This Ministry made a request that all the money that resulted from the employment of inmates was to be transferred to the State. And that is what happened. As a result of that the "W" enterprises, in other words, the Economic Enterprises of the SS in the concentration camps had to pay certain amounts of money to the Reich. These amounts were rather low at the beginning, because the enterprises and their whole structure depended on capital from outside, and the Reich credit, and, it could not be recognized at the time up to what amount of money could be paid by these enterprises. However, on the other hand, that question was more or loss theoretical for the SS enterprises, because the higher profits which were reached by paying smaller amounts had to be paid to the Reich in the form of tax up to ninety percent, so that the amount paid to the inmates played no important role. In spite of that I tried, and was of the opinion that those enterprises also should gradually adopt their wages to the amounts paid by the armament industries, although that did not change very much. That is why from time these wages were increased.
THE PRESIDENT: Then, witness, these prisoners were arrested and forced to work, and were paid nothing, and their wages were collected by the Reich?
THE WITNESS: Yes, Your Honor, that is correct.
Q. I call that slavery. What do you call it?
A. Yes, you can call it that way. I could not change it.
Q. No, do you agree that it is slavery, forced labor without pay?
A. The same conditions also prevailed in the German prisons. In other words, you have to consider everything slave labor.
Q. In German prisons men had been accused of something, and tried, and had a chance to defend themselves, and were convicted, that is true, is it not?
A. Yes, I think you are quite right.
Q. That was not true in the concentration camps?
A. That is correct.
Q. They were just picked up in the street, and thrown into a concentration without any hearing?
A. That is how the Gestapo apparently did it.
Q. That is right.
A. However, during peace-time years it was not carried out in such a way they were given a trial, or a hearing. I know the methods only the way everybody else know them.
Q. Well, do you now agree with me that the condition here described was slavery?
A. Yes, you can put it that way.
Q. Well, will you put it that way?
A. I in any case during the first years -- well, under slavery I can imagine something entirely different.
Q. Well, under slavery I can imagine something exactly the same, too.
A. For instance, I cannot imagine that committments to concentration camps were actually carried out without any reason whatever, in a way. I mean the fact that when you say "slave" I understand that there are really people, that is, where the name "slave " comes from, that there were people simply removed, or kidnapped from some place, and put to slavery that could work there. However, I am not convinced that in all the cases in which the Gestapo arrested people, and committed them to concentration camps that they were actually innocent, and, I so assume today that they had violated the laws of the country in some way.
Q. No, the law that was violated was that they belonged to the wrong race. The negro was enslaved because he was black; the Poles were enslaved because they were Jews. Do you see any difference?
A. Well, after all, not all Poles were Jews.
Q. No, I mean, the Polish Jews were enslaved, because they were Jewish?
A. Yes, well the Jews were treated in a special way by the German Reich. In other words, according to my opinion they did not come under these groups. We can only discuss the question of all of those who were not Jews, and I am still of the opinion today that many people had violated laws, at least violated police regulations which had been decreed, and had to be a decree in a occupied country in order to keep order, and peace; that is, for instance, some refused to work, and they had so violated these police regulations, therefore, they had been committed, or removed to the concentration camp.
Q Do you honestly believe that was true of all the inmates of the concentration camps?
A No, I do not wish to assert that, that is applied to all of them. I don't think that myself, but, generally speaking, yes, we sort of stuck to that, I can still remember those documents, and I knew very much from the knowledge of the times because those things did not pass from my hand, I read quite often that the arrest had taken place because of a refusal to work or because a person had left a working place, or for some similar reason, even if those decrees had been judged quite kindheartedly.
Q Did you ever hear of whole villages being picked up and bundled into trains and sent to concentration camps, men, women and children?
A I never saw that because I was not out of there. I had no opportunity.
Q Did you ever hear about it? It is never the less astonisting.
A No, I didn't that entire villages were evacuated--no I never heard of that.
Q You never heard of everybody in a church or a motion picture theatre being herded together and shipped into Germany for labor-men, women and children?
A I read that in the documents, but prior to that, I did not know.
Q You mean prior to that you never heard anything about it, until you got the documents in this case?
A Yes, I can say that with a clear conscience--that I did not know these things before.
Q Well, that may be true. It is nevertheless astonishing.
A Yes, I admit that, Your Honor, but it is the truth.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, you testified that the inmates of the concentration camps were not given pay for their work and so far were treated in the same manner as the inmates of the punitive situations of the state;
where persons did not receive any wages for their work either. I am asking you know, witness, when the Gestapo committed persons to concentration camps, according to your knowledge, did it base itself on the point of view of the labor assignments or did the Gestapo go from the point of view that only police security measures were sufficient reason for the commitment to a concentration camp? And I ask you furthermore did you ever have any meetings or discussions with the Gestapo or the RSHA in order to get as large a number of persons as possible to be committed for the purpose of the so-called slave labor into the concentration camps?
A I had no possibility to learn further of the measures of the RSHA or the Gestapo. My knowledge is based on hearsay or assumptions. However, up to this date I am of the opinion that the Gestapo, being quite kind hearted about it, which kind-hearted-ness they showed during the last years of the war, did stick to state police regulations. As I stated before I never took one single stop in any case in order to commit people to concentration camps simply to get them as labor.
Q Did not Himmler himself write you a letter one time, which was introduced by the Prosecution, to the effect that on the question of commitment of inmates into the concentration camps only state police reasons should be competent and that the impression that one should not give the people were being sent to concentration camps in order to work there?
A I can not think of the document at the present moment, but it is quite possible. I believe that I saw some sort of a document here, but I do not know where.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Just so that I shall be certain that I heard correctly, did the defendant say that the Gestapo at a certain period in their career became kind hearted? Is that what I understood the translater to say?
DR. SEIDL: I am afraid, Your Honor, that I did not understand your question because the German translation is so insufficient.
Would you repeat it?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I understood through the translation that the defendant said that at a certain period in their career, the Gestapo became very kind hearted. Did I understand correctly?
DR. SEIDL: Neither the defendant nor I made such a statement. I believe that there must have been some sort of a mistake.
THE PRESIDENT: I think so.
THE INTERPRETER: The word, Your Honor, was "broadminded".
THE PRESIDENT: "Broadminded", not " kind hearted".
JUDGE MUSMANNO: That is still pretty astonishing.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q I shall now come to another document, Your Honor. On 20 February 1942 the Inspector of concentration Camps, who at that time was subordinated to the SS-Perational Main Office issued an order. This is Document 2167, Document Book Number 4, page 47, which is page 36 of the English Document Book, Exhibit No. 87. I am asking you witness, how was the labor assignment dealt with before this decree came out?
A From my own knowledge I do not know exactly how the labor assignment was handled in the concentration camps before 1942. Generally speaking, it was carried out in such a manner that the camp commandant assigned these inmates to such work as was to be done. I mean by that it consisted mostly of work within the camp itself. When the WVHA-that is between 1938 and 1939--took over the economic enterprises within the camps, then a special main department was opened up in the WVHA which was special Department 1-5. This special Department 1-5 was to regulate the prisoner labor assignment Berlin, mainly the labor assignment to those various enterprises. However, two or three months later, I know that after a very short time, it was discovered that it was very hard to do so. I could not possibly be done from Berlin. That is why this Department 1-5 was removed from the main office and transferred to the Inspectorate, and this Department 1-5 then, after that new regulation with which document 87 deals, dealt with labor assignments.
I believe that it was called the Plenipotentiary for labor assignments. In the camps the protective camp leader E was directly subordinated to these Plenipotentiaries for the Assignments of Labor at the Inspectorate for Concentration camps. "E" means here "Einsatz". That assignment was rather speaking the organization until 1942.
Q We come now to the document no 1994, document book 4, page 50, Page 38 of the English Book. It is Exhibit No. 88. The subject of this letter is the reassignment of commanders at the concentration camps. I am asking you witness, was the re-assignment of concentration camp commandants a part of your task, and why you propose such a re-assignment to Himmler?
A Re-assignment as such was not part of my task. It was always dealt with so far by the Inspectorate in collaboration with the Personnel Main Office. However I have already explained why I was interested in the detachment of certain concentration camp commandants from certain enterprises, and I spoke with Himmler about it, and thereupon I made a suggestion to him, as can be seen in this document. I was speaking particularly of commandant Loritz, Bielkowski and Kuenstler, and I suggested having them re-assigned. They were the oldest commandants. I tried to remove Ziereis from Mauthausen, but met with the opposition of Gauleiter. He worked together with Ziereis and supported him, and he also urged Himmler, and Himmler against my proposal, ordered that Ziereis was to remain in Mauthausen. I was in the opinion that for other reason, the re-assignment would have been the right thing to do, not only amongst the leading personnel but also in the smaller groups, in other words, of the enlisted ranks. These men had already been in the-se units for ten years or so, and I was of the impression that this long time that was spent in the same command or the same assignment or the same official position, particularly in a position like the concentration camps, could not possibly be good for the development of the character of a human being.
Himmler agreed with me in that opinion. However, he himself said that a reassignment during the war, due to the general lack of leaders, was very difficult. Here too he wanted to do this later on, he wanted to introduce the practice that every two years the men were to be reassigned for there were no volunteers.
Q In the documents introduced in Exhibit No. 90, 1545, they are speaking of a special account. This is the document found on Page 59 of the German and on Page 46 of the English document book. I am asking you, Witness, what happened with the money of that special account?
A I know nothing about it. I presume that these amounts had been gathered in the inspectorates, and I do not believe that there was much, in order to be used for the maintenance of these special buildings. I do not know anything about it though.
Q Then I come to Document NO-1554, which was introduced as Exhibit 91, Document Book IV, Page 60 of the German, Page 47 of the English document book. It refers to the guarding of prisoners. I am asking you, Witness, why were the prisoners to be shadowed, and who was it actually made this proposal? The letter is signed by Brigadefuehrer Gluecks.
A This letter refers to an inside matter of one of the camps, and Gluecks probably discussed it with one of the camp commanders, and I knew nothing about it. However, I presume that by shadowing these prisoners themselves, they tried to discover the illegal administration of the camp. I don't see any other reason for that.
Q You knew nothing about that letter; you never did anything about it, did you?
A No, neither was it known to me nor did I do anything about it.
Q I shall now come to Document NO-1506. This is Exhibit No. 93, Document Book IV, on Page 63 and on Page 50 of the English document book. This is the decree of the Amtsgruppen-Chief D of the first of August, 1942. It refers to the inspection of the concentration camps. It can be seen from this that the inspection of a concentration camp can only be carried out with the permission of the inspector.
In this connection I am asking you, Witness, what can you say with reference to the question of the inspection of the concentration camps of 13 June 1943 to which effect certain witnesses have already testified here before this Tribunal?
A I cannot say very much about that because who visited concentration camps and why they visited the camps and in what groups, I did not know in Berlin, with the exception of a very few cases, unless, of course, I participated in it myself, which occurred once in a while. However, generally speaking I don't know who visited these concentration camps.
Q This is a letter from Amtsgruppen-Chief D on the 15th of July, 1942, or rather the 15th of June, 1943, addressed to the commanders of four camps and concerns special billets in the concentration camps. It was introduced as Exhibit 94, and is on Page 51 of the English document book. It is Document 1242, Document Book IV, on Page 64 of the German, and as I said before, Page 51 of the English document book. What do you understand about special constructions here to which this letter refers?
A They meant brothels by that.
THE PRESIDENT: Meant what?
THE WITNESS: Brothels.
Q (By Dr. Seidl) I shall now come to Document NO-2180. It is on Page 68 of the German document book IV and 65 of the English document book, a letter from Amtsgruppe D on the 15th of April, 1942, and it refers to the training of prisoners, and it was addressed to the camp commanders of the concentration camps. I am asking you, witness, what training of prisoners are they talking about here?
A It was a training which Himmler had prescribed once. That is the training of stone carvers and masons and the training was riven in the concentration camp of Flossenbuerg, Mauthausen, perhaps, and some other camps.
Q I shall now refer to Document NO-1293, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 99, Document Book IV, Page 85, or Page 68 of the English document book. This is a decree of Obergruppenfuehrer Gluecks to the concentration camp commandants on the 4th of April, 1944. It refers to the screening of prisoners by the political department before transfer. What kind of a transfer are they speaking about here, and did you know this letter before the beginning of this trial?
A By transfer, they mean transfer of the prisoners from their main camp to a labor camp. During these transfer, as I just found out for the first time through this letter, it seems to have occurred that inmates who were about to be released were transferred to labor camps where they went through the "G" manufacturing. "G" stands for secret, Geheim. Such inmates could not be released during the war because they knew the secret. That was the reason why it says here in this letter, in future when transfers of inmates take place into labor camps, Department VI, the political department, was to be asked before releasing them, because that particular department knew if that inmate or inmates were to be released or not, in order to enable these people to be released.
Q My following question refers to Document NO-1551, which was introduced by the Prosecution as Exhibit 100. It is on Page 69 of the English document book IV, Page 86 of the German document book. It refers to the monthly reports about all Czech detainees in concentration camps. They are referring to a decree on the 25th of January, 1944. I am asking you, Witness, who issued this decree, and did you know the contents of this decree?
A This decree was probably released by the inspectorate or Amtsgruppe D, as it can be seen from the file. This decree did not originate with me, because it concerns a matter with reference to the internal reports between to concentration camp and inspectorate the same as that letter to the concentration camp commandants came from Amtsgruppe D and was signed by Gluecks, who simply referred to one of his former letters.
Q With Exhibit 101 the Prosecution introduced a teletype which refers to the assignment of Hungarian Jews, Document No. 592, Document Book IV, Page 88. It is on Page 71 of the English text book. I am asking you, Witness, when was that teletype sent off, and who was it that ordered the assignment of Hungarian Jews?
A When the teletype was sent I could not tell because no date can be seen on this document. The employment of the Hungarian Jews had been ordered by Himmler even before. I know that a large number of them had been transferred or went to the organization Todt, T-o-d-t. Those were female Hungarian Jews. That is why this request came through.
Q I shall now come to Exhibit No. 102, Document No 1967. It is on Page 73 of the English document book and on Page 89 of the German document book. It is from the 10th of December, 1941, in other words, from a time during which the inspectorate of the concentration camps had not been incorporated into the WVHA. It is a letter from the inspectorate to the commandant, and refers to information in respect to protective custody occurrences. I am asking you, did you know the contents of this letter before the beginning of this trial?
A No, this document originated at a time when I had nothing to do with concentration camps.
Q Now, coming to Document NO-681, which is on Page 76 of the English document book and on Page 90 of the German document book IV, here introduced as Exhibit 103. It is on an order of the ReichsfuehrerSS, for the suppression of bandit activity and is dated June 23, 1942. In the distribution list at the end of the document the WVHA is not mentioned, as a distributee. I am asking you, did you or the WVHA have anything to do with the entire matter?
A This was something of a military matter with which neither I personally nor the WVHA had anything to do, and I knew noticing about it.
THE PRESIDENT: We will be in recess.
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the court will find seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
Q I turn to Document NO-1017. It is in Document Book 4, page 95 of the German text, page 81, of the English text. It was offered as Exhibit 104. It is a letter of the Chief of Amtsgruppe D to the commander of the concentration camps, of the 1st of August 1942, and it shows the transfer of Soviet Russian civilian workers to concentration camps and now I want to read, the last paragraph and I quote: "Since the Soviet Russian civilian workers are assigned through the offices of the State Police only, all correspondence regarding these prisoners has to go exclusively through the assigning (district) offices of the State Police." I now ask you, Witness, did the administration of the WVHA have anything to do with this matter, and were you yourself informed of this matter?
A I have only seen this letter here and I have only seen it here in these documents. The WVHA had nothing to do with the commitment of prisoners in this case.
Q The next document which was presented by the prosecution is Document NO-2131. It was Exhibit 105. It is contained in Document Book IV, on page 96 of the German text and on page 83 of the English version. It is the decree of the Chief of the Security Police and the SD of the 23d of March 1043, which refers to the increased commitment of prisoners into the concentration camps. This decree was sent to all the commander etc., of the Security Police and the SD, while an information copy only was given to the Chief of the WVHA. What was the result of this order?
A From this information copy it becomes clearly evident that the WVHA did not participate in this execution, but it only received this decree for its information.
Q This document, or information copy in this document was not only sent to the WVHA, but it was sent directly to the Amtsgruppe-D. What does the fact show with regard to the working methods of the Amtsgruppe-D?
A The way from the RSHA to the camps was direct through the Amtsgruppe-D, and of any happenings which were sent to me for purposes of information I furthermore received an information as in this case. In other cases, however, the channel went from the RSHA directly to all the Inspectorates of the camps.
Q Exhibit No. 106, the Prosecution has offered, is a copy of an interrogation of a Dr. Rasch of 16 June 1943. It is Document NO-1073. It is on page 101 of the German Document Book. It is on page 86 in the English Document Book. Do you know this Dr. Rasch, and what statement could you make about it?
A I don't know Dr. Rasch at all, and I have no knowledge of the incident which he describes in his interrogation.
THE COURT: It is not Exhibit 101. It is 106.
DR. SEIDL: It is Exhibit No. 106.
THE PRESIDENT: On page 101.
DR. SEIDL: 101, in the German Document Book, and page 86 in the English Document Book.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q As Exhibit No. 107, the Prosecution has presented a memorandum about the capture and the arrest of Jews in France. It is Document NO-1411. It is on page 112 of the German Document Book and on page 90 of the English version.
It is Exhibit No. 107. Were the contents of this memorandum known to you and did this letter have anything to do with the activities of the WVHA?
A I have only seen the document here for the first time. It has nothing to do with the activity of the WVHA.
Q I now come to Document NO-1547. It is on page 118 of the German Document Book, and on page 97 of the English Document Book No. 4. Amtsgruppe-D on 3 January 1944 sent a letter to the concentration camp commandants about the new commitment of prisoners into the camps. The Document is presented as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 108. Does the contents of this letter agree with the general directives issued by you to Amtsgruppe-D?
A I did not deal with this letter directly. It originated from Amtsgruppe-D. However, it entirely agrees with my concepts and the directives which I gave to Amtsgruppe-D.
Q I now come to Document 1558. It is in Document Book 4; it is on page 119 of the German Document Book, and on page 98 of the English version. It was offered as Exhibit 109, and it is a letter from Gruppenfuehrer Gluecks to the concentration camp commandants on 9 May 1944. The original referred to a decree of Chief of the Security Police and the SD. I now ask you, witness, what does the document show with regard to the position of the RSHA in the system of concentration camps?
A I have already pointed out that all directives concerning prisoners that were committed into concentration canps or transferred and so on, were exclusively dealt with and these orders were issued by the RSHA, which is again proven by this document.
Q Now I come to Document NO-2074, which is in Document Book 4, on page 120 of the German text, and page 99 of the English text.
It was presented as Exhibit 110. It is a letter of the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, 10 May 1944. What caused the administration of the Reich Minister for the Eastern Occupied Territories to compose this letter, and what attitude did you yourself maintain with regard to this matter?
A This is apparently the transfer of Jews from the ghetto's of the Eastern Territories, that is, outside of the General Government into concentration camps. These Jews who up to that time had been living in the ghetto's were under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Eastern Occupied Territories, which also directed the labor allocation, and which used the profits accrued out of the work of these Jews for its own budget. With the transfer of the Jews into the concentration camps this source of income was lost for the Reich Ministry of Eastern Occupied Territories, because the renumeration for all the work in the concentration camps was transferred to the Reich by the concentration camp administration. The Reich Ministry for Occupied Eastern Territories objects against this danger in this letter. I myself do not know whether the transfer of Jews into the concentration camps of the Ostland actually took place, because the Higher SS and Police Leaders were responsible for that task. From the Reich Minister for the Eastern Occupied Territories, I did not hear anything further about this matter. He once more turned to the Reich Ministry of Finance in the letter, but I can not recall any action that was taken at all in this matter. From this I must conclude that the transfer to the concentration camps probably was never carried out.
Q I now come to Document NO-383. It was presented by the Prosecution as Exhibit 112. It is in Document Book No. 4, page 129 in the German text, and on page 106 in the English version.
This is a letter from the commandant of the Security Police and the SD, within the area of the Military Commandant in France, and is addressed to the administration of the concentration camp at Flossenburg. Did this letter come to your knowledge, or what can you yourself say in this connection?
A No, the letter only came to my knowledge here, and I was astonished to see, for the first time, from this letter to what extent the measures of the members of the Security Police went with regard to the concentration camps.
Here I saw that even extensive orders in the field of administration were channelled through the RSHA. We have orders concerning the legacy from prisoners, and, even orders concerning the use of clothing which was left behind, and also about the use of valuables, and other personal items. This is the first time that I had seen such extensive measures of the RSHA in that document. The document is a very clear example to show how far the RSHA has extended its authority with regard to concentration camp matters.
THE PRESIDENT: To whom is that letter addressed to?
A That letter was addressed to concentration camp Flossenburg directly. It was directly addressed to the concentration camp at Flossenburg.
Q Well, who is that? Who was the head of the administration of the concentration camp at Flossenburg?
A To the administrative leader of the concentration camp even. It was not even addressed to the commandant.
Q What was his name? Who was in charge of Flossenburg?
A I don't know that, Your Honor.
Q That was after you were given charge of all concentration camps, wasn't it, in June 1944?
A Yes.
Q But the letter never came to you?
A No. I only saw the letter here for the first time, and I would have known of it if I had received it, because it contained a rather unusual thing.
Q Well, you seem to have never heard about the unusual things that happened in the concentration camps, even though you were the head of the system.
A In accordance with my assignment, I personally occupied myself only with the labor allocation of prisoners because the entire enormous organization of the concentration camps could not be dealt with by me alone at all. After all, we had an Inspectorate for this purpose, and I have also pointed out in receiving the order from Himmler that I, as Chief of one of the biggest Main Office was already so overburdened with work that I could not administer 13 other concentration camps with 500 labor camps on the side.
Q In that important position, you only heard about the unimportant and trivial things, not the important one.
A Well, I could not change that. I heard whatever information was passed on to me. I did not have any knowledge at all of such matters.
Q When it came to such things as compulsory labor and confiscation of personal property and extermination, you never heard about those; you just heard about the little things.
A Well, I can state only the facts, Mr. President. I did not receive any knowledge of these things.
Q That is all I want to hear from you in the facts. Do I state a fact when I say that?
A That is a fact. For example, I did not see this letter either.
Q All right. Another question: You spoke of the Higher SS and Police Leaders. You have used that phrase several times. Who were they, the Higher SS and Police Leaders?
A The Higher SS and Police Leaders were the representatives of Himmler in their respective fields. I have already discussed this on Friday. I have described their activities within the Reich and in the Occupied Territories.
Q In the field of concentration camps, weren't you a Higher SS official?
A My position can not be compared with that of a Higher SS and Police Leader.
Q What rank did you hold?
A I was Obergruppenfuehrer, and the Higher SS and Police Leaders also had the same rank, but our official duties and official positions differed fundamentally. The Higher SS and Police Leaders were active in their respective fields of competence, and they had the rank of -something like the rank of a commanding general. I was an administrative chief in the Reich administration of the SS.
Q What is the corresponding rank of an Obergruppenfuehrer? What is the corresponding military rank?
A General. The rank does not make any difference here. The difference lies in the field of their respective activities. The Higher SS and Police Leader had a military authority, and I as administrative chief did not have any military authority, and, in order to complete the comparison, we may also the Reich Physician. He was a physician. These are completely different.
Q Well, in the administrative field, leaving out the military field, in the administrative field, you were a Higher SS official weren't you, Obergruppenfuehrer - a general?
A Yes, of course I was a high SS leader, but this has nothing to do with the title Higher SS and Police Leader. The title Higher SS and Police Leader was title of an agency. In the Army one could call this person an army corps area commander, and the Higher SS and Police Leader held approximately the same position. No comparison can be made. They had completely different activities. This is not an anonymous title, but a title for a very precisely defined task and position. The Higher SS and Police Leader in the General Governmentfor example that was, if I can clarify this matter--he was Police Minister of the General Governor. That is something completely different from the administrative chief. That is exactly the same as it was in The Reich.