Did you not put your initials in each place that you wanted to make a change?
Isn't that so?
A No; we copied it again.
Q You copied it anew. Did you not mark the places that you wanted change and say how you wanted it changed? You did, did you not?
A Yes; but that was of little significance. For instance, the word "Reichsbank" was replaced, and "Gold Discount Bank" was used, and there were some other snail changes like that.
MR. DODD: It right be helpful to the Tribunal to know that it was re-writte and initialed.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle):
Q Mr. Witness, I want to ask you a few questions. The first you heard a about those transactions was from the defendant Funk, was it not?
Q Did Funk tell you who had told him about then in the SS?
Q Himmler had spoken to Funk about this? about this?
Q You do not know whether Pohl was there also?
A No, I cannot tell you that. But I can say that right from the beginning the name of the Minister of Finance was being used and mentioned. But whether he was personally there, I do not know.
Q Did Funk say to you what Himmler said to him? disposal of the SS for this purpose. Board of Directors?
Q Was Funk at that meeting?
Q What did you say to the Board of Directors?
Q What did you say to them?
A In a few words I described my conversation with Mr. Funk, my conversation with Mr. Pohl, and confirmed the fact that the Reichsbank was taking valuables of the SS into theit vaults.
Q And then did the Board of Directors approve the action?
A Yes; there was no objection.
Q Now, the Defendant Funk said to you that these objects had come "from the East", did he not?
Q What did you understand that he meant by that phrase, "from the East"?
A Principally I thought of occupied Poland; but some Russian territories may have been meant by it.
Q You knew that this was confiscated property, I presume? the property, did you not? be placed at the disposal of his men; and that I offered to do so and describing it?
Q I did not ask you whether it was talked about. I asked you whether the services included arranging the property and putting in different kinds of containers and sacks. Is that what you did?
A Yes. That was up to a decision by the directors of the Cashier's Department. If they considered it necessary, they could do so.
Q Was that done?
A That I could not know. That is a matter for the Cashier's Department.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, may I put two very brief questions, please?
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Dr. Sauter. BY. DR. SAUTER:
Q The one question, Witness, is this: You have always been asked who has talked to you here during the past few days.
A In Nurnberg?
Q Yes, in Nurnberg. And you have heard that several members of the Prosecution have discussed this affair with you during the last few days.
I should like to ascertain this. Have I talked to you?
Q I will say I saw you for the first time in my life to-day. I just wanted to state this for correctness's sake.
And the second question is this: This is something you have already confirm ed; but after the Prosecution's cross examination, I should like to put it to you again. submitted and which you have read, was there ever any mention of the fact that these were articles which came from concentration camps?
A The word "concentration camp" was neither used during the conversation with Mr. Funk nor during the conversation with Mr. Pohl.
Q So that Funk did not give you a hint of that type, either?
DR. SAUTER: In that case, Mr. President, I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Witness can retire, and the Tribunal will adjourn.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, you did offer 3947 as an exhibit, did you not?
MR. DODD: Yes, sir, I did, as Exhibit 850, I believe it was.
THE PRESIDENT: 850 was the order, and then that copy of the Puhl affidavit was 851?
MR. DODD: That is right. I did not offerthe other affidavit because we discovered it wasn't sworn to. I have it here and I will do it later, and I have that witness here. This thing can't go on interminably and I don't want to drag it on, but I would like to offer the affidavit when he can swear to it, and if there is going to be any demand for him I would like to state that Dr. Stuckert? is not a prisoner. He is a free man in this country.
THE PRESIDENT: He should be called now.
MR. DODD: If he is going to be called I would suggest that it be done soon.
THE PRESIDENT: If you want to cross examine him he should be called now.
DR. SEIDEL: Mr. President, I am representing Attorney-At-Law, Dr. Hoffmann for the defendant Goering. The defendant, Goering, asked me in the re-examination of the witness Puhl to ask two questions. The questions will probably be in connection with the Document which the Prosecution submitted to the witness, Puhl, in cross examination, Document 3947 PS. The Prosecution on page 2 of this document read sentence 3, which begins as follows:
"The Reich Marshall of the Greater German Reich -- "
THE PRESIDENT: If you want to put questions to the witness Puhl on behalf of the defendant Goering you can do so and Puhl will be recalled for that purpose.
DR. SEIDEL: Mr. President, the difficulty is something else. The defendant Goering has in my opinion a justification. The questions which he wanted to ask the witness he could put plainly if he previously had an opportunity to see the document to which the Prosecution referred. Therefore, during the cross-examination I wanted to have the sergeant on duty give document 3947 to defendant Goering. This was refused with the explanation that on the basis of an order of the Commandant of the Prison, documents can no longer be given to the defendants in the main proceeding when their case has already been concluded.
THE PRESIDENT: As long as the document was read over the earphones the defendant Goering and yourself shall certainly see the document, but the witness must be called during this sitting. You may see the document and the defendant Goering may see the document, but the witness must be recalled for any questions at once.
DR. SEIDEL: Mr. President, only excerpts were read from the document. In my opinion the defendant Goering if he desired to ask a sensible question must know the whole document. I am of the opinion that there are only two possibilities; Either the defense will in the case of defendants whose cases are already concluded, disperse with further material in crossexamination; or the defendants will be given the opportunity to see the now evidence submitted in documents from which excerpts are read, and that can only be done by showing the defendant the whole document.
THE PRESIDENT: There is only just one page and there is only one paragraph in it which refers to Goering. And that paragraph has already been read. When I say one page, it is just one page of this English copy. I think you have a German translation before you.
DR. SEIDEL: I have three and one half pages.
THE PRESIDENT: There is only one paragraph which relates to Goering.
DR. SEIDEL: It is only a matter of whether in the main proceedings I may give this copy to the defendant Goering. If this is possible -- and I see no reason why this should not be possible -- I will be able to ask the witness Puhl any questions that are necessary. I am of the opinion the defendant is right when he says that of a document from which only excerpts are read he would like to read the whole document.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I would like to point out that Dr. Seidel had the document for 10 minutes during the recess; and also I would like to point out that we did not like to prevent his having the document; it is a security measure altogether.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you will be satisfied, Dr. Seidel, if the witness Puhl is recalled at two o'clock for Dr. Seidel to put any questions to his that he wishes. And of course he would have the document. He has the document now.
And of course Goering would have the document too.
DR. SEIDEL: That is the difficulty, Mr. President. I have the document but on the basis of the instructions of the police the defendant Goering is not allowed to have the document.
THE PRESIDENT: You can give the document to Goering now.
DR. SEIDEL: I am not allowed to do that.
THE PRESIDENT: I am telling you to do it, and they will let you do it.
Dr. Sauter, do you wish to cross-examine the man who has made a statement? Do you wish to cross-examine Toms?
DR. SAUTER: Please, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: You do?
DR. SAUTER: Yes. Mr. President, may I comment on what Dr. Seidel has just said? It isn't just a question of this one document which Dr. Seidel just wanted to give the defendant Goering. It is a general question of whether a defense counsel is justified in giving a defendant during a session, documents. So far that was permitted. Now the police say that those defendants whose cases have been completed here for the present may no longer be given any documents by the defense counsel in the court-room. We of defense counsel feel that that is unjustified, since it may very easily happen that the defendants may have something -- may have some connection with a later case. We request you and the Court that in the future the defendants should be permitted -- the defense counsel should be permitted to give the defendants documents here in the session, even if the case, as such, has been concluded.
That is what Dr. Seidel wanted to ask you.
Mr. President, may I say something else?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Sauter? You wanted to say something more to me?
DR. SAUTER: May I point out the following: In the interrogation room down in the jail we are not allowed to hand any documents to the defendants. Thus, if I have a document then which I want to discuss with my client, I have to read all this document to him. If 10 or 12 or 15 defense counsel are down, there in the evening -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the Tribunal is of the opinion that any document which is handed to the defendants' counsel may be handed to the defendant: themselves by the counsel and that it does not make any difference that a particular defendant's case Has been closed with reference to that rule.
DR. SAUTER: I am very grateful to you, Mr. President. I hope that his will involve no more difficulties.
THE PRESIDENT: Well then now, you want to cross-examine Toms?
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Is Toms here? Can he be brought here at oncce?
MR. DODD: He is on his way -- he is probably right outside the door.
THE PRESIDENT: All right Marshal, see if he is available.
MR. DODD: I have not had time, Mr. President, to have the affidavit sworn to because I have not seen the man.
THE PRESIDENT: No, but as far as his cross-examination is concerned, he can be put under oath here.
THE MARSHAL: No sir, he is not here yet.
MR. DODD: He is on his way.
THE PRESIDENT: He is not available.
MR. DODD: He is on his way. He was in Lieutenant Meltzer's office a minute ago and he went out to get him.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he can be called then at two o'clock after the other witnesses.
Now Dr. Siemers, would you be ready?
DR. SIEMERS: Dr. Siemers, defense counsel for Grand Admiral Dr. Eric Raeder. a witness in connection with all the documents which the Prosecution submitted in the case against Raeder. I hve given all of these documents to Raeder so that he will have them with him in the witness stand in order not to lose any time by bringing each one to him separately. These documents are in part in document book number ten. The British delegation put these documents which were not yet in the document book into a new document book 10 (a). I assume that this document book is in the possession of the Tribunal.
document book 10 (a) and 10. documents from my document book connected with the case in question. Thank you. ERIC RAEDER, called as a witness, took the stand and testified as follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Will you state your full name.
A. Eric Raeder.
Q. Will you repeat this oath after me: truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(Witness repeated oath)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. BY DR. SIEMERS:
Q. Grand Admiral Raeder, please tell the Tribunal briefly about your career?
A. I was born in 1876 in Wansbeck near Hamburg. I joined the Navy in. 1894. I became an officer in 1897. Normal advancement; two years naval academy; three months leave in each year to Russia to study languages during the Russian-Japanese War. Foreign press -- I was editor of the "Naval Review" and the "Nautikus."
1910 to 1912, Navigation Officer on the imperial yacht "Hohenzollern." 1912 to the beginning of 1918, First Admiral Staff Officer and Chief of Staff of the cruiser "Admiral Hipper."
with Admiral von Tother. For two years I wrote a naval history for the naval archives. As Rear Admiral from 1922 to 1924, inspector of training program of the Navy. 1925 to 1928 as Vice-Admiral, chief of the navy station Baltic in Kiel. appointed by President von Hindenburg at the suggestion of the Reichswehr Minister Groehner. April, 1939, I became Grand Admiral. Navy and received the title Admiral-Inspector of the Navy without being connected with any official functions.
Q. I should like to come back to one point. You said that in 1935 you became Commander-in-Chief of the Navy. This was only, if I am right, a new title, is that right?
A. It was only a new name.
Q. That is, you were head of the Navy from 1928 to 1943?
A. Yes.
Q. According to the Versaille Treaty Germany had an army of one hundred thousand men and a navy of fifteen thousand men, with one thousand five hundred officers. In proportion to the size of the Reich the Wehrmacht was extremely small. Wehrmacht, to defend herself against possible attacks by neighboring states and what dangers did Germany have to count on in the twenties?
against attacks of even the smallest states, since she had no modern weapons while the surrounding states, Poland in particular, were equipped with the most modern weapons. The modem munitions plants had also been taken away from Germany.
The danger which Germany faced in the 20's was an attack by Poland on East Prussia, in order to cut off this territory and occupy it. This was cut off from Germany by the Corridor. The danger was especially clear to Germany because at that time Wilna was occupied by the Poles, and because Lithuania had taken away the Memel area. In the south, Flume had been taken away without the League of Nations or anyone else objecting. could not be allowed to happen to Germany in that period of impotency was the occupying of East Prussia and taking it away from Germany. Our efforts were therefore aimed at organizing ourselves so that we would be able to oppose such an invasion of East Prussia by Poland. place. Was not the border crossed, in fact, on several occasions in the 20's? the military circles, but also by the Government in the 20's, especially by the Social Democrats and by Stresemann?
A Yes. I said before that the Government realized that such an invasion could not be allowed to occur. internation law and contrary to treaty in the time before Hitler.
On the 1st of October 1928 you became Chief of the Navy Command. Thus you received the highest position in the German Navy. Did you use all your efforts, in viewof the dangers described, to build up the German Navy in the framework of the Versailles Treaty in order to be able to protect East Prussia in particular?
A Yes, I used all my efforts. I considered building up the Navy my life task. In all stages of this period of construction, the reconstruction of the Navy was especially difficult, and as a result, in all these years I was constantly having to fight in one direction or another in order to put through this construction work.
Perhaps I became a little one-sided since this battle for the construction of the Navy took all my time and kept me from taking part in any other matters that had nothing to do with it. formation of a competent officers' corps and well-trained and particularly well-educated crews. Grand Admiral Doenitz has already reported here the result of this training of our officers and men, and I should like to confirm that these German naval men were respected at home and abroad because of their good training and because of the fact that in war they fought in an exemplary manner to the end, in complete unity, because they participated in no atrocities. In the occupied areas where they were stationed, in Norway for instance, they earned the recognition of the population for their decent behavior. Navy in these 15 years, it can be stated that as head of the Navy you are responsible for everything that happened in this connection?
A I am fully responsible for it? October 1928. To whom wer you subordinate as far as construction of the Navy is concerned? You could not act completely independently. the Reich Government, since he was a member of the Reich Government. Second, I had to obey the Commander in Chief of the Wehrmacht in these matters. From 1925 to 1934 the Commander in Chief of the Wehrmacht was Reichspresident General Feldmarschall von Hindenburg, and after his death on the 1st of August 1934, Adolf Hitler.
DR. SIEMERS: Mr. President, in this connection may I submit Raeder Exhibit No. 3, a short excerpt from the Constitution of the German Reich. It is in Document Book I on page 9. Article 47 reads:
"The Reichspresident has the supreme command of all the armed forces of the Reich."
later, as Raeder Exhibit No. 4, Document Book I, page 11.
I refer to Article 8 of the Defense law, which reads as follows:
"The command lies exclusively in the hands of the lawful superior.
"The Reichspresident is the Commander in Chief of all Armed Forces. Under him, the Reich Minister for Defense has authoritative powers over all the Armed Forces. At the head of the Reich-Army is a General, as Chief of the Army-Command; at the head of the Reich-navy, an Admiral, as Chief of the Naval Command." regime. I refer to them only because this confirms what the witness says. In regard to reconstruction, it is the Reich Defense Minister, and then in the third position is the head of the Ministry. BY DR. SIEMERS: Navy, first, by breaking the Versailles Treaty, second, behind the back of the Reichstag and the Reich Government, and third, with the intention of waging aggressive war. of the Navy was for aggressive or defensive purposes. Please distinguish chronologically. Speak at first only about the period of time under the influence of the Versailles Treaty, that is, from 1928 until the GermanEnglish Fleet Agreement of the 18th of July, 1935.
My question is: In this period of time of the construction of the Navy, was the construction of the Navy for aggressive purposes as the Prosecution asserted? purposes. No doubt there was a certain evasion of the Versailles Treaty. a few, short quotations from a speech, which I made in 1928 in Kiel and Stalsund, the two largest garrisons of my Navy station, before the citizenry. When I took up my duties in Berlin, I handed it to Minister Severing as my program. Minister Severing regarded me with acertain amount of suspicion at that time.
DR. SIEMERS: I believe the High Tribunal will agree, because the statements from the year 1928 show Raeder's attitude more clearly. For that reason I submit this speech as Raeder Exhibit No 6, document book I, page 17.
The speech itself begins on page 17.
MR. President, it would take perhaps five or ten minutes, and I would ask whether it is time to adjourn, or shall we continue?
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
DR. SERVATIUS (Counsel for Defendant Sauckel): Mr. President, will you please grant permission for the defendant Sauckel to be absent from the courtroom on the session of the 18th so that he may prepare his defense?
THE PRESIDENT: You want to be absent in order to prepare your defense?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I would like to suggest that before the witness Puhl is recalled, the witness Toms be called. I believe it will save some of the Tribunal's time. I think, from what I know of the prospective testimony, there may be questions that will arise in the mind of the Tribunal which it would like to put to the witness Puhl after having heard the witness Toms. concerned, that the witness Puhl be in the courtroom when the witness Toms testifies. I think he should have that opportunity.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, do you have any objections?
DR. SAUTER: I have no objection.
MR. DODD: May we call the witness Toms?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, call Toms, and have Puhl somewhere in the courtroom where he can hear. follows:
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you state your full name?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me?
A I beg your pardon, but I didn't quite hear you.
Q Will you repeat this oath after me: pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath).
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
MR DODD: Mr. President, I am aware that he has been called for cross-examination. However, there are one or two matters, now material, which were not included in the affidavit, and to save time I would like to bring those out before the cross-examination takes place.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. BY MR. DODD:
Q Mr. Toms, you executed a statement on the 8th day of May, 1946. Is that so?
Q And you signed it?
Q And everything in it was true?
Q And is true now, of course? identify it now. Is that the statement that you signed, Mr Toms?
Q All right. Now, I have one or two questions to ask you about it.
MR. DODD: I wish to offer it, Mr. President, as USA Exhibit 852.
Q (Continuing) You know this gentleman sitting to your left, do you not?
Q That is Mr. Puhl, is it not?
Q Now, did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Puhl about any special deposit which was coming to the Reichsbank and about which you should maintain utmost secrecy? else was present at the time.
A This conversation took place in the summer of 1942. I was called to come up into president Puhl's office, Mr. Frommknecht, the cashier, delivering the message. Mr. Frommknecht took no to Mr. Puhl, and there Mr. Puhl disclosed the fact that a special transaction with the office of the Reichsleader SS was to be undertaken.
Do you want no to explain it in detail? quite confidentially, that not only were articles to be delivered which could be taken over in the ordinary course of business of the Reichsbank quite automatically, but there would, also be the use of jewlry and other articles. experts, he replied that we would have to find a way to utilize these articles. sent to the Chief Cashier's Department -- that is, the Cashier Department of the Reich Government -- which was dealing with all booty of the Army. However, Mr. Puhl thought that this matter should not go through the Chief Reich Cashier's Department, but should be handled by the Reichsbank in some other form, Therefore I suggested that those articles could be dealt with exactly like the delivaries of confiscated Jewish articles which had been dealt with before, which had been sent to the Municipal Pawnbroker's Office in Berlin. President Puhl agreed to this suggestion.
Q When did the first of those shipments arrive?
remember.
Q 1942?
A Does the name "Melmer" mean anything to you?
A The name "Melmer" was the name of the SS man Who, in subsequent tines, brought these valuables to the Reichsbank. Under this clue word all deliveries of the SS were later on, entered on the books of our bank.
Q Did you ever mention the name or the word "Melmer" to puhl, and Aid he ever mention it to you?
A The name "Melmer" has not been mentioned, by President Puhl to me but it has been mentioned by me before President Puhl. I gave it to him, because I had to inform him about the carrying out of this particular business and, most of all, of course, about the business which arose from transferring the payment for these articles. In accordance with the suggestion which came from the office of the Reichsleader SS, that money was transferred to the Reich Ministry of Finance, into an account which had the name "Max Heiliger". Later on, informed. President Puhl briefly about those facts.
receiving in the SS shipments? was getting along. I explained to him that, contrary to the expectation that there would really be very few deliveries, deliveries were growing, and that apart from gold and silver coins there was a great deal of jewelry, rings, wedding rings, even dental gold, gold and silver fragments; in fact, all sorts of gold and silver articles. dental gold and other articles?
A Kay I first of all add one or two things. I drew his attention especially to the fact that on one occasion I had received something like twelve kilograms of jewels and that there was such a considerable amount that I had never seen anything like it before in all my life.
Q What was it?
A It was pearls. They were pearls and pearl necklaces. rims?
A I can't swear to that at the moment, but I have described the general character of these deliveries and, in my opinion, I probably used the word "spectacles", but I wouldn't state it on my oath.
Q Was he ever in the vaults when this material was being processed? inspect gold deposits there and particularly to inform himself about the typo of storage. The deliveries were kept in a special department of one of the main safes, so that on those occasions Mr. Puhl saw the trunks and boxes -he must have seen them -- of these deliveries. Nearby in the corridor of the vault deliveries were being dealt with and I am of the certain opinion that Mr. Puhl, when he walked through the strong rooms, must have seen those matters since they were quite openly lying on the table and everyone who visited the strong room could see them. out, were there not, before it was shipped away for molting and for sale in the pawn shops?