Q. That was Dr. Hohberg, is that right.
A. Yes, Dr. Hohberg, Yes.
Q. Dr. Volk - V-o-l-k?
A. V-o-l-k, that is correct.
Q. Was it one of the tasks of Staff W to administer the business affairs of the FWB combine?
A. Yes, as far as I can recall we had some sort of dealings with the DWB. In any case, the name DWB occurred several times in the correspondence.
Q. Do you know whether or not the DWB was a holding company which controlled the other industries of Amtsgruppe W?
A. From a chart I saw at the time I detected the fact that all the agencies of the Dest, DEST, the Allach, for instance, the Freudentnal Company, and various other agencies were under the DWB.
Q. Now, can you testify whether or not Amt. W-1 received periodical reports from all the industries run by it?
A. As far as I know, periodical reports only came from the single plants.
Q. And these plants for the most part were in the concentration camp, were they not?
A. As far as I can remember, all of them were concentration camp plants.
Q. About how many concentration camps did they have plants in?
A. I can't give you the exact figure today out of memory. I only know that from all the so called distributor which was affixed to the correspondence, for instance, that the brick factory or the tile factory in Hamburg Ol Berste, Neuengamme, Stutthof, Hopperhil, were manufactured there and also the quarry factories or those handling the stones, the granite plants, which, as far as I know, start at Mauthausen, and they also belonged to Oranienburg II.
Then there was Flossenbuerg, Natzweiler, to the concentration camp in the concentration camp, if I am remembering it, and at the moment I cannot recall any other plants or their names.
Q. They received financial reports in Amt. W-1 from those enterprises?
A Financial reports did not go to the legal department as far as I remember. They went to the revision department, which dealt with those matters.
Q You were in the revision department for two months?
A Yes, I was.
Q You know that you saw financial reports in the revision department, is that right?
A I saw thousands of the various plans or at least those plans which were grouped together, the others subdivided after W I-1 and W I-2. For instance, I wrote that myself on a special machine.
Q What sort of correspondence did you have occasion to observe in the legal office of Amt W-1?
A Generally speaking Justice Schneider dealt with the question of the contracts, for instance as to the release contracts and credit contracts.
Q Do you remember the case of the WVHA taking over the porcelain factory Bohemia-Prague?
A In Amt W-1 there was a file Bohemia.
Q What can you tell us about that transaction of taking over the porcelain factory Bohemia-Prague by Amt W-1?
A If I have to tell you that from memory and try to reconstruct it from memory, I would have to state the following. The Bohemia was the greatest Czech porcelain factory known; and it originally belonged to two Jews, who now live in London. They had emigrated to London. I furthermore believed and understood from those files that the packet of shares, in other words, the greatest number of shares, in Bohemia were in the vault of a bank in London. The actual owners had a trustee at the Bohemia who managed the business interests of these two original owners, or at least presented them.
I also remember that certain orders had been issued at the time by SS-WVHA to get in touch with representatives in order to transfer the Bohemia to the SS-WVHA. I furthermore recall that the trustee at the time declined to get into economic dealings with the SS. I furthermore remember that trustee at the time had been arrested and that his wife committed suicide by poisoning herself and that no clear conclusion could be reached. Certain letters were sent back. Correspondence by the legal department was had as to why the question of Bohemia could not be forced to an issue.
I further believe, too, that there was a question which arose in the legal department and was answered at the Office of the Exterior. There were certain misgivings about an English redemption on the question of the confiscation of the Bohemia. How the question was solved later on I could not tell you at the present moment. It was then that I resigned from the legal department myself.
Q Do you know whether Pohl ever managed to get the Bohemia porcelain concern into the "W industry?
A That he could take over the shares as such I doubt very much because all the shares were in London. However, the shares had nothing to do with the economic dealings themselves.
Q Well, whether or not he could take over the shares, did he take over the factory?
A I believe I am able now to remember that a certain man by the name of Director Hechtfischer started certain conversations and conferences about that matter.
Q Now, Herr Kruse, can you tell us whether Mummenthey ever visited the Dest enterprises in the concentra tion camps?
A Well, I had to assume that on the basis of the travel reports which also appeared in the legal department once in a while; and this Dr. Schneider referred to this visit in the camp sometimes. He referred to discussions he had with the Amt Chief.
Q Did this correspondence which you transcribed for Schneider sometimes concern Mummenthey's trips to concentration camps?
A Well, concentration camps, no. I can't say concentration camps; but at least I can say to the various factories of the Dest.
Q These factories were in concentration camps; is that right?
A These factories generally speaking were in the concentration camps or at least annexed to the concentration camps, for the simple reason that a concentration camp was not formed first and then a factory of the Dest was founded, but it was the other way around, maybe that a Dest factory was set up first or at least was planned, near which a concentration camp was added or built.
Q In other words, the concentration camp was built on with the view in mind of supplying a Dest industry with concentration camp labor; is that right?
A Yes, quite.
Q Do you remember the case of Stutthof, for example, in that connection?
A In the case of Stutthof I can not recall this case in detail. All I know is that the Sturmbannfuehrer at the time led the conversation for the whole Stutthof. As far as I can remember the man writing the contract at the time was a Mr. Deichgraeber.
Q Can you perhaps tell us the name of the local Dest manager in Mauthausen?
A I do not know the name of the manager from Stutthof itself. However, I can not recall it anyway.
Q. No, I don't mean Stutthof, I mean Mauthausen.
A Oh, Mauthausen. Well, as far as I can recall the correspondence was addressed to a certain Mr. Walther.
Q Walther?
A Walther, yes.
Q Can you by any chance tell us the manager for Dest at Auschwitz?
A I believe that I am in a position to say that a certain man by the name of Ruprecht was in Auschwitz at the time.
Q Ruprecht?
A Yes, Ruprecht. However, there is a possibility that I might be mixing him up with somebody else. However, I think I can say that Ruprecht was there.
Q Now, what operation did Dest have in the Sachsenhausen-Oranienburg concentration camp?
A In Oranienburg two factories wore being operated by the Dest, or, rather, built up. That was the beginning. Later on three factories were directing that. They all went under the name 0-1, 0-2, and Rue. There was a third independent part there by the name of the Central Chemical Laboratories. 0-1 was the so-called tile factories in Oranienburg. 0-2 was the stone manufacturing factory in Oranienburg. Rue was the factory that was making grenades, which was the armament Ruestungs, armament factories which were set up by the Dest and in which the closed combat program was being worked out for the infantry.
Q You mean they made hand grenades in this armament factory; is that right?
A Well, I don't know if they were hand grenades; I believe that they were grenades which could be fired from a very small sort of gun. However, they were also the wing grenades. That is why I believe that they were not hand grenades but special grenades which were released from a very small infantry gun.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess now for a few minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will be in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
Court No. II - Case No. 4
THE MARSHAL: All persons in Court will please take your seats.
Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
Q. (By Mr. McHaney): Witness, you have described the Dest enterprises which were operated at the Sachsenhausen Oranienburg concentration camp. Can you tell us approximately how many concentration camp inmates were working in those enterprises?
A. As far as I can remember there were approximately in the large scale brick work in Oranienburg, at the time I was there at the beginning, there were one thousand, and later on when the armament plant was taken over an additional one thousand prisoners were working there. At the Steyr Works there were approximately two and a half thousand prisoners working, that is, as far as I am able to recall that at the present time.
Q. Now, did it happen that some of these inmates had to walk by the offices of Amt W-1 in Oranienburg when they were on their way to work in these Dest enterprises?
A. That only applied to a so-called Speer Command. Those were the inmates who worked at the stone works at Oranienburg. These workers were billeted in the big camp and every day they had to go to the place of work from the camp and they also had to return. However, I believe I am able to say that at that time they saw the daily transports who came to the Klinker Works from the big camp. But he must have seen them at that time because they had to pass by his administrative barracks. These were either prisoners who had been detached or who because of physical exhaustion had to be sent and transferred to the big camp.
Q. Approximately how many inmates were in this commando which was from the big camp and which daily went to the Dest enterprises to work?
A. I have already stated that in my estimation the stone processing plant employed two and one-half thousand prisoners. The B work plant had a thousand and later on two thousand workers.
Q. Can we say that two thousand or twenty-five hundred inmates walked by the office building of W-I at Oranienburg on their way to and from work?
A. It probably will be a figure between two thousand and two thousand five hundred, according to the personnel strength of the detachment.
Q. And if Mummenthey had looked out of his window, he could have seen these workers walking by?
A. I believe so, yes. I believe that I can answer that in the affirmative because I remember that the office of Mummenthey was located at the end of the administrative barracks.
Q. Did you see them?
A. I did not get your question.
Q. Did you see the inmates walking by daily?
A. Yes, I saw them march by when we already were early in the morning at the plant, which was located near the administrative barracks.
Q. What time did they come by? Mummenthey may state that if they came by at a certain time he was not at work that early. What time was it?
A. In the morning they probably passed by there around 7 o'clock.
Q. How about the evening?
A. And in the evening I think they marched out again at 5 or 6 o'clock. It was according to the seasons. When it got dark evenings, became dark earlier, the prisoners of course had to come back to the Camp earlier because security measures were not taken.
Q. What can you tell the Tribunal about the condition of these inmates which you saw walking by outside of your window?
A. I can only say that a large number of these prisoners were in a remarkably low physical condition. I myself have repeatedly seen the prisoners supported and assisted by their comrades, on their shoulders.
Q. Do you know what the nationality of these prisoners was?
A. As far as I can remember, almost all nationalities were represented in the camp, but as far as I can remember the Russians and the Ukrainians were in the majority in the plant. Then we had a large number of Frenchmen, Belgians, Dutchmen, and also Norwegians in the camp Oranienburg. We also had Danes and Norwegians.
Q. Were there any prisoners of war among then?
A. I was not at Mauthausen. In Oranienburg we had a special camp for prisoners of war. And they also had to work in the stone processing plants.
Q. Can you say that among the inmates that you saw walking to and from the stone works of Dest there were prisoners of war?
A. Yes, the group of the prisoners of war marched absolutely under the leadership of somebody in charge - I do not know whether an officer or not but in any case he was leading his column.
Q. What nationality were these prisoners of war?
A. These prisoners of war were Russians.
Q. How could you tell they were Russian prisoners of war?
A. The explanation for this was given to us in the camp itself. I myself, in the big camp of Neuengamme, have seen the sign "Prisoner of War Camp", and on the red triangle, which every political prisoner had to wear a big "R" was superimposed on the triangle.
Q. And you can testify that these inmates as they walked to and from their place of work, or Dest, appeared to be undernourished and ill, exhausted?
A. This applied to one part - that mostly applied to the Eastern workers or to the workers from the outside.
Q. Now, witness, have you ever heard the name Reinhardt?
A. I believe that I can recall this name in some connection.
Q. In what connection do you think that you recall the name?
A. I believe that in connection with the Osti I have heard this name on some occasion.
Q. What did you understand "Action Reinhardt" to mean?
A. The title "Action Reinhardt" was not clear to me at the time. However, I then asked several prisoners about it at the time and they felt that it had some connection with the Jews.
Q. You mentioned something about Osti. What was Osti?
A. About the Osti, the Eastern industries, I can only say something as far as the economic command was concerned. At the time of the DST Unterscharfuehrer Johann Sebastian Fischer dictated a memorandum to me which I wrote down.
Q. What was the "Eastern Industries"? Do you know?
A. The "Eastern Industries" was a company for the utilization of Jewish property and the utilization of Jewish labor.
Q. And Osti was controlled by Amtsgruppe W of the WVHA?
A. I cannot say that for certain because at that time I only saw the report as such, while the general file of the Osti did not exist at the time I was working there.
Q. Witness, I want to hand you Document NO-1271. Do you recognize that document?
A. Yes, I wrote this document. I wrote it myself.
Q. Is that the report on Osti written by Fischer?
A. That is the report, and I can remember it for the reason that the introduction begins with the following words: "SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Mummenthey, I have received in April 1944 the order to examine the administration of the Eastern Industries --"
DR. FROSCHMANN: I would like to ask the prosecution if the document which has just been presented has an exhibit number.
MR. MC HANEY: It does not have an exhibit number. It is not offered by the prosecution; it is simply being shown to the witness. He testified that he typed it. We will offer the document at a later date.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I wrote it.
THE PRESIDENT: If the document is not offered in evidence, it should not be read by the witness. Of course, he did that without your asking him but until it is offered in evidence the witness should not read it.
MR. MC HANEY: Very well, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: He has already testified that he wrote it.
MR. MC HANEY: Quite correct.
DR. FROSCHMANN: May it please the Tribunal, I wanted to know if the document which was just presented has already been submitted by the prosecution as evidence and already has been provided with an exhibit number.
THE PRESIDENT: No.
DR. FROSCHMANN: Then I would like to object to the presentation of the document until it has been furnished to the defense.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the objection is good. It hasn't been offered in evidence yet.
THE PRESIDENT: Go ahead.
Q (By Mr. McHaney) Witness, can you tell us what identification would appear on any letters which you actually transcribed when you worked in office Y-1? Is there any identification initial which might appear on the document?
A Please do not speak so loudly and please repeat the question once more. I did not understand.
(Interpreter repeated question.)
AAs far as the correspondence at the plant was concerned, W-1, and the dictation mark Dr. Schn and in my case the small k4, and in the case of other prisoners, the first initial of their family name.
Q Do you know anything about a commando which repaired and rebuilt watches in Oranienburg?
A I know that in Oranienburg in the so-called special camp there was a barracks where Jews were to produce so-called watches, the insides of watches.
Q You say this was a Jewish commando?
A Yes, it was so that the inmates of the barracks did not have any contact whatsoever with the other prisoners and the windows of this barracks were barred and according to what we were told at the time, Jews at that time were only allowed to stay in the barracks and were not allowed to have any contact whatsoever with the remaining part of the camp.
Q And what were these Jews doing?
A I have already stated, and I can only testify on the basis of what was told to me by the other prisoners, there was a so-called block eldest who was also in charge of a block in the special camp, and he told me that the Jews were manufacturing watches.
Q Have you ever seen Oswald Pohl, or did you ever see him during the time you were working in Oranienburg?
A On one or two occasions I have seen Pohl in the area of the stone processing plant.
Q Well, have you seen Pohl? That's what I asked you. I didn't understand your answer to be responsive.
A Yes, I have seen Pohl at the time.
Q And do you see Pohl in the dock over here?
A He is the first defendant in the first row.
MR. MCHANEY: I ask that the record show that the witness properly identified the defendant Pohl.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will so show.
Q Witness, do you know whether this commando of Jews working on watches in Oranienburg was under the control of Amtsgruppe W?
A No, I cannot say that.
MR. MCHANEY: I have no further questions at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: Cross examination.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. SEIDL (Counsel for defendant Pohl):
Q Witness, you are permanently residing at Hamburg?
A Yes.
Q How long have you been in Nurnberg?
A I have been here in Nurnberg since Tuesday.
Q Prior to your interrogation today have you been in this courtroom?
A Yes.
Q How many times were you here?
AAbout three times.
Q Have you also talked to other witnesses who were examined here, or who are yet to be examined?
A Yes, yesterday I talked to one witness.
Q What is his name?
A I believe that I have heard the name of Krystian. However, I did not understand the name exactly.
Q Have you talked to Dr. Engler?
A Yes, after all Dr. Engler is a friend of mine.
Q He is also to be examined here as a witness; is that correct?
A I cannot tell you that. In any case Dr. Engler gave my name as a witness.
DR. SEIDL: May it please the Tribunal, I make the request that the entire testimony of this witness be stricken from the record. According to the regulations of the Military Tribunal for Nurnberg it is prohibited that witnesses be allowed to be in the courtroom outside of their own examination and to talk to other witnesses.
I refer to Article 9 of the procedure and regulations for the Military Tribunal at Nurnberg which were issued by Military Government, and it states in Article 9:
"Witnesses are only to be present in the courtroom during their examination. During the proceedings witnesses are not allowed to talk to each other either before or after their examinations."
MR. MCHANEY: If the Tribunal please, I would ask that a decision on the motion be delayed until such time as prosecution has had an opportunity to study the rules. I do not have them in my possession. It is quite true that this witness has been in the courtroom during the last few days. He has been in Nurnberg for approximately a week. He was originally brought here with Dr. Engler with whom he worked in the AMT W-1 in Oranienburg. For various reasons he has not been put on the stand prior to today, and I do know that he has appeared here.
Normally we do not do that until such time as after they have testified. However, unless the rules of this Tribunal expressly provide, and I must confess I am not familiar with it, it is not customary to sequester a witness unless requested prior to the time of his appearance, by opposing counsel. And certainly I do not think it has customarily been considered sufficient justification to strike the testimony of a witness. As far as conferring with any witnessis concerned, as far as I know the only man he has talked to is Krysiak after Krysiak's testimony yesterday, and of course, his testimony does not in any way bear upon matters to which Krysiak testified.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the rule that you cite, Dr. Seidl? What number?
DR. SEIDL: May it please the Tribunal, approximately eight days ago -
THE PRESIDENT: Will you answer my question please? What is the number of the rule which you cited?
DR. SEIDL: The regulation which was handed to us by the Secretary General of the Tribunal is not provided with any number, but it has the headline Agency of Military Government, Uniform Regulations for Procedures for Tribunals at Nurnberg, and it is dated the 1st of April 1947.
May it please the Tribunal, unfortunately I do not have a copy in English. However, I thought that regulations which you receive here from the Secretary General's office, that they of course are also furnished to the Tribunal and the prosecution. However, may it please the Tribunal, I would also like to add that in the regulation of Article 9 which I have mentioned, it is not a special principle involved, but this is a principle which is contained in all legal books and legal regulations; also in the German Legal Code, and which, as far as I know, is also contained in the American Legal Code.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, there is noting in the Americal Legal Code which excludes a witness from the courtroom or prohibits him from talking to other witnesses either before or after they testify. That fact may be shown, but there is nothing to prohibit it. I have never heard of it. In fact, I have never heard of this either.
MR. MCHANEY: The prosecution is laboring under the same difficulty, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: I suspected so.
MR. MCHANEY: I would suggest that we defer ruling and that Dr. Seidl continue with such cross examination as he may have. Even though this rule exists prohibiting a witness from appearing in court or from conferring with a witness, it obviously does not require that the testimony of the witness be stricken.
It may require some remonstrance on the part of the Court directed to the prosecution, but certainly the fact that each case would have to be considered, if no harm has been caused by his attendance or if the witness with whom he had conferred is a witness who testified on matters which in no way bear upon his testimony, why quite obviously I think it is unnecessary to strike his testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, this is not a rule of this Tribunal. It is a military regulation apparently, issuing from the Chief of the American occupying forces or from Military Government. If it develops that the rule has been violated we will reserve decision on the effect that that may have on the witness' testimony, but meanwhile, Mr. McHaney, perhaps you had better determine whether the Chief of Counsel or the the witness is the proper person to be committed to a concentration camp.
MR. MCHANEY: I shall do that, your Honor.
Q (By Dr. Seidl) Witness, you have testified that the concentration camps were established after the plants had been established. Can you give me the name of the DEST plant which already existed before the concentration camp at Dachau was established?
A I cannot give you any information at all about Dachau. I have answered the question for the reason because I still remember having a Reich business report at the time in which the principle was stated, that it had become necessary to bring the prisoners to perform useful work from the concentration camps, and for this reason the Camp Neuengamme originally was only established. I cannot give you the exact date anymore, but it was established from the very moment when the possibility of an economic use of Neuengamme existed.
Q. Can you tell me what DEST branch was located near Buchenwald?
A. The history of Buchenwald is unknown to me. I only know that at Buchenwald the so-called Bergstedt existed. However, I can not tell you just when it was established.
Q. How was it in the case of the Concentration Camp Stutthof?
A. As far as I know, the Concentration Camp Stutthof consisted of various plants. First of all, Stutthof was near Hoppehill, and I believe that I can still remember a third plant.
Q. I am going to snow you a document which has been presented by the Prosecution. It is Exhibit 77, Document NO-2432. It is contained in Prosecution Book No. IV. It is a letter of the Higher SS Police Leader -
THE PRESIDENT: What is the exhibit number?
DR. SEIDL: It is Exhibit 77. It is the first document in the Document Book No. IV. It is a letter from the Higher SS and Police Leader, the Reichsfuehrer SS. I quote:
"As I have reported earlier, after the dissolution of the remaining prisoner's camp near Danzig, in that respect a larger prisoner camp has been established. In this camp at present are approximately 3500 prisoners who, for the majority, were handed over by the State Police Headquarters in Danzig, and for the smaller part, by the headquarters in Bromberg and Graudenz."
And I go over the second paragraph which states:
"The camp, which is well-built and save, is guarded by police reservists from the State police administration of Danzig."
Now I come to page two, and I am only going to read one sentence here: "As the taking over of this prisoner's camp as a state concentration camp has been disapproved, I request that this camp be turned into a state camp, and that this camp be placed under my charge immediately."
And I ask you, witness, does this Prosecution document not show very clearly that the camp already had existed for a long time before anybody had thought of establishing a DEST plant there?
A. That may be right for Stutthof. In my statement I have expressly spoken of the business reports of the DEST.
Q. And from what period of time was this? Whet did it include?
A. As far as I know, it was a business report written in the year 1942. Of course, I am unable to give you the exact date. At the time I read this business report--I had to multiply it immediately -- I also can not give you any details about the individual plants.
Q. If I understand your testimony correctly, then this is one of your conclusions?
A. No, it is not a conclusion; out I believe that I can say that in the business report of the DEST, it was already written from the very wording...
Q. Well, did DEST have the possibility to establish concentration camps?
A. It did not have the possibility of establishing concentration camps.
Q. Then, at the very best, the DEST could only forward a suggestion to the agency which was competent for the establishment of concentration camps?
A. Jell, I did not give the reason why this was done --but I have only repeated what was contained in the business reports of the DEST. It is my opinion.
Q. Your opinion. Then your opinion will have to limit itself to the point that, at the very best, this could apply only to the plant after 1942.
A. Of course, I can not answer this question in the affirmative but I can only answer it in the connection during the time when the report was shown to me, or when I saw it. however, may I limit the date in that connection, insofar as the business report did not report to the business year 1942, but, for the most part, it was also the business report for other years. Whet the connections were between the establishment of concentration camps--that, of course, I was unable to see. I did not have as much insight.
Q. You have said that you have seen the defendant Pohl on two occasions at Oranienburg?
A. Yes.
Q. When was that?
A. I believe that was in the summer of 1944--it was in the summer and fall.
Q. Is it correct that Amtsgruppe D also had its seat at Oranienburg?
A. I do not know anything about Amtsgruppe D.
Q. Well, now, let us turn to another point, witness. in 1941, you were tried by the Special Court because of a violation of the law of 20 December 1934.
A. Yes.
Q. And after this punishment, you were transferred to the Concentration Camp Neuengamma?
A. Yes.
Q. And you were a political prisoner there?
A. Yes.
Q. There were also prisoners in the camp who were sent to the camp for other reasons than political reasons?