Q. Witness, the task of Sauckel was primarily the procurement of labor, and not the distribution. Had the Amtsgruppe D anything to do with this activity?
A. I have already stated that we did not have anything to do with the procurement of labor. I have already stated it was our task to distribute the labor which was located in the concentration camps for the armament industry.
Q It is an established fact that during the war a large number of foreigners came to Germany for work. I do not want to examine now, at least at this time, into how many of them came voluntarily and how many were not volunteers. I am now asking you whether these people who came to Germany through the efforts of Plenipotentiary Sauckel were sent to concentration camps, or was it not done in such a way that these workers were brought to private quarters or were sent to labor camps which were under the administration of the Labor Front, for example, and who did not have anything to do with the concentration camps which you have stated were the outside camps of the concentration camps?
AAs far as I am informed, the workers who were brought into the Reich by Sauckel were directly distributed to the industries, and they were brought into so-called labor camps. I believe that these labor camps were administered by the German Labor Front. These labor camps, however, did not have anything to do with the concentration camps and the labor camps of the concentration camps.
Q Was Plenipotentiary General Sauckel able by himself to have any persons, no matter whether they were Germans or other nationals, brought in a concentration camp?
A He was unable to do that. He could only do that if he turned the matter over to the Gestapo. Any commitments into a concentration camp, as far as I know, was always channelled through the Gestapo. I have never seen in a single instance that Sauckel entered the picture in any way on that subject.
Q If the Gestapo or another agency of the RSHA, for example, the Reich Criminal Police, Office 5 of the RSHA, committed a German or a foreign national to a concentration camp, was this in any connection then with the allocation of labor, or were only security reasons responsible for that?
A For the commitment into a concentration camp, only the police or the security police were of decisive importance. I do not know that reasons of labor allocations would have been decisive for that. I have never been asked by any agency, for example, how large the requirements for the labor allocations were, that is to say, to fill up certain gaps. I have never had any negotiations with any agency, either Sauckel's agency or the RSHA - to the effect that the number of prisoners was not sufficient in order to meet the requirements; to the contrary, in these cases I told the plant owners, "I do not have sufficient people. I can not give you any." I did nothing whatsoever to increase the number of prisoners.
Q In the course of the presentation of evidence, witnesses have been called by the Prosecution who testified about the general conditions in the concentration camps. What observations did you make in this respect on the occasion of your official trips, and what explanation can you give to the statements made by the witnesses?
AAs I have already stated, as a result of my being overburdened with work, I was only rarely able to leave Berlin, and I went into a plant only when I had to make a decision only by looking at things personally. Of course, on the occasion of such journeys, I was also interested in other things which were connected with labor allocations. On my way to and on the return trip, I always looked at labor camps whenever I happened to pass by them. I looked at conditions under which the prisoners worked. I went into their barracks. I had shown to me the food which was given to these prisoners. I looked at the canteens. That was according to the time that I had at my dispotal and according to the situation. In general, conditions in 1943, until approximately the middle of 1944, were quite normal.
They were not the same in all the camps.
Of the bigger labor camps, I can name the camp at Salzgitter, which I visited; then the camp in Duerrenfurt near Breslau, the camp at the Krupp Works near Breslau. Then I visited the camp Heidebreck, in Upper Silesia, and perhaps some other camps.
I mostly watched the prisoners at work, because I was visiting the camp during the day time, and actually I was unable to observe any especially bad conditions. I do not want to say that this was the case everywhere. There were 500 to 600 camps. I do not know whether everything was in order there. These bad conditions which have been described here by the witness arose only, for the most part, toward the end of the year 1944 and the time afterwards. That was when the situation on the whole in Germany had already deteriorated to a rather large estent. This was the result of the destruction and the damage which was caused to the communications network, when it became increasingly difficult to procure the necessary food; lack of gasoline made it difficult to use trucks, and there were other factors which were caused by the deteriorated situation.
I have also seen that in this period of time the clothing situation of the prisoners was not such as had been desired in the interest of their health and the work which was to be performed. Whatever conditions were caused, before the year 1943, however, things were relatively bearable, and it was quite good in 1943. In no place which I visited were any specially bad conditions reported to me by the plant managers or the camp commanders.
Q The Prosecution has shown a film as evidence. It is entitled "Nazi Concentration Camps" and has been made by the U.S. Forces.
This film, in part, contains pictures which were made of the camps when they were taken over by the U.S. Army. Can these conditions in the camps at the end of the war be considered as typical, and do they justify a conclusion that conditions were such in normal times? What particular reasons were responsible for the collapse of the organization of the concentration camps at the end of the war?
A It would have been terrible if these pictures which we saw in the film had been typical of the concentration camps at all times. They are typical for the weeks of the collapse, and can in no way be compared to the conditions which prevailed in the concentration camps in normal times. It could not be prevented in view of the confusion which prevailed during the last few months even among the highest commanding authorities and in view of the fact that apparently nobody on the top level know what should be done with the concentration camps, that finally this dramatic and sad confusion resulted, which was shown by the films.
If the concentration camps and labor camps had been left where they were previously located and if they had been turned over to the Allies or the German Red Cross, if since the fall, of 1944 those people had not been again transferred further into the Reich from one camp to another in the middle of the cold winter, these sad conditions could not have arisen at all. Responsible for this are those who carried out this evacuation, and in this case it must be Himmler, if not Hitler.
In normal times, as I have already stated, I think until the summer of 1944, as far as the quartering and feeding and clothing of the prisoners were concerned, conditions were quite normal and bearable.
In any case, they were not so terrible as they were afterwards at the end.
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q But what about the intentional extermination program? That was started long before the collapse of the German defense, or don't you know anything about that either?
A Mr. President, I do not know what extermination program you are referring to. I do not know that the transfer of the camps further into the Reich and that the placing of these masses within the Reich was based on an extermination program.
Q I am talking about the intentional extermination of the old, the sick, and the Jews, whether they were able-bodied or not, by shooting, by hanging and by gassing, especially at Auschwitz. Didn't you know anything about the extermination at Auschwitz?
A Of course I had knowledge of it. The whole extermination program, which was directed against the Jews, was an action which was channeled through the RSHA and for which Eichmann organized transports of Jews who came to Auschwitz and were exterminated by Hoess. That program had nothin; to do with the concentration camps as such, and the existing concentration camps were actually misused in this respect. The documents and the reports for this program, as far as I am informed, did not even go through the Inspectorate of Concentration Camps. This was all carried out in a very small circle.
Q But on a very large scale.
A Well, I had the first authentic figures after the war. At that time I did not have any idea at all that this number extended to millions. The whole program of the extermination of the Jews was dealt with by Amt IV of the RSHA, and the organizer of the transports was a certain man named Eichmann who sent these transports to Auschwitz, and there these transports were exterminated by Hoess, who in this case did not act as camp commander but as commissioner of Himmler or the Reich Government.
Q Were you in charge of the concentration camps while this program was being carried out by RSHA?
A I do not know when this program started.
Q Well, no matter when it started, was it being carried on at any time while you were in charge of concentration camps?
A Whether in the year 1942 to 1943 this extermination was still carried out I don't know. I don't knew how long it lasted.
Q Well, it is your contention they just borrowed the concentration camps to carry out the extermination program?
A That is my opinion, yes.
Q Just one second. In order to carry out the extermination program they had to build gas chambers at the concentration camps?
A Yes, but I did not have any gas chambers constructed. I did not give any order whatsoever that gas chambers should be established.
Q Well, were they constructed while you were in charge?
A I do not know exactly in what years the gas chambers at Auschwitz were erected.
Q Well, no matter when they were erected, were they there and operating while you were in charge?
AAs long as Jews were exterminated the gas chambers were working and operating.
Q And was that while you were in charge of concentration camps?
A I cannot say that, because I have visited Auschwitz only once in 1944 and perhaps twice in 1943. At that time I did not see that Jews were being exterminated.
I, therefore, do not know how long this program was underway.
Q Did you see any gas chambers when you were there?
A I have seen the gas chambers as buildings in the distance, yes.
Q You knew they were there.
A Yes, I knew that.
Q What did you think they were being used for?
A I knew that Jews were being exterminated and that the gas chambers were being used for that purpose.
Q And when you saw them and knew that Jews were being exterminated, you were in charge of that concentration camp?
A Yes, the gas chambers were standing there until the last day. They were standing there also when the concentration camps were subordinate to me. They were not destroyed previously.
Q Nor afterwards. They continued to be operated after you were put in charge?
AAs far as the extermination of the Jews was carried on, yes, but I do not know how long this continued.
Q Well, at least it continued as long as you were in charge.
A I do not know how long it was continued. I do not know when the last Jews were exterminated.
Q Well, you are trying to evade it, perhaps not intentionally. At any rate, after you became chief of the concentration camps, the gas chambers at Auschwitz and elsewhere continued to work?
A I assume that, yes, naturally.
Q Did you ever do anything to find out why people were being based to death, or did you ever protest against that program?
A On two occasions I discussed with Himmler the entire Jewish extermination program. The first time it was approximately in the spring of 1943. At that time I had discovered, in my trips to Oranienburg, that the Jews whom I always used to meet when they came out of the Schering Works in the afternoon in large numbers, and who worked there as laborers, suddenly did not appear any more.
The streets were empty. This attracted my attention so much that I pointed out this fact to Himmler during my next discussion and I asked him why the Jews had been taken away from there and he told me, "Well, all the Jews from Berlin are now being sent to Theresienstadt." I considered this statement to be true at the time. I discussed this matter the second time with Himmler after the speech at Posen. That was in October, 1943. That was the first time, at Posen, he told the SS leaders that the Jews were to be exterminated. This was the first official notification which came to my knowledge. After this speech I talked to Obergruppenfuehrer Schmidt, Von Herff, and other comrades, and we discussed the thing over the table. Their concepts of this speech and their opinions were not uniform at all. To the contrary, we were rather surprised about the way in which the Jewish question was now to be solved in such a brutal manner. For this reason, on the occasion of our next meeting, I again talked to Himmler about this, because I had been assigned the labor allocation. Otherwise I wouldn't have talked to him at all. We discussed labor allocations. On that occasion I told him that I still considered it stupid, now at the time when all the labor was so valuable to us, that I considered it madness to exterminate these people now. He became very angry then. He pressed his lips together and told me, "Well, that is none of your business. You do not know anything about this, and furthermore, you are too soft." Then he went to the adjoining room. He left me standing there, and approximately after five minutes he returned, and then he dismissed me by saying, "I have nothing further for you." Besides this I had no discussion with him about that.
Q Your objection to the extermination program was that it was interfering with your labor supply?
AAs I have already stated, I probably would have never even been able to talk to Himmler if I had started any other way. I was fundamentally opposed to the entire question, because the solution of the Jewish question, if it was necessary, in this form seemed to be most inappropriate.
Q But the only objection that you expressed to Himmler was that his program was killing off a lot of your valuable workers.
A With this argument I tried to bring about a discussion, and I have already stated there was no other argument with which I could have started an argument with him at all, but even this method failed.
Q You didn't try the argument that this was wholesale murder?
A I did not use this argument, which was clear with me, because this would have caused him much less to have started a discussion with me. I had to bring him into a situation which would throw him into a discussion, but even this method failed.
Q Did it occur to you that it was wholesale murder?
A Of course I considered this as mass murder, and I still consider it that today.
Q But you went right back to the concentration camps and continued to administer them?
A These gas chambers were only at Auschwitz. I did not see any other extermination facilities at other camps.
Q Didn't you see the one at Dachau?
A No, I never saw it.
Q Have you never seen it?
A No, not one at Dachau. I never saw it.
JUDGE MUSSMANO: The translation of one of your statements came through that you said to Himmler that the extermination of the Jews should not be done now. Do I understand from that that you indicated that you would be satisfied if it were done later?
DR. SEIDL: May I interrupt? Perhaps the defendant has never made such a statement. It is apparently here a very bad mistake in the translation.
JUDGE MUSSMANO: That is the reason I say that is the way the translation came through. In fact I wrote it in my book, "considered it madness to exterminate them now."
That is the absolute phrase which came through.
THE WITNESS: I did not make such a statement.
DR. SEIDL: Will you please reply once more to this question, Witness? Will you please repeat once more what you said previously?
THE WITNESS: I stated it would be madness to exterminate these people. I did not say "now".
JUDGE MUSSMANO: Very well.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: One witness testified that in June, 1943, you went to Auschwitz on an inspection tour with a number of people with you, and that you went to the gas chamber and saw a number of sick people brought from the hospital in trucks and placed in the gas chamber and gassed, and that you and the other people with you looked in the window when they were being gassed. What do you have to say to that?
THE WITNESS: That was not me. This must be a case of mistaken identity. I have never visited Auschwitz with a staff of twenty to twenty-five people, and there I have never been in such a party nor accompanied by such a staff. Never in my life have I witnessed a gassing at Auschwitz, nor any other place for that matter. It is possible that it was the higher SS police leader, Schmauser, from Breslau, a person similar to my stature, but I have never in my life watched a gassing.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Did you make an inspection tour of Auschwitz in the month of June, 1943?
THE WITNESS: I have already stated that in 1943 I was in Auschwitz on two occasions, but I do not know exactly when. I do not remember the dates any more.
THE PRESIDENT: We will be in recess.
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1345 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1345 hours.)
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 19 May 1947).OSWALD POHL - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION - Continued THE MARSHAL:
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, what is the impression that a person gained when visiting a concentration camp of medium size; visiting it under normal circumstances?
A In normal times the concentration camps, which at the time-shall we say up to 1942--had not reached those huge proportuions, were installations in which the outside appearances of the camp corresponded with the situation at the time. It was still possible, however, to keep the lodging conditions in a good shape. On one side of the barracks was a row where the cots for the inmates, where every inmate had his own bed; and on the other side was the living room where every inmate had a sink of his own. And between the two were the washing and shower rooms. The clothing of the inmates also, at the time, was rather good; good clothing, underwear. And, generally speaking, a camp during normal times gave a rather orderly impression.
Q Which was the highest Reich authority that assigned the food to the concentration camps?
A The food rations for the inmates were assigned by the Reich Ministry for Food, together with the food allocations for all prisoners, that is, for those who were in punitive institutions.
Q What can you tell us with reference to these rations--these rations which you had, and the food; did you think it was sufficient, or did you find it necessary to take stops to the Ministry in order to increase it?
A It all depended on the time. As long as the food situation in Germany was still good, food rations of inmates were sufficient as well. By that I mean that they were slightly below the food allocations for the civilian population.
However, they were high enough to enable civilians to live well, and the food of the concentration camps was a little bit lower--therefore, it was sufficient. And it can be classified as good. The conditions, of course, changed, or were aggravated in the course of the war. Particularly from the summer of 1944, on.
I, myself, had no influence whatsoever on the size of rations. That is to say, I could try to increase the food at the time through the different channels. In other words, at a time when the food deteriorated--and we did that.
Q Through which channels did the camp commanders receive the food supplies?
A The camp commandant, or his administrative leader who was responsible for the food, had to got it through the Food Office on the basis of the numbers of inmates, and he received a so-called Bezugschein (Special Permit). The Food Office told him where he could procure the food. In other words, which firm could sell it to him, and the total amount of food was computed on the basis of the number of inmates. That food was then bought independently at the deliverers.
Q What were your observations that you yourself made with reference to the clothing of the inmates?
A The same applies to the clothing as applies to the food. It was sufficient so long as the supply situation in Germany did not necessitate any restrictions. It became gradually worse, and finally insufficient when that supply situation worsened or deteriorated--and finally there was almost nothing whatsoever, to say the least.
Q How was the medical situation? How was it organized within the camp? Which office was responsible for medical supplies and care? And what can you yourself say with reference to that on the basis of your own activities?
A The medical care was subordinated to the Reichsarzt-SS (Reich Physician-SS) and the Chief Physician of the Inspectorate was subordinated to him. The Reichsarzt also had to see to it that these Court No. II, Case No. 4.individual camps were provided with the necessary medical care and personnel.
The material, that is to say, the drugs--all the medical material was sent to them from the main medical camp; and the Chief Physician from the inspectorate applied for them there.
Q In the various trials it was shown repeatedly that all happenings in concentration camps were submitted to a strong secrecy. What can you say to that point, with reference to your own observations and also with reference to the practice of the Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler and the RSHA?
A. The secrecy in all offices was the same. It was based on the Fuehrer Order No. 1. That order had been affixed to all the walls of all the offices, not only of the SS, but also of the entire Wehrmacht. The order read approximately as follows: that for all the secret matters, the top secret matters, only the persons in direct connection with that matter were to gain knowledge of that fact and individuals out of that entire circle should know only so much as he needed for his share in the task. During the war, they complied with this order strictly. As far as Himmler's method is concerned, I already stated before when I described him, or, rather, his personality, namely, that he probably exaggerated that order by limiting the circle of persons which formed the Reichsfuehrung-SS administration by separating them. In other words, there was no possibility beyond that order to find out things. And that applied also to the RSHA.
Q. Witness, I shall now come to the discussion of some documents which were introduced by the prosecution in connection with evidence with reference to the concentration camps. I shall show you a few documents: from Document Book No. IV, Exhibit No. 79, the prosecution introduced three documents which referred to the transient camp of Sobibor. Document NO-482, Document Book No. 4, page number 6 of the English Document Book, it is in connection with the transient camp of Sobibor, your letter of the 15th of July, 1943, to the Reichsfuehrer SS as follows:
"According to your above instruction, the transient camp of Sobibor in the district of Lublin is to be transformed into a concentration camp.
"I have discussed the matter with SS-Gruppenfuehrer Globocnik. We both suggest to you to abandon the idea of transforming it into a concentration camp, because the purpose intended by you, namely, to set up at Sobibor a depot for the dismantling of captured ammunition, will be reached without this transformation too."
This is on page 8, Your Honors. Witness, did you have to visit the camp Sobibor yourself, before you made this statement to the Reichsfuehrer, and what was the reason for this order?
A. I did not see the concentration camp of Sobibor. I did not know it. When I made that statement with reference to that matter I relied on the statement made by Gruppenfuehrer Globocnik. In other words, I agreed with his opinion. Thereupon, I took the attitude which I told Himmler in that letter.
Q. As Exhibit 80, the Prosecution introduced Document NO-1475, Document Book No. 4, page 10, both in the English and in the German document books. This is a letter from the Director General Steyr-Daimler-Puch, A.G., to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, on the 14th of July, 1943, with reference to the concentration camp that is to be suggested to be set up near Wiener-Neudorf. I shall ask you now, witness what did you do after having received this letter, or, did you ever have any knowledge of it?
A. This letter is addressed to Himmler. Therefore, I could not have gained any knowledge whatsoever from this letter, nor can I remember today if I was used in this whole matter. This does not deal with setting up the concentration camp as it says here wrongly, but it is a labor camp for the Steyr-Daimler-Puch works. If I ever dealt with them I probably would have given it to the Inspectorate which would have taken care of all the other matters that were connected with creating such a camp. However, it is also possible that Himmler, as he did quite often informed the commander of Mauthausen camp directly.
Q. On the 5th of April, 1944, with the letter of the same day, you sent to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler a map of the Government General Eastern countries and Western territories according to the status of March 1944, showing where all concentrations were on it. The prosecution has introduced this letter as Prosecution Exhibit 81, Document NO-020, Document Book No. IV, page 17, or page 16, of the English. According to that letter, there were 13 concentration camps in the Reich territory, 3 concentration camps in the Government General, 3 Concentration camps in the Eastern Territories, Eastland, and one concentration camp in the Netherlands. I am asking you now, Witness, the camps outside of the Reich territory, after the 3rd of March, 1944, were they also subordinate to the WHA, or were they subordinate to the to the SS-Reichs-Und Polizei-Fuehrer in that territory?
A. The camps in the Eastern territories were under the supervision of the Higher SS and Police leaders. As far as reporting about them was concerned, they were subordinate to the Inspectorate of concentration camps.
A. As Exhibit No. 83, the prosecution introduced a letter of the SD Security Police, of January 1941, the question of which is the commitment to concentration camps, as Document NO-743, Document Book No. IV, page 18 or 19, which they sent to the various agencies, but not to the WVHA. What can you say about that document with reference to the position of the WVHA?
A. In 1941, because this letter is from January 1941, the WVHA had nothing to do with the concentration camps. Therefore, it was not necessary either to sent this letter to the WVHA.
Q. In other words, you have no knowledge of that letter?
A. No, none.
Q. Doesn't it result from this letter also that the Chief of the Security Police, SD, or the RSHA, played quite some influence on the camps; also, the inspectorate of the concentration camp was never subordinate to the RSHA and the contents of this letter was only transferred to the inspectorate of the concentration camp?
A. Yes, that is to be referred to the decree concerning the secrecy of the Gestapo, in which it is said that the state concentration camps be administered by the secret Police. A definite ruling on which the RSHA based its power.
Q. I shall now turn to Document NO-2110. This is a letter of Amtsgruppe D of the 4th of September 1942, which was introduced by the prosecution as Exhibit 84. That's on page 22 of the German, page 20 of the English Book. It says here, literally, and I shall quote: "You will find additional decrees of the Reich Security Main Office to the subordinate police offices with reference to making the commitment papers recognizable by the stamp, "Prisoners of camp 1, 1A, 2, and 3, and this is for your information." I shall now ask you witness, did the Amtsgruppe D give you this additional decree of the RSHA, and did you have Knowledge of this letter of Amtsgruppe D?
A. No, In reference to the correspondence that took place between the RSHA, and through the Inspectorate to the concentration camps, I had no knowledge, and I can see from this letter that it concerned police matters and dealt with the classification of inmates, and these matters were not within my sphere of duties at that time, so I did not have knowledge of that letter.
Q. Exhibit No. 85, which the Prosecution introduced, are the regulations for the concentration camp of Dachau from 1933. It is Document 1216-PS, in Document Book No. 4, page 23, and on page 22 of the English. I will ask you, witness, did you know anything about these camp regulations which date from 1933?
A. I never saw these camp regulations here, and I do not believe it was ever in effect. All I knew was of the camp regulations from 1933 or 1939.
Q. And in this connection, witness, I would like to ask you a general question. Did the Inspectorate for concentration camps regulations which applied to all the concentration camps, or did you do something to that effect yourself?
A. I knew of no such thing that the Inspectorate itself gave an additional statute for concentration cams, but it is possible that the valid camp statutes were issued by the inspector of the concentration camps, if not worked on by him, as it was necessary for all the official writings to be done with Himmler's permission before it was put into effect. I know nothing of other camp statutes.
Q. The next document I would like for you to look at, is document No. NO-517, in Document Book 4, page 46, in the English Document Book on page 34; it is a file note of the defendant Baier, from Staff W, dated 23 March 1944. It was introduced by the Prosecution as Exhibit No. 86. The file note referred to setting up a special wage scale for the inmates.
I will ask you now, witness, who was it that issued orders for this preliminary work, was it a wage scale regulation or was it a camp statute?
A. It was both at the same time. Through the subordination of the camp factories under the WVHA it became necessary on the questions which rose there to regulate them through some sort of statute, and this was to say that it was considered here a camp statute. It would have been more correct to call it a plant regulation. On this occasion I wanted that at the same time the camp or plant statutes would develop or possibly even solve the wage scale problem for the inmates. I was of the opinion that on the premiums we could not state what premiums were ordered, only which had been introduced by me, premiums or bonus; so that this premium order could only possibly be developed into a wage order, inspite of the resistance of the Reich Finance Ministry which claimed the wages, or payment for the inmates as such, a refund for the State. I also spoke to Himmler about it, and generally speaking, he was of the same opinion as I was, because he saw that through the whole development the prerequisites could be explained, but that they had been passed by the events for a large part and that another solution had to be reached. That is why I wanted to develop this question in the form of a wage scale for inmates.
Q. In this connection I would like to ask the witness according to what principles the amount of the so-called prisoners pay was set up at various times?
A. The inmates were not paid. Therefore, you can not speak of wages for the inmates, so far as the Nazi setup. This was due to a decree which I never saw myself, but of which I only heard. There was a decree issued by the Gestapo that went back to 1933 or 1944, according to which in the Protective Custody Camps the inmates who were being used there for labor, were not to be paid and that also happened. Only in 1936, approximately, were the expenses for the concentration camps taken over by the Reich Ministry of Finance.