Very good, sir. I withdraw the question. I ask that it be stricken.
THE PRESIDENT: It is stricken. I am sure of that.
Q Did at any time, during your time of office, Barnewald make a special request to you for food for the concentration camp Dora?
A Barnewald never did that.
Q Was a request from Barnewald then placed before you by Hermann Pister?
A No. I was not competent in this matter at all.
Q Even in an emergency, would you have been competent if such a request had come to you either from Barnewald or Pister?
A Yes, if such a request had been made then, of course, I would have helped exactly as I did in the case where I found out about it through Kammler. I always tried to help whenever I was able to do so.
Q You are familiar with the Pister affidavit, are you not?
A Yes, I know it.
Q Would Pister make such a statement as this from a motive of revenge against you?
A I do not know why Pister should try to revenge himself on me. I never did anything to him.
Q I believe you stated on direct examination that you were Pohl's deputy some four weeks while Pohl was on leave?
A I beg your pardon. That was when Loerner was on leave. Then I was deputy.
Q You are correct. I will stand corrected. You were Loerner's deputy four weeks while he was on leave.
A Just about three years ago today, I deputized for Loerner when he went on leave.
Q During this four-week period were any reports, routine reports or special reports sent to Loerner's office which were brought to your attention for decision?
A Of course, I cannot recall anymore today what matters were submitted to me in detail at that time, however, I can say that no extraordinary matters and especially important matters were submitted to me. Above all, I did not deal with any matters which have now become the subject of the indictment.
THE PRESIDENT: He will recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal recessed at 1630 hours)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Oswald Pohl, et al, defendants, sitting at Nuernberg, Germany, on 24 June 1947, 0930-1630, Justice Robert M. Toms presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II. Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the court.
DEFENDANT TSCHENTSCHER - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION - Continued BY MR. WALTON:
Q. Witness, yesterday at the end of the session we were speaking of the time when you were acting as deputy for George Loerner during his four weeks leave. At this time, is it not so that the WVHA, and certainly Department B, was understaffed?
A. Yes. In the course of the war many people had been released. They had been sent to the front, and it is also correct that we were understaffed; that is to say, every single one of us was overworked, which was inevitable in view of the war and the military situation at the end.
Q. Therefore, as George Loerner's deputy it was necessary that you receive all of the papers which would normally have come to his desk, is that not so?
A. Yes, every morning I received all incoming mail for the Office Group, and I read it.
Q. Then you were acquainted generally with what was going on in the clothing department of the WVHA, were you not?
A. On the whole, yes, at that time.
Q. Do you remember whether you signed any orders for shipments of clothing to the concentration camps during that time?
A. I have been thinking about that here, now that these matters have become more important in this trial. It is entirely possible that some document or other was signed by me, without my realizing its signi ficance at that time.
Should that have happened - I cannot recall it there was nothing which struck me as peculiar or suspicious, not even when I am reflecting about these things in a different sense than I was at the time.
Q. Did not these reports show to you that there was a great lack of necessary clothing for the concentration camps at this time?
A. No, that did not appear at that time. I cannot recall at all that point was even debated.
Q. Very well. There are one or two questions which I omitted asking you yesterday concerning your visit to Dora. At the time of your inspection of Dora under Pohl's orders, I'll ask you whether or not you were able to determine what type of prisoners were working in the shafts and the tunnels at Dora; in other words, were they German nationals or foreign nationals?
A. I was not able to find that out at the time. I passed the inmates, it is true, but they all wore the same striped clothing, white and blue. We talked to some of the so-called Kapos, the foremen, in order to find out how they were being fed, but all of these men spoke German. I did not notice anything.
Q. Do you know whether or not any of these men were prisoners of war or former prisoners of war?
A. From among the Kapos to whom I talked and who spoke German, as I said, I did not notice anything. They were in their inmates' uniform. It did not occur to me at the time to investigate this point, because this point of view was not generally prevalent at the time.
Q. If there prisoners of war there, they were also at work on these "V" weapons, were they not?
A. Work at that time was purely earth work. The tunnels were then being built. The actual production had not yet begun.
Q. This same group of prisoners who were working on the tunnels were also scheduled later to work on these "V" weapons, were they not?
A. No. Kammler told me that for that purpose he needed skilled personnel, and some of them were free German civilian workers, perhaps workers from abroad, but engineers, skilled workers and mechanics, because work was highly complicated as far as I could judge it.
Q. Then would you state that there never were prisoners of war, as far as you know, who worked on these "V" weapons?
A. This is much too difficult for me. I can say neither yes or no. At that time I was quite unable to form a judgment.
Q. Now, I will ask you whether or not during the month of April 1945, you, together with Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, and Loerner and other members of Amtsgruppe A and B, evacuated Berlin and went to Dachau?
A. We were only together with Loerner. Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl I did not see any more at that time. He had left before, and the supervision for the group south of the WVHA had been transferred to Loerner.
Q. Did you go to Dachau in April of 1945?
A. I went to Dachau for a short time, but I stayed mainly at different places, because I had a special assignment. I was mainly in a place called Pullach near Munich, and for some days in Passau, and I moved on to the south, to the mountains. On two brief occasions I went to Dachau, it is true, which was in the first half of April.
Q. Were not you there with Georg Loerner when a transport of prison inmates was brought from some other camp to Dachau?
A. At that time I stayed near the barracks, not in the actual concentration camp.
I was staying in the area of the SS training camp which we have heard so much about. I saw individual inmates who were doing some work in the camp, but no transports or inmates.
Q. Are you familiar with the affidavit of Gerhard Vieweg who states that he saw you within the confines of the concentration camp at Dachau with Georg Loerner?
A. I do not know that affidavit, and it cannot be true, because I was not in the concentration camp at that time.
Q. Is it true then that you attended the dinner or banquet which Pohl gave for members of his staff at Dachau?
A. A lunch was given, and we expected Pohl to turn up, and I don't believe he actually came, unless that was on a different day which I no longer know. That was in the so-called officers' mess in the woods. It was an officers' mess at one end of the camp near the troop training camp.
DR. PRIBILLA: May I ask the Prosecution where the affidavit of Vieweg is? I must say that I have never seen that document where Georg Loerner and Tschentscher are mentioned together.
MR. WALTON: This affidavit is contained in Document Book 21. I do not remember the exact page, but I believe it is either the last affidavit in Document Book 21 or the next to the last affidavit. It is certainly the only affidavit by Vieweg. The document to which I refer is Document NO-2331, in Document Book 21. It is Prosecution's Exhibit 517, and it is found on Page 30.
Q. (By Mr. Walton) Now then, I understood you to say that you never were in the confines of the concentration camp Dachau during the time of which we speak, namely in April of '45, is that correct?
A. I am not able to confirm that I did not enter the concentration camp at that time.
Q. Have you ever entered the concentration camp at Dachau?
A. I described that yesterday in detail. In the spring of 1941 when I was staying in the troop training camp of Dachau with my unit I inspected part of the actual concentration camp by invitation.