Q You needn't give us any names, but I'd only like to know what other affairs, what other business was that? war, shall we say business, which has something to do with gold, foreign currency, and such.
Q They weren't criminal affairs, therefore, were they?
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks that this is getting too far awary from the point to ask him about other deliveries.
DR. SAUTER: Very well, but the questions are put anyway. BY DR. SAUTER: regards to this SS delivery, to know regarding these deliveries whether they were used and when they arrived at the Reichsbank. It appears, according to documents I have, that they were always accounted for. They were accounted for by the chief cashier's department.
Q And to whom were these accounts sent?
A They were sent to the Reichsfuehrer SS office direct; that is to say, Melmer collected them personnally from the bank.
Q Didn't they go to any other departments? department.
Q To the foreign currency department, were they? That's the State Deportment, isn't that?
A No, it's the department of the Reichsbank which in turn is the connection to the directorate.
Q Didn't these accounts also go to the Reich Ministry of Finance? two accounts, in duplicate. Whether the Reichsfuehrer's office sent one copy to the Reich Ministry of Finance, that's something I don't know. accounts?
Municipal Pawn Broker's Office?
Q Where did those gold teeth go?
A To the Prussian State Hint. They measured them down and then the gold was separated and the fine gold was returned to the Reichsbank.
Q Witness, you had said earlier -- I don't quite know at the moment when but I think it was at the beginning of '43 -- that certain articles had arrived stamped "Auschwitz". I think you said the beginning of '43.
A Yes, but I can't tell you the exact date now.
Q You are saying, "We all knew that there was a concentration camp there." Did you really know that as early as the beginning of '43. Mr. Witness?
Q Yes, now we all know it. I am talking about at the time at which this happened.
A I can't say that for certain. I made that statement on the strength -- Oh, I beg your pardon; there's something I just remembered. The utilization of these deliveries was probably carried out as late as '45, and at that time something about Auschwitz had become known. first clues of the source of these items, apparently originating in concentration camps, occurred when it was noticed that a parcel of paper was stamped with "Lublin". This was early in '43. And another clue could be gathered when it was found that same items bore the stamp "Auschwitz". "I've already emphasized before for a very good reason that we all knew that these cases were the sites of concentration camps." That's your statement, and I now repeat the question. Of course we all know it now, but did you as an official of the Reichsbank know, as early as the beginning of '43, that there was the huge concentration camp at Auschwitz?
A To that positive type of question I must say no, I didn't, but -
THE PRESIDENT: He did not say anything about a huge concentration camp at Auschwitz.
DR. SAUTER: No, that was a rhetorical exaggeration of mine. I said that we knew from the trial about the huge concentration camp at Auschwitz.
THE PRESIDENT: Did he know it? Did he know that there was a huge concentration camp in 1943? He has not said so.
THE WITNESS: I will say no to your question, but this is the point: I assumed that this slip with "Auschwitz" came from a delivery which was probably made in '43, but that it was not utilized until much later. And I am stating that after I had been to Frankfurt that the name Auschwitz was known to mo, and I admit that this may be an exaggeration as far as I did retrospectively say to myself that there was a concentration camp there, you see, but I know that at the time, somehow or other, we became attached with the name Auschwitz; and I think we even asked a question about the connections; but I don't think we got an answer and we didn't ask again. BY DR. SAUTER:
Q Well then, Mr. Witness, I've got one last question. The prosecution have shown us the document 3947-PS today. I repeat, 3947-PS. Apparently, this is the draft for a memorandum which some department in the Reichsbank seems to have prepared for the directors of the Reichsbank. It is dated the 31st of March, 1944, and it contains the sentence on page 2 which I shall read to you because it refers to defendant Funk and the defendant Goering. This is the sentence:
"The Reichsmarshall of the Greater German Reich, the deputy of the Four Year Plan, informed the German Reichsbank, in a letter of the 19th of March 1944, a copy of which is enclosed," -- incidentally, the copy isn't in my hand -- "that considerable amounts of gold and silver objects, jewels and so forth, at the Main Office of the Board of Trustees East should be delivered to the Reichsbank according to the order issued by Minister of the, Reich," -- that's the defendant -- "Funk and Graf Schwerin Krosigk. The utilization of these objects should be accomplished in the same way as the Melmer deliveries."
That's the end of my quotation.
that such an agreement or such a letter was entirely unknown to him and that he did not know anything at all about metal deliveries.
MR. DODD: I must object to the form of the question. I have objected before, and it is a long story of the answer before the question is put et the witness. I think it is an unfair way to examine.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, you know, do you not, that you are not entitled to give evidence yourself? You are not entitled to say what Punk told you, unless he has given the evidence.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, this is not one of my witnesses. This is a witness who has volunteered for the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: It is not a question of whose witness he is. You were stating what Funk told you, and you were not referring to anything Funk said in evidence, and you are not entitled to do that. BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. I should be interested in hearing from you when you were Reichsbankrat whether you knew anything about this order which is mentioned in the letter of 31 March, which is mentioned in connection with the department of the Reichsbank. Was defendant Punk concerned with this?
A. I think I can remember that, in fact, instructions did exist which stated that gold of the Chief Trustee's Department, East, should be surrendered to the Reichsbank. I am not absolutely certain whether this document is just a draft made by the Deputy Director of the Chief Cashier's Department, made for the Directorate at the time I was there, but I am pretty certain that originally such instructions were given, but I want to point out that the Chief Cashier's Department, on the basis of orders from the Pine Gold Department, were against accepting these valuables since, technically speaking, they were not in a position permanently to assume responsibility for such considerable deliveries of all sorts. Through Funk's intervention, it was achieved later on that this instruction was cancelled. The deliveries of the Chief Trustee's Department, East, to the Reichsbank, especially of the Chief Cashier Department, did, in fact, not arrive when carried out, but I believe I am certain that originally instructions of this type, as explained in this letter did exist.
Q. Did you read that yourself? Did you read the instructions?
A. I think that in the files of the Precious Metals Department, which are in the hands of the American Government, there will be copies of these instructions.
Q. Was that instruction signed by the defendant Punk?
A. That I can not tell you.
Q. Who else might have signed it?
A. I really can't tell you at the moment, but I would not assume that it is the case, because, if the Finance Minister's and Goering's orders are referred to, who were superior to Funk, then there must be some other department that signed.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have no further questions.
MR. DODD: May I ask one or two questions on re-direct?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. BY MR. DODD:
Q. There wasn't any exaggeration about the fact that you did find a slip of paper with the word "Auschwitz" written on it among one of these ships, was there?
A. No.
Q. Now, I suppose you found lots of things among these shipments with names written on them. There must have been something that made you remember "Auschwitz", isn't that so?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, what was it?
A. I must assume that I now recollect that there was some connection to a concentration camp, but I can't say. I am, maybe, of the opinion that it must have happened later.
Q. Well, I don't care to press it. I just wanted to make perfectly clear to the Tribunal that you told us that you did remember "Auschwitz", and it had such a meaning for you that you remembered it as late as after the surrender of Germany. That is so, isn't it?
A. Oh, yes.
MR. DODD: I have no further questions. BY THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle):
Q. You said there were about 77 deliveries, is that right?
A. Yes, there were over 70.
Q. How large were the deliveries? Were they in trucks?
A. They were different. Their size was different. Generally they arrived in ordinary cars, but sometimes they arrived in lorries. when there were banknotes, they the size was smaller and the weight was lower. If there was silver, silver articles, then, of course, the weight was high, and a small lorry would bring it.
Q. There were several lorries, or trucks, in each delivery, usually?
A. No, they weren't that large. There were, amybe, on the outside, one truck.
Q. One other question: Do I understand you to say that those articles were transferred to new containers?
A. Yes, they were put into ordinary bags by the Reichsbank.
Q. Bags, marked with the Reichsbank's name on the bag?
A. Yes, on which the word "Reichsbank" was written
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
(EMIL PUHL, a witness, resumed the stand and testified further as follows)
THE PRESIDENTL Now, Dr. Seidle, do you wish to ask the witness Puhl some questions?
Witness, you remember that you are still on oath?
A. Yes, sir.
DR. SEIDL: Counsel, Dr. Seidl for the defendant Goering. BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Witness, in connection with document 3947-PS, USA 850, I have to put a few questions to you.
letter there is contained a paragraph which refers to the Reichsmarshall Goering and which is connected with the Chief Trustee's Department, East. Is it true that this Chief Trustee's Department was a department which had been established by a law in the Reich and that its right to confiscate had also been settled by a Reich law?
A. I can not answer the second part of your question just like that. I am not a legally trained man. The Board of Trustees, East, was actually, was officially established? whether by a decree or by a law, that is something I can not tell you at the moment.
Q. According to what you know, did the Board of Trustees, East, have contact with the SS Economic Department? Did they have anything to do with each other?
A. I have never observed that.
Q. Is it apparently out of the question, at least when you read the letter, that the Board of Trustees, East, and its deliveries could in any way be connected with the Me liner action?
A. That very probably is so.
Q. You mean there was no connection?
A. That is right, that there was no connection.
the Reichsbank, the Reichsbank did not like to have to do with cases of Customs investigations and the Currency Control Department. The part of this letter which refers to the defendant Goering contains a sentence which refers to the utilization of objects which originated from the occupied western territories. Is it true that, particularly in the occupied western territories, both the Currency Control Department and the Customs Investigation Department had their officials? departments is unknwon to me. I would doubt that they were considerable, unusual, but they were fairly largo sums, mostly, of course, of foreign currency.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, do you want to ask him anything? BY MR. DODD:
Q After having heard Mr. Toms' testimony, do you wish to change any of your testimony that you gave this morning? it remain as it is?
MR. DODD: That is all I have. BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Do you know who Kropp, who signed under the word "Hauptkasse" in the letter of 31 March 1944, 3947-PS, is?
A Mr. Kropp was an official of our Cashier's Department. He had a comparatively leading position.
Q Of which department?
A The Cashier's Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. The witness can retire.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Siemers.
DR. SIEMERS (Counsel for defendant Raeder): Grand Admiral Raeder, will you come up to the witness stand?
(ERICH RAEDER, a witness, resumed the stand and testified further as follows.)
BY DR. SIEMERS: reconstruction o the navy was to serve aggressive or defensive purposes. the speech he made in 1928. It is Raeder Exhibit Number 6, Document Book I, page 15, and the speech, as such, begins on page 17. asked for as one of my witnesses, brought this speech along on his own free will, since he still remembered it from the year 1928.
DR. SIEMERS: This becomes apparent from page 16 of the document book. It is Raeder's letter to Minister Severing, dated October 8, 1928, and Severing sent this speech to me when he came to Nurnberg to appear as a witness. make the sentences shorter for the interpreters:
"The Armed Forces -- I am speaking of course primarily for the Navy, but I know that it is not different in the Army -- since after 1919, its inner solidarity and penetration has been perfected with the greatest devotion and loyalty to duty, in its present structure, whether officer or soldier, in its present form of development and its inner attitude, is a firm and reliable support, I dare say -- even on the basis of its inherent military might -- with respect of conditions within the Reich -- the firmest and most reliable support of our German Fatherland, the German Reich, the German Republic and its constitution and that the Wehrmacht is proud of the fact to be just that."
I then turn to page three, and it is the sixth line:
"If, however, the State is to endure, this power must be available only to the constitutional authorities.
No one else may have it; that is, not even the political parties; the Wehrmacht must be completely nonpolitical and be composed only of servicemen who, in full realization of this necessity, refuse to take part in any activity of domestic politics. To have realized this from the outset and organized the Wehrmacht accordingly is the great and enduring achievement of Noske, the former Reichswehrminister, whom the worthy Minister Dr. Gessler followed, on this road with the deepest conviction." page I continue, on line 7; perhaps this is the most important sentence:
"In my opinion, one this is of course a proviso for the correct attitude of the service man, namely that he is willing to put his profession into practice when the Fatherland calls upon him. People who never againwant war cannot possibly wish to become soldiers. One cannot blame the Wehrmacht for imparting to its service men a manly and warlike spirit, not the desire for war or even a war of revenge or a war of aggression striving after which, in the general opinion, would certainly seem a crime of all Germans, but the will to take up arms in the defense of the Fatherland in its hour of need."
Then I pass on to the last paragraph on page four. "It must be understood -- for it is in accordance with the essence of the Wehrmacht -that it is important to be as far as possible in a position to fulfil its tasks, even under the conditions today, dictated by the Versailles Treaty." second paragraph, line six. "Just picture the extent of the German coastline in the Baltic and North Sea, chiefly the Prussian coastline, which would be subject to attacks and ravages of even the smallest maritime nations, had we not at our disposal modern maneuverable naval forces at least up to a strength permissible by the provisions of the Versailles Dictation. Above all, think of the position of East-Prussia which in the event of a shutting down of the Corridor would wholly rely on overseas import, an importation which would have to by-pass directly bases of foreign nations and in the event of war would be endangered to the utmost, or even be made impossible, if we wer not in possession of fighting ships. Further bear in mind reports about the effects of visits of our school-ships and our fleet in foreign countries, according to which already in 1922 through the model conduct of shipscrews an improvement of internal conditions of the Reich was deduced and the esteem of the German Reich thus helped considerably.
.." So far, that speech.
THE PRESIDENT: Since you are passing from that now, we might perhaps adjourn.
(A recess was taken.)
BY DR. SIEMERS: you used the sentence before the Kellogg Pact. In conclusion, I should like to ask you, did this principle of January, 1928 remain your principle during the whole time of your command of the Navy?
DR. SIEMERS: In connection with the Versailles Treaty, I should now like to submit an affidavit, because some figures are necessary here, which it is easier to submit in writing than by interrogation. I shall turn to Affidavit II, Raeder No. 8, document book 1, Page 39. misunderstanding, I should like to point out that Vice admiral Lohmann has nothing to do with the captain Lochmann, who was well known, almost famous, in the 20's. The tribunal may remember that the Lohmann affair was mentioned in connection with the broaches of the Versailles Treaty. Captain Lohmann at that time died in 1930, and has nothing to do with the author of this affidavit, Vice Admiral Lohmann. Admiral Raeder was in charge of the Navy. It was already concluded in 1928.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you wanting to callthis Admiral Lohmann as a witness?
DR. SIEMERS: No, I did not name him as a witness, as he was satisfied with the affidavit. Because of the many numbers, the British prosecution delegation agreed to turning in the affidavit, but asked that Admiral Lohmann might be cross-examined. And that was arranged with me.
THE PRESIDENT: I see, yes. You do not need to go into all those figures of tons, do you? You do not need to read all these, do you?
DR. SIEMERS: I do not want to read the individual figures. I would like to point out that this is not the affidavit about Doenitz; this is Raeder No. 8, Page 39.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes,; I have the one. There are a good many tons in it, though.
DR. SIEMERS: I should like to read under Roman numeral "I":
"Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build 8 armoured ships."
"Germany, however, built only three armoured ships, the 'Deutschland', the 'Admiral Scheer', and the 'Graf Spec'.
"2. Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build 8 cruisers. Germany, however, built only 6 cruisers." I shall omit the details.
"3. Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build 52 destroyers or torpedo boats. Germany, however, built only 12 destroyers and no torpodo boats." BY DR. SIEMERS: exhausted the possibilities of the VersaillesTreaty. It specifically omitted the construction of the larger ships. So I ask for your opinion.
A. That is correct. It is astonishing that the Versailles Treaty in this period of time was used so little. I was reproached for this when the National Socialist Government took power. It was not considered, however, that the government at that time, and the Reichstag, were not of a mind to improve those ships. We had to fight for this permission to build up the Navy. which we were permitted primarily in order to make a pitiable defense of the coast in extreme emergency.
Q I shall come back to Document 332. It is established that during the time of the Versailles Treaty, Germany did not take advent ago of the provisions of the Treaty. On the other hand, on the basis of the documents submitted by the prosecution, it has been shown that the Navy committed broaches of the Versailles Treaty in other connections. The individual breaches were given with great precision by the prosecution. breaches were committed behind the back of the Reichstag and the government. Is this accusation justified?
A. Not at all. I must repeat that I was not connected with those breaches. First, on the first of October, 1938, I became chief of the Navy Command in Berlin. But since it was done previously, I had nothing to do with it. Then I came to Berlin, The Lohmann case which you mentioned previously had already been concluded. It was in the process of being liquidated. And the Reich defense minister Groener, when the affair was first discovered, ordered the army as well as the navy to report to him all breaches which were in process, and from then on he would discuss these things with Colonel von Schleicher. He liquidated the Lohmann affair, and this liquidation was still in progress when I came there. assign the responsibility for all these broaches of the Versailles Treaty to the Reich government as a whole, then the Hueller-Severing-Stresemann Government, since he believed that he could no longer boar this responsibility. these matters, the chief of the army command, General Heil, and I, as well as some office chiefs in the administration, were called to a meeting, and at that cabinet session all the ministers were present. General Heil and I had to report openly and completely as to what broaches were undertaken by the army and the navy. and removed the responsibility from the Reich defense minister, who, however, continued to be responsible for the execution of things. Everything which happened in the future we had to report to the Reich defense minister, and were not allowed to undertake any stops alone. Reichsminisminister of the Interior, Severing, who showed great understanding for the various necessities. command, gave a list of the individual breaches?
Q And thereupon the government told you, "We will take the responsibility" agreement with the Reich government?
A Yes; the Reich defense minister Greener was extremely sensitive on this point. He insisted that he shall learn everything and should approve everything. He thought that only in this way could he take the responsibility. I had nothing whatever to do with the Reichstag. The military chiefs were not allowed to have any contact with the Reichstag or its members. Any contact with the Reichstag was through the Reich defense minister or by Colonel von Schleicher on his behalf. I could talk about the fact with the Reichstag members only in the so-called budget committee, where, aside from the Reich defense minister, I was sitting and had to comment on his statements. secret departments within the construction program of the navy without the approval of the Reich government?
A. Without the approval of the Reich government, and, above all, of the Reich defense minister.
DR. SIEMERS: May I ask the Tribunal in this connection, from Raeder Exhibit No. 3, document Book I, cage 10, please look at Article 50, It reads:
"In order to be valid, all decrees and orders issued by the Reich President, including those pertaining to the Armed Forces, must be countersigned by the Reich Chancellor or the competent Reich-Minister. By the act of countersigning, responsibility is accepted." existed in October 1928. An important part of the construction of the Navy was that the old line ships from the former war were to be renewed.
In this connection, I submit to the Tribunal Raeder Exhibit No. 7, document Book Roman Numeral I, page 23. Book shows, under paragraph No. 2. It at first was submitted at the suggestion of the Reichstag, and then I might point out on page 24, #3, it shows that this hip construction replacement plan refers to three armored ships, and it is added that the construction could last until 1938. This figure is important, as the Prosecution will note, that in 1933 the Construction Plan was set up until 1938, in order to deduce a plan for attack. period, 1938, which, as the prosecution will admit, can have nothing to do with a war of aggression.
Q. The submission of the plan was through the Reich Government and you did the work, the preparatory work?
A. Yes.
Q. Is this only true of the ship replacement plan for 1938, or was it always handled in the some way in subsequent years?
A. The plan as submitted was true basically of the Reichstag. Each individual ship, however, had to be included in the budget plan of the year in which the construction was to begin and had to be separately approved. The whole construction program was thus in close agreement with the Reich Government and the Reichstag.
DR. SIEMERS: From this ship replacement program in connection with the Document I should like to point out two points which will greatly shorten the questioning of the witness. out that the great age of all the ships and all the liners referred to, which necessitated replacements, necessitated a ship replacement program. in it's 89th session of 18th June, 1929, asks the Reich Government for an extension of the construction program. The general opinion at that time is that, as the ship replacement program shows, set down in the Frankfurter Zeitung Title of 15 August 1928, and the Frankfurter Zeitung points out that an armored cruiser gains its full value only as a member of a squadron. The Frankfurter Zeitung was the best German newspaper and only in 1945 during the war it was forbidden, when the National Socialist Dictatorship became worse and worse.
I should like to point out on page 29 and quote one sentence:
"The building of the battleships will be stretched out over a long period of time, so as to hove the Navy where Wilhelmshaven occupied continuously. The ideal time of construction is about three years." occupation as long as possible. building program would have been hastened. having a tonnage of ten thousand tons, was about 75 million marks. testimony, where the value of the breaches of the Versailles Treaty wall be shown, and finally on page 30 may quote a few lines from the plan of the militarization of the Wehrmacht. I quote:
"For the Wehrmacht and the German Reich to defend its borders and protect it's peace, and since the German Republic as the only one of the great powers carrying out it's armament, the following possibility had to be taken into consideration: The employment of the armed forces as a defense against armed territories, and as a defense agains neutrality."
which the Prosecution brought up.
I, page 1, and refer to page 3, Article 191. It is a question of the acquisition by Germany contrary to the Versailles Treaty and of the constructof submarines. Article 191 reads and I quote:
"The construction and acquisition of all submersibles, even for commercial purposes, is forbidden to Germany." ship construction of submarines in Holland, and was interested in a general ship construction program and of submarines which were being constructed in Holland, in order to save time again it will be simpler if I refer to the affidavit of Vice Admiral Lohman, Roman NumeralI in Document Book I, page 4, Raeder Exhibit No. 2.
I shall read the short paragraph under Roman Numeral I:
"According to the Treaty of Versailles, the German Reich was neither to build nor to acquire U-boats. When in July, 1922, the firm N. V. Ingenieurs Kantoor Voor Scheepsbouw was established in the Hague, the Navy acquired an interest in it in order to keep informed on U-boat construction. The intention was to make use of the experience gained thereby in the German Navy, when later on conditions of the Treaty of Versailles would be annuled by negotiation, and Germany would be again permitted to build U-boats. Moreover, the navy wanted, for the same purpose, to train a small nucleus of skilled personnel."
Mr. Tribunal, I should like to point out at this point there is a translation mistake in the English copy. The word "Konstruktion" has been translated "construction", and construction means "Schiffsbau" in German. It was not a construction bureau. As far as I know "Konstruktion" must be translated "design". to set it right.
I quote:
"The first German U-boat was commissioned 29 June 1935. The program of parts to build U-boats had started correspondingly earlier." German-English fleet agreement was already in existence at that time. I will as. if this statement of Admiral Lohmann is correct.
A Yes. It corresponds with the facts.
Q Then I come to Prosecution document 441, U.S. 47. This is in document Book Raeder, document Book 10, on page 22 in the numbers of the British Delegati This is your letter of the 10th of February 1932 in regard to torpedo armament of the S-boats, the speed boats.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this in Document Book 10-A or 10?
DR. SIEMERS: Document Book 10. The old document bock.
THE PRESIDENT: My pages are wrongly marked somehow. It is all right.
DR. SIEMERS: Please excuse me. That is how the figures were given to me.
THE PRESIDENT: It is correct in the other members' books. BY DR. SIEMERS: Versailles treaty. For that reason, you are accused in this connection. Did this involve only the 5 speed boats mentioned in this document?
A Yes. There were 5 boats which we used as patrol boats in the ship replacement program which we had demanded in the program, which in themselves had no armament.
A. Not bigger than 40 tons, perhaps smaller.
Q Were more boats of this type built during the Versailles Treaty?
A I cannot say with Certainty. In any case, we had no armed boats in addition. Of course, what is what I mean. It was so that we had 12 plus 4, or 16. We Were allowed to build 16 torpedo boats. A torpedo boat of 200 tons could not be produced at that time because of the question of the motors and the question of navigability. For that reason, we did not build these torpedo boats. We kept a number of quite old torpedo beats from the beginning of the century. We kept them in the Service in order to be able to train crews with them. We could not fight with these boats any more. But during this time we could not replace these boats We wanted to have some small boats capable of action even if small, which if the Baltic was blocked off could be of use.