Morning Session
MARSHAL: May it please the Tribunal, the report is made that Defendant Göring is absent.
THE PRESIDENT: We were going to deal with Defendant Bormann’s documents, were we not?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: If Your Lordship pleases.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, two witnesses only have arrived so far for the Defendant Sauckel. Three essential witnesses are still missing. Perhaps the Court can help to bring these witnesses quickly so that the case will not be delayed. They are the witnesses Stothfang, Dr. Jäger, and Hildebrandt. I have repeatedly asked the Prosecution to get them but they are not here yet. I have not yet spoken to the witnesses.
THE PRESIDENT: Have they been located?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes. One is in a camp in Kassel, which is only a few hours from here, and the other is in Neumünster. That is a little farther, perhaps 6 or 7 hours from here. Dr. Jäger is free.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not in accordance with the information which the Tribunal has. The Tribunal has the information that they cannot be found.
DR. SERVATIUS: I received the information that their whereabouts has been ascertained.
THE PRESIDENT: From whom did you receive that information?
DR. SERVATIUS: Officially, from the General Secretary.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we will make inquiries into it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, first, with regard to the witnesses applied for for the Defendant Bormann. They are, as I understand it, Fräulein Krüger, to whom we have no objection. The witness Müller is no longer applied for?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, I have dispensed with that witness.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Then, Klopfer, and lastly, Friedrich. These are with regard to Bormann’s law-making activities, and the Prosecution have no objections.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Lordship, in place of the witness Müller, whom I have withdrawn, I have an additional request for the witness Gerta Christian on the same subject for which I had requested the witness Müller.
THE PRESIDENT: The first witness, Miss Krüger, is going to speak to exactly the same facts, is she not, to the death of Bormann?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, Your Lordship. The circumstances concerning Bormann’s death are not very clear. It is very necessary to hear all the available witnesses on this subject because only in this way can one be convinced of the fact, which I am trying to establish, that the Defendant Bormann is already dead.
THE PRESIDENT: It does not seem to be a very relevant fact. It is very remotely relevant whether he is dead or whether he is alive. The question is whether he is guilty or innocent.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Lordship, my point of view is that sentence cannot be passed against a dead man. That is not provided for in the Charter. According to the Charter, the Court can only sentence an absent person, but a dead person cannot be included under the term “absent.” If the defendant is dead, the Charter does not provide the possibility of continuing proceedings against him.
THE PRESIDENT: Sir David, have you any objection to that other witness?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: No, My Lord, the Prosecution does not make any objections.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Now, My Lord, with regard to the documents, the first batch of documents is a series of treaties and diplomatic pronouncements and documents to counteract the statement of Sir Hartley Shawcross as to the position of international law before the Charter, the statement that the law of nations had constituted aggressive war an international crime before this Tribunal was established and this Charter became part of the public law of the world. The position of the Prosecution is that evidence on that point is really irrelevant because after all, the Tribunal is covered by the Charter, and it seems unnecessary to translate and publish, by way of document books, all these matters which the learned counsel has set out in his application. That is, shortly, the position of the Prosecution with regard to that first batch of documents. Especially, I do not want to discuss the problem for the reason that I have given.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. What are the numbers of them?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: They are 1 to 11—no, 7, in the application.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Are they long documents?
DR. BERGOLD: Your Lordship, I have not seen them yet. I applied for these documents 3 months ago in order to look them over, but unfortunately I have not received them yet and therefore I cannot give the Court any information as to whether they are long or not and what parts of them I will need for my defense.
THE PRESIDENT: Number 2 looks like a long document.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, My Lord.
DR. BERGOLD: But I will not use all these documents if I receive them. I shall probably take some of them, Your Lordship; I shall only...
THE PRESIDENT: When you say you applied for them 3 months ago, you do not mean you applied to the Tribunal, do you?
DR. BERGOLD: I applied to the General Secretary, but perhaps it was put aside when Your Lordship decided that my case should be postponed to the end. Perhaps it was forgotten.
THE PRESIDENT: Was there any order on your application?
DR. BERGOLD: No.
THE PRESIDENT: You applied, I think, for an adjournment, did you not, in order that the matter might be brought up later?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, Your Lordship; I am in an especially difficult situation. I have questioned many witnesses and have tried very hard, but I can find nothing exonerating. All the witnesses are filled with great hatred toward the Defendant Bormann, and they want to incriminate him in order to exonerate themselves. That makes my case especially difficult. The man himself is probably dead and can give me no information. Any day now I might get new information. For example, a few days ago one of Bormann’s co-workers, a Dr. Von Hummeln, was arrested in Salzburg. I will go to see him and perhaps I shall get fresh information—perhaps none. I must also assume...
THE PRESIDENT: We need not bother about that now. We are only inquiring about your application with reference to the documents.
Sir David, have you anything further you want to say about the documents?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: No, that is my short point. I do not want to discuss the merits of my points because that is the issue, that I am saying is irrelevant.
THE PRESIDENT: What about Number 11?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am not disposed to object to any of the other documents, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any others besides...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Number 11—I can see a possible argument on that, My Lord; therefore I am not going to object to it. The other documents we certainly have no objection to; the ordinances of the Führer’s Deputy and...
THE PRESIDENT: All under “B”?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes. The Prosecution makes no objection to these.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
Now, what do you say to Sir David’s objection to these documents, 1 to 7?
DR. BERGOLD: Well, Your Lordship, I have already made my point of view clear in my application. In order to save the time of the Court, I will merely refer to this written application. I will not say any more at the moment on the subject, but if Your Lordship wants me to explain it here now I am ready to do so.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the matter.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Did Your Lordship wish to deal with the other outstanding applications or would Your Lordship prefer to deal with that later on at the end of the case of Von Schirach?
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think we have the papers here. We were only going to deal with Bormann this morning.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: If Your Lordship pleases.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, we have got a document here, D-880, said to be extracts from testimony of Admiral Raeder, taken at Nuremberg on 10 November 1945 by Major John Monigan. Have you offered that document in evidence or not?
MR. DODD: May I have just a minute to check it? I am not certain.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we will give you the document.
MR. DODD: I believe not, Mr. President; I do not believe it has been offered in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to have been handed up yesterday or the day before...
MR. DODD: I think through a mistake.
THE PRESIDENT: ...or last week. Yes. But you will find out about that and let us know.
MR. DODD: Very well, Sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, you were still examining Gustav Hoepken, were you not?
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I shall continue my examination of the witness Hoepken.
[The witness Hoepken resumed the stand.]
DR. SAUTER: Herr Hoepken, we stopped yesterday when discussing the question whether the Defendant Von Schirach during his time in Vienna was opposed to the Church or was tolerant in this connection. The last answer you gave me yesterday referred to the relations of the Defendant Von Schirach to the Viennese Cardinal, Innitzer. Is it correct, Witness, that at the suggestion and with the knowledge of the Defendant Von Schirach during his time in Vienna you periodically had talks with a Catholic priest there, a Dean, Professor Ens, for the purpose of discussing Church questions with him and removing any differences which might arise?
HOEPKEN: Yes, that is true. Professor Ens was not, as you assume, Catholic, but Protestant. He was Dean of the faculty of theology of the University of Vienna. When he visited me he submitted many Church and religious questions to me. I discussed them with him. He then asked me to report on them to Herr Von Schirach so that, if it were in his power, he could make redress. This was done as far as possible.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know, Witness, that the Defendant Von Schirach, for example, ordered that at the Party Christmas celebrations new National Socialist Christmas songs were not to be sung, but the old Christian Christmas hymns?
HOEPKEN: Yes, I know that at the Christmas celebrations of the Party and of the Hitler Youth, and the Christmas celebration for wounded soldiers, the old Christian Christmas carols, such as “Es ist ein Ros’ entsprungen,” and “Silent Night, Holy Night...”
THE PRESIDENT: This is surely not a matter which is worthy to be given in evidence.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, do you know that the Defendant Von Schirach, in the official magazine of the Hitler Youth, had a special number published which was in favor of humane treatment of the people of the Eastern Territories, and when was that?
HOEPKEN: I know that it was the quarterly number for April to June 1943.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know that in the same official magazine of the Hitler Youth, at the request of the Defendant Bormann, a special anti-Semitic number was to appear, but that Von Schirach refused it?
HOEPKEN: I know that it was requested at that time by the Propaganda Ministry and also by the Party Chancellery. Von Schirach refused each time.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, do you know that Von Schirach once inspected a concentration camp?
HOEPKEN: Yes, I know that.
DR. SAUTER: Which one?
HOEPKEN: The concentration camp Mauthausen.
DR. SAUTER: In regard to this point, which has already been more or less cleared up by the testimony of other witnesses, I am interested only in one question. When was this visit to Mauthausen?
HOEPKEN: I cannot say exactly. I can say with certainty, however, that it was not after April 1943.
DR. SAUTER: Why can you say that?
HOEPKEN: In April 1943 I was discharged from hospital and began my service in Vienna. From that day on until April 1945 I knew every day where Von Schirach was. Moreover, immediately after my arrival in Vienna in April 1943, when I asked him, as I was rather run-down physically because of my wound and was also a sports teacher, whether I might do some sports between 7 and 8 in the morning...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, we do not want to know about the witness’ health, do we?
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you heard what the President just said. I have already told you I am interested in when this visit to Mauthausen was. You said, if I understood you correctly...
THE PRESIDENT: He said he could not say when it was and it was after April 1943. He said he could not say when it was.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I believe you misunderstood the witness. Witness, please pay attention as to whether this is correct. I understood the witness to say that it was before April 1943. The visit must have been before April 1943. It could not have been later.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, he also said, according to the conversation I heard and took down, that he could not say when the particular time was.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, but through the testimony of the witness I should like to settle the fact that it was not later than April 1943.
THE PRESIDENT: He said that already. He said it. He said, “I cannot say when it was, but it was not after April 1943.” He said: “In April 1943 I was discharged from the hospital and began my service in Vienna. I knew every day where Schirach was.” I have got that all written down.
DR. SAUTER: Very well. Witness, in this conversation about his visit to Mauthausen did the Defendant Von Schirach tell you anything to the effect that on this visit he got to hear of any atrocities, ill-treatment, and such things?
HOEPKEN: No, he said nothing about that.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, I now turn to the question of the deportation of Jews from Vienna. As far as I know you were an ear-witness of a conversation between the Reichsführer SS Himmler and the Defendant Schirach. Will you tell us what was said in this conversation on the question of the deportation of Jews?
HOEPKEN: I believe it was in November 1941; Himmler and Schirach were motoring through East Prussia from Himmler’s quarters to his special train. In the car Himmler asked Von Schirach: “Tell me, Von Schirach, how many Jews are still in Vienna?” Von Schirach answered, “I cannot say exactly. I estimate 40,000 to 50,000.” And Himmler said: “I must evacuate these Jews as quickly as possible from Vienna.” And Schirach said: “The Jews do not give me any trouble, especially as they are now wearing the yellow star.” Then Himmler said: “The Führer is already angry that Vienna, in this matter as in many others, is made an exception, and I will have to instruct my SS agencies to carry this out as speedily as possible.” That is what I remember of this conversation.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know anything about the anti-Semitic speech made by the Defendant Von Schirach in September 1942 at a Congress in Vienna, which the Prosecution submitted to the Court?
HOEPKEN: Yes, the contents of the speech are known to us.
DR. SAUTER: I want to know whether you know anything about it, especially whether Schirach said anything to you about why he made this anti-Semitic speech?
HOEPKEN: I know from the press officer Günther Kaufmann, who was mentioned yesterday, that directly after this speech Von Schirach instructed Kaufmann that every point in the speech should be telephoned to the DNB (Deutsches Nachrichtenbüro) in Berlin, with the remark that he had every reason to make a concession to Bormann on this point.
DR. SAUTER: Why a concession?
HOEPKEN: I assume that Schirach knew that his position in Vienna was precarious, and that he constantly heard, especially from the Party Chancellery, that he must take a stricter course in Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: You were Chief of the Central Bureau with Schirach in Vienna. In this capacity, did all Schirach’s incoming mail go through you?
HOEPKEN: Not all of his mail, but the great majority of it. Mail stamped “only direct” and “personal” did not go through my hands.
DR. SAUTER: But the other mail?
HOEPKEN: That went through my office.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, we have here a number of documents which have been submitted to the Court. They are the activity and situation reports which the Chief of the Security Police made, I believe, monthly or weekly and which have been submitted to the Court under Number 3943-PS. These reports came from Vienna, and since you know the situation in the Central Bureau in Vienna and are well-informed about its activity, I will now hand you several of these documents. Please look at the documents and then tell us whether from these documents, which are photostat copies, you can determine whether these reports of the SS came to you or to the Defendant Von Schirach, or whether they went to a different office. I call your special attention to the manner in which these documents are annotated. Please note on the individual documents who initialed the document and what was done with the document after that. And then please tell us who these officials are who figure in the documents as officials of the Reich Defense Commission; for instance, a Dr. Fischer, et cetera.
Those are the documents, Mr. President, about which the Court asked questions the other day.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I know they are, but I do not know what the question is exactly. It seems to me there are a great number of questions. Well, let us get on, Dr. Sauter. We shall have to consider these documents, you know, and the witness ought to be able to give his answer.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, Mr. President. Of course, the witness has to look at the documents first. He must especially note which officials initialed the documents and what the officials did with them. That is what I must ask the witness, in order to ascertain what the documents...
THE PRESIDENT: I should have thought that he had seen these documents before.
DR. SAUTER: No; they were just handed over in cross-examination. I could not discuss them previously with the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: They were certainly handed over before this morning.
DR. SAUTER: Not to the witness—to me, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, get on, Dr. Sauter, get on.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, what do these documents tell you? Did they come to the knowledge of the Defendant Von Schirach, or how were they dealt with?
HOEPKEN: These documents did not go through the Central Bureau. I see here that they are initialed by a Dr. Felber. I know him. He was the expert assigned to the Regierungspräsident in Vienna for all matters concerning the Reich Defense Commissioner.
From the treatment given these documents, I must assume that the Berlin SD agency sent them directly to the office of the Regierungspräsident, and from there they were entered into the files, as I see here. I do not see Von Schirach’s initials here.
DR. SAUTER: The Regierungspräsident was a certain Dellbrügge?
HOEPKEN: Dr. Dellbrügge.
DR. SAUTER: And this Dr. Felber whom you mentioned was an official of the Regierungspräsident?
HOEPKEN: Yes, an official of the Regierungspräsident.
DR. SAUTER: And when such a document as you have there arrived, where did the post office or any other agency deliver it? Was it delivered to you or did the Regierungspräsident have his own office for incoming mail, or how was it?
HOEPKEN: I already said that they must have been sent directly to the office of the Regierungspräsident, who had his own office for incoming mail.
DR. SAUTER: How can you tell that the Defendant Von Schirach had no knowledge of these documents?
HOEPKEN: Because he did not initial these documents. If documents were submitted to him, they were initialed “z.K.g.”—noted—“B.v.S.,” and that does not appear on these documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, I do not think the Prosecution suggested that they were initialed by Von Schirach. It was quite clearly brought out in Von Schirach’s evidence that he had not initialed them, and that fact was not challenged by Mr. Dodd.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I believe it is a decisive point whether Defendant Von Schirach had any knowledge of these documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Why do you keep asking whether they were initialed by him or not? That fact, as I have pointed out, has already been proved and not challenged.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, I have here an additional collection of documents under Number 3876-PS. They are additional reports from the Chief of the Security Police. There is another address on these. It says here, among other things: “To the Reich Defense Commissioner for the Defense District XVII”—that was Vienna—“for the attention of Oberregierungsrat Dr. Fischer in Vienna.”
I am interested in knowing who Dr. Fischer was. Was he in the Central Bureau, or who was he?
HOEPKEN: I do not know a Dr. Fischer either in the Central Bureau or in the Reichsstatthalterei.
DR. SAUTER: Then how do you explain the fact that in these reports it always says, “To the Reich Defense Commissioner for the Defense District XVII, for the attention of Oberregierungsrat Dr. Fischer?”
HOEPKEN: I assume he was a colleague of Oberregierungsrat Dr. Felber, who specialized in these matters. Also I see they were secret letters, and were therefore addressed to him personally.
DR. SAUTER: As far as you know, did not the Regierungspräsident Dellbrügge report to the Defendant Von Schirach on these reports which reached him, or have one of his officials report about them?
HOEPKEN: The Regierungspräsident reported directly to Herr Von Schirach about matters concerning the Reich Governor and the Reich Defense Commissioner. I was not present at these conversations; consequently I cannot say to what extent he reported to Von Schirach on these matters.
DR. SAUTER: If the Regierungspräsident or one of his officials reported to the Defendant Von Schirach on these reports, would that be shown in the documents?
HOEPKEN: Probably yes. In that case the Regierungspräsident or the officials would have had to write on them “To be filed after being reported to the Reich Governor,” or “for further action.”
DR. SAUTER: On the documents which I submitted to you there is no such indication?
HOEPKEN: On these documents, no.
DR. SAUTER: And on the documents which I have here, there is no such note either. Do you conclude from this that the Defendant Von Schirach received no report on them?
HOEPKEN: I must conclude that Von Schirach was not informed on these matters.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, the Defendant Von Schirach was chief of the state administration in Vienna in his capacity as Reich Governor, as well as chief of the local administration to a certain extent as mayor, and finally chief of the Party as Gauleiter. Now, we hear that in each of these capacities he had a permanent representative.
I should like to know who normally administered the affairs of the Reich Defense Commissioner and the Reich Governor; that is, the affairs of the state administration?
HOEPKEN: I have already said that it was the Regierungspräsident, Dr. Dellbrügge.
DR. SAUTER: And then what did the Defendant Von Schirach do in the field of state administration?
HOEPKEN: He was given regular reports by the Regierungspräsident. Von Schirach then made his decision, and these decisions were then carried out by the officials or departments.
DR. SAUTER: If I understand you correctly, the Defendant Von Schirach concerned himself only with such matters as were reported to him by the Regierungspräsident or which were brought to his special attention in writing; is that true?
HOEPKEN: Yes, that is true.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, were you yourself a member of the SS?
HOEPKEN: No, I was never a member of the SS.
DR. SAUTER: Of the SA?
HOEPKEN: No.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know that these three permanent representatives, whom the Defendant Von Schirach had in Vienna, namely the Regierungspräsident, the Deputy Gauleiter, and the Mayor, were all three SS Führer?
HOEPKEN: Yes, I know that.
DR. SAUTER: How was that? Did the Defendant Von Schirach select these men himself, or how do you explain the fact that all three of his representatives were SS Führer?
HOEPKEN: The Deputy Gauleiter, Scharizer, was an honorary SS Führer and, as far as I recall, he was Oberbefehlsleiter of the Party. When Von Schirach came to Vienna, Scharizer had already been active for several years in Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: As what?
HOEPKEN: As Deputy Gauleiter. I do not know when the Regierungspräsident, Dr. Dellbrügge, came to Vienna; but I assume either before or at about the same time as Von Schirach. Moreover, the Regierungspräsidenten were appointed by the Ministry of the Interior, so that I think he could hardly have had sufficient influence to refuse or select a particular Regierungspräsident.
As for the mayor, the situation was similar.
DR. SAUTER: He was a certain Blaschke?
HOEPKEN: Yes. He was SS Brigadeführer Blaschke, he was also appointed by the Ministry of the Interior as acting mayor.
DR. SAUTER: By the Ministry of the Interior?
HOEPKEN: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: When was that?
HOEPKEN: I believe that was in 1944, in January or February of 1944.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know that this SS Brigadeführer, or whatever he was, this Blaschke, before the time of the Defendant Von Schirach, was active in Vienna as a town councillor, and I believe also as vice mayor?
HOEPKEN: He was a town councillor before; and I believe he was vice mayor before I came to Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know that the Defendant Von Schirach for a long time opposed this SS Oberführer or Brigadeführer Blaschke being appointed mayor of Vienna?
HOEPKEN: I should say he opposed this for about 6 or 9 months, and I believe later he refused to allow the Minister of the Interior finally to confirm his appointment as mayor.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, what were the relations between the Defendant Von Schirach and the SS and the SS officers? Were they especially friendly and cordial or what were they like?
HOEPKEN: As far as I know, Schirach associated with the SS Führer as far as was officially necessary and no more.
DR. SAUTER: Was he friendly with SS men?
HOEPKEN: No; I do not know. In any case I knew of no such friendship.
DR. SAUTER: Did he not express to you his attitude toward the SS?
HOEPKEN: I have already said that he always had the feeling that he was under a certain supervision from them and for that reason he was rather distrustful.
DR. SAUTER: Distrustful of...
HOEPKEN: Of the SS.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, do you know how the Defendant Von Schirach received his information about the foreign press and foreign press reports?
HOEPKEN: He received them from the Reich Propaganda Office in Vienna. They were excerpts which the Propaganda Ministry issued in collaboration with the Reich Press Chief, Dr. Dietrich. As far as I know, however, they were selected and screened.
DR. SAUTER: Did you live for a long time with Von Schirach in Vienna?
HOEPKEN: From 1944 on I lived in Schirach’s house.
DR. SAUTER: You also took your meals with him?
HOEPKEN: Yes, I also took meals with him.
DR. SAUTER: Did not the Defendant Von Schirach obtain information from the foreign radio?
HOEPKEN: No, I am almost certain he did not, because after every meal he listened to the official German news services with me and a few other co-workers. Besides, if he had done so it would in my opinion have become known very soon for, as I said already, he had the feeling that he was being watched.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the witness can only tell us what he knows. How could he know whether Von Schirach ever listened to any foreign news? If he does not know, why do you not take him on to something else?
DR. SAUTER: The witness said, Mr. President, that during the latter part of his time in Vienna, from the spring of 1944 I believe he said, he lived in the house of the Defendant Von Schirach.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I know he said that, and he said that he did not think he heard foreign news. What more can he give? What more evidence can he give on that subject?
DR. SAUTER: I wanted to hear that, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: But he said it already. I have taken it down. Why do you not go on to something else?
DR. SAUTER: Witness, do you know that in the last weeks of the resistance an order came to Vienna from Berlin according to which all defeatists, whether men or women, were to be hanged? What attitude did Schirach take toward this order?
HOEPKEN: I know that so-called courts martial were to be set up with the purpose of speedily sentencing people who objected to the conduct of the war or who showed themselves to be defeatists. This court martial was set up in Vienna, or rather appointed, but it did not meet once, and thus did not pronounce any sentences.
DR. SAUTER: Did the court martial of the Defendant Von Schirach carry on any proceedings at all?
HOEPKEN: No, not to my knowledge.
DR. SAUTER: Do you know anything about it?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, that fact, again, was given in evidence by Von Schirach and was not cross-examined to—that that court martial did not meet.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, do you know anything about the fact that in the last weeks an order came to form franc-tireur units? What was Von Schirach’s attitude to that?
HOEPKEN: I do not know that franc-tireur units were to be formed, but I do know that a “Freikorps Hitler” was to be formed. They were to be in civilian clothes. Schirach ordered that no people from the Reichsgau Vienna were to be assigned to this “Freikorps.”
DR. SAUTER: Why not?
HOEPKEN: Because at that time he considered resistance senseless. Secondly, because he considered it contrary to international law.
DR. SAUTER: My last question to you, Witness. You were with Schirach to the last, until he left Vienna?
HOEPKEN: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Did Schirach give an order to destroy bridges or churches, residential quarters, and so forth, in Vienna?
HOEPKEN: No, I do not know of that.
DR. SAUTER: What was the position he took?
HOEPKEN: That orders to blow up bridges or to take any defense measures were given only by the military authorities, as far as I know.
DR. SAUTER: But not by Schirach?
HOEPKEN: No.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have no more questions to put to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other defendant’s counsel want to ask questions? The Prosecution?
MR. DODD: Witness, would you see all of the files that were in Von Schirach’s office during the time that you were his adjutant?
HOEPKEN: I have already told you, or I told the defense counsel, that most of the mail went through the Central Bureau.
MR. DODD: I want to show you a document that is in evidence here and ask you if you can tell us whether or not you have seen this before.
[A document was handed to the witness.]
Have you ever seen that document before?
HOEPKEN: I do not know this document officially, as I see it is dated 28 May 1942, at which time I was an officer in the Luftwaffe.
MR. DODD: I see, you did not mean the Tribunal to understand that you were familiar with everything that was in Von Schirach’s files, because certainly this document was there during the years that you were his adjutant. You never saw it. It is marked “Central Bureau,” and you had charge of these very files, yet you never saw this teletype to Bormann? So you certainly did not know everything that was in his files, did you?
HOEPKEN: I said that the majority of the mail went through my offices but, of course, since I was not in Vienna at this time but only came to Vienna in April 1943, I was not able to look through all the back documents and letters in the files of the Reich Governor. That would have taken years.
MR. DODD: Let me ask you something else. You were there in the last days, I assume, when the city was taken by the Allied Forces, were you not?
HOEPKEN: I was in Vienna until April 1945.
MR. DODD: What was done with Von Schirach’s files when the end was very obviously coming? What did you do with all those files over which you had control?
HOEPKEN: I was not in charge of any files. I was chief of the bureau, and I...
MR. DODD: Well, you know what I mean—chief of the bureau or of the office where these files were kept. What I want to know is what did you do with the files?
HOEPKEN: I gave no orders in this connection.
MR. DODD: Do you know what became of the files?
HOEPKEN: No, I do not.
MR. DODD: They were taken out of the office sometime before the city was captured; do you not know that?
HOEPKEN: No, I did not know that.
MR. DODD: Were the files there the last day that you were there?
HOEPKEN: Probably, yes.
MR. DODD: I do not want a “probably.” I want to know if you know and if you do, to tell us. Were they there or not the last day that you were in the office?
HOEPKEN: I gave no orders to destroy them or to remove them.
MR. DODD: I did not ask you if you gave orders. I asked you if you know what became of them and whether or not they were in the office the last day that you were there?
HOEPKEN: I do not know what happened to them. Nor can I say whether they were still there on the last day.
MR. DODD: Do you not know that they were all moved to a salt mine in Austria?
HOEPKEN: No, I do not know that.
MR. DODD: You have never heard that, or that they were taken out of the office and were later found by the Allied Forces in a salt mine?
HOEPKEN: No, I do not know that.
MR. DODD: I do not mean that you heard they were found there, but you certainly knew that they were taken out of the office?
HOEPKEN: No, I do not know. I also gave no orders.
MR. DODD: Well, now, let me put this proposition to you, and then perhaps you can give an explanation of it to the Tribunal. This document that I have just shown to you and these reports that you examined for Dr. Sauter were all found in Schirach’s files in a salt mine. Would you have any explanation for that?
HOEPKEN: No, I cannot explain that.
MR. DODD: They were found together. Would that mean anything to you, or would you have any explanation for it?
HOEPKEN: No, I have not. I can only explain that by saying that probably the Chief of the Reich Governor’s office or one of his officials who was in charge of these things gave the order to that effect, of course without my knowledge and without any order from me.
MR. DODD: Tell the Tribunal exactly what day you closed up your office in Vienna, or the last day that you were in this office.
HOEPKEN: It might have been the 3d or 4th of April.
MR. DODD: When was the city taken?
HOEPKEN: I read in the newspaper afterwards that the city finally fell into the hands of the Allies on 13 April.
MR. DODD: Did you all leave your office on the 3d or 4th of April? Did Von Schirach leave as well, and all the clerical staff, et cetera?
HOEPKEN: Schirach and I and his adjutant left the office on this day, or rather, Schirach had previously set up his office at his home and was working there.
MR. DODD: Had he taken any files from his office to his home?
HOEPKEN: Only what he needed immediately to carry on his business; that is, the matters which were being dealt with at the moment.
MR. DODD: Did you leave someone in charge of the files when you left there, you and Von Schirach on the 3d of April; and if you did, who was it that you left in charge?
HOEPKEN: I did not leave anyone to supervise. The file clerks did that of their own accord.
MR. DODD: I am trying to understand—and I think it would be helpful to the Tribunal—whether or not you just walked out of this office and left everything there, or whether just you and Von Schirach left and left other people there, or whether the place was in such chaos that nobody remained. I have not any accurate picture of it, and I think it is of some importance. You ought to be able to tell us. You left there with him. What was the situation on the 3d or 4th of April? The city was practically to be taken in another 10 days. It was under siege. There was much confusion. What were you doing about your files and all of your other papers in your office when you walked out of there that day? You certainly just did not walk out and not give some directions.
HOEPKEN: I believe that we are not clear about the character of the Central Bureau. The Central Bureau, of which I was in charge for the last few months, had no powers, no executive powers, but all of these things were done by the competent Reich Governor, that is, the Regierungspräsident, and he probably...
MR. DODD: I do not need any explanation of how your office was set up. I want to know if the papers were left there or not, or if anybody was left with them.
HOEPKEN: The papers, as far as I know, were left there, and the archivists were instructed to take care of them.
MR. DODD: Did you order any papers to be destroyed before you walked out that day, the 3d or 4th of April, anything at all?
HOEPKEN: I gave no orders to destroy anything in the Reich Governor’s Office; I had no authority to do that.
MR. DODD: Did anybody to your knowledge order anything destroyed, whether you did or not?
HOEPKEN: Whether such an order was given and who gave it, I do not know.
MR. DODD: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document you put to him?
MR. DODD: Number USA-865. It is Document 3877-PS, a teletype to Bormann from Von Schirach on 28 May 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to re-examine the witness, Dr. Sauter?
DR. SAUTER: Witness, I should like to go back to what the Prosecution just asked you.
The documents of the Reich Governor’s office apparently are supposed to have been found in a salt mine. Did you have any supervision over the documents of the Reich Governor’s office?
HOEPKEN: No, I had no supervision over these documents. I just explained that. For that reason, I could not give any order to remove them. I know that valuable objects, pictures, and so on, were removed, but much earlier.
DR. SAUTER: And the other employees of the Central Bureau, were they Viennese? Did they stay in the office, or what do you know about that?
HOEPKEN: Most of them were Viennese, of course, and probably remained behind. I shook hands and said goodbye to them, and then we separated. I also asked whether I could do anything for them, and then I left Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: I have no more questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
Perhaps we had better adjourn now.
[A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: With reference to the application on behalf of the Defendant Bormann the Tribunal allows witness Number 1, Miss Else Krüger.
The Tribunal allows witnesses Numbers 3 and 4, Dr. Klopfer and Helmuth Friedrich.
The Tribunal also allows the witness whose name I have got inserted instead of Number 2, Christians, I think it was.
With reference to the documents applied for, Numbers 1 to 7, the application is refused. But the Tribunal will consider any application for documents which the defendants’ counsel, who may be appointed to argue the general questions of law on behalf of all the defendants, may wish to have translated.
Document Number 11 may be translated.
Counsel for the Defendant Bormann may see the documents which are mentioned under Roman Number III in the application and counsel for the Defendant Bormann may also use the documents contained under heading “B.”
The final decision upon the admissibility of all these documents is, of course, a matter which will be decided at the time the documents are presented.
There is one other thing that I want to announce, and it is in answer to the application of Dr. Servatius on behalf of the Defendant Sauckel.
I am told that the witness Timm is in Nuremberg prison. The witness Biedemann is also in Nuremberg prison. The witness Hildebrandt will probably arrive in Nuremberg today. His whereabouts had been lost and he has only just been rediscovered. The witness Jäger is in the British zone, and the British secretary is trying through the military authorities to obtain his attendance; The witness Stothfang has not been located. There appears to be a mistake in the identity of the person who was reported to the General Secretary previously. The witness Mitschke has never been located, although every effort is now being made to locate him.
That is all.
DR. SAUTER: I ask permission to call a further witness, Fritz Wieshofer. I shall examine this witness only very briefly, because most points have already been clarified through the other witnesses.
[The witness Wieshofer took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name?
FRITZ WIESHOFER (Witness): Fritz Wieshofer.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat this oath after me: I swear by God—the Almighty and Omniscient—that I will speak the pure truth—and will withhold and add nothing.
[The witness repeated the oath.]
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
DR. SAUTER: Herr Wieshofer, how old are you?
WIESHOFER: 31 years old.
DR. SAUTER: Married?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Children?
WIESHOFER: One son.
DR. SAUTER: Were you a member of the Party?
WIESHOFER: I applied for membership in 1938.
DR. SAUTER: You only applied for membership?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Were you a member of the SS or the SA?
WIESHOFER: I was in the Waffen-SS.
DR. SAUTER: Since when?
WIESHOFER: Since June 1940.
DR. SAUTER: Are you Austrian by birth?
WIESHOFER: I am Austrian.
DR. SAUTER: When did you join the Reich Youth Leader’s Office?
WIESHOFER: I joined Herr Von Schirach on 3 October 1940.
DR. SAUTER: And what did you do before that?
WIESHOFER: Before that I had a temporary post in the Foreign Office.
DR. SAUTER: For how long?
WIESHOFER: Only from May until October 1940.
DR. SAUTER: And before that?
WIESHOFER: Before that I was employed in the Gauleiter’s office in Carinthia.
DR. SAUTER: Did you have anything to do with the Hitler Youth?
WIESHOFER: No.
DR. SAUTER: In October of 1940, then, you came to Vienna to join Von Schirach?
WIESHOFER: Yes, to Vienna.
DR. SAUTER: In what capacity did you go there?
WIESHOFER: I went there as Von Schirach’s adjutant.
DR. SAUTER: And what did your duties mostly consist of?
WIESHOFER: As adjutant I was responsible for the handling of the mail, engagements for conferences, seeing to it that files were presented on time at conferences, travel arrangements, and so on.
DR. SAUTER: Did you only work for Schirach in his capacity as Reich Governor, as Gauleiter, or did you act for him only as mayor?
WIESHOFER: I was adjutant for Herr Von Schirach in all his capacities.
DR. SAUTER: Did you also have access to the secret files?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, I shall only have a very few brief questions to put to you. First of all, I am interested in this: Who was responsible for the forced evacuation of Jews from Vienna?
WIESHOFER: The forced evacuation of Jews from Vienna, as far as I know, was handled by the RSHA. The representative in Vienna was a certain Dr. Brunner, an Obersturmführer in the SS.
DR. SAUTER: Did you often visit Dr. Brunner officially in connection with the forced evacuation of Jews, and for what reason?
WIESHOFER: In some cases, Jews who were affected by this forced evacuation made written applications to Von Schirach to be left out of the transport. In such cases, Von Schirach, through the Chief of his Central Bureau, took the matter up with Dr. Brunner’s office and asked that the request of the applicant be granted. I would say that generally this was done by the Chief of the Central Bureau. I remember two cases where I myself received instructions to intervene with Dr. Brunner, not by writing or telephoning, but by going to see him personally.
DR. SAUTER: And what did this SS Sturmführer Dr. Brunner tell you about what was actually going to happen to the Jews when they were taken away from Vienna?
WIESHOFER: Dr. Brunner only told me, on the occasion of one of these interventions, that the action of resettling the Jews would be a resettlement from the district of Vienna into the zone of the former Government General. He also told me in what way this was being carried out. For instance he said that women and small children would travel in second-class carriages; that sufficient rations for the journey and milk for small children would be provided. He also told me that these resettled persons, upon arrival at their destination, insofar as they were capable of working, would immediately be put to work. First of all, they would be put into assembly camps, but that as soon as accommodation was available, they would be given homes, et cetera. He also told me that because of the numerous interventions by Herr Von Schirach his work had been made very difficult.
DR. SAUTER: Did you, or have you—I will put my next question this way: Did you ever see an order in which Gauleiter were forbidden to intervene in any way on behalf of Jews, and did you discuss that order with Von Schirach?
WIESHOFER: I recollect a written order which we received either at the end of 1940 or at the beginning of 1941. It stated that “There are reasons which make it necessary once more to point out,” et cetera. It obviously was a repetition of an order which had already been given. The purport of the order was that because of certain reasons, Gauleiter were prohibited from intervening on behalf of Jews in the future.
DR. SAUTER: Did you talk about that with Schirach?
WIESHOFER: I talked to Herr Von Schirach about it.
DR. SAUTER: What did he say?
WIESHOFER: As far as I can recollect, Von Schirach wrote on the order “To be filed.” He did not say anything more about it.
DR. SAUTER: I have another question, Witness. The Defendant Von Schirach was once in the concentration camp at Mauthausen. Can you tell us when that was?
WIESHOFER: I cannot tell you that exactly. All I can say on that subject is that when I came back from the front—and this was either in the autumn of 1942 or in June 1943—the adjutant who was on duty at the time told me that he had accompanied Herr Von Schirach to a concentration camp, Mauthausen Camp. Some time afterwards—it must have been when I came back from the front the second time, at the end of 1943—Herr Von Schirach also told me that he had been to Mauthausen. I only recollect that he said that he had heard a symphony concert there.
DR. SAUTER: Well, we are not interested in that; we have heard that. I am only interested in one thing: Did he visit Mauthausen or another concentration camp again later on? Can you give us reliable information on that or not?
WIESHOFER: I can give you reliable information on that. That is quite out of the question, because from November 1943 until the collapse I was continuously on duty and I knew where Von Schirach was, day and night.
DR. SAUTER: Did he go to Mauthausen again in 1944?
WIESHOFER: No, certainly not, that is out of the question.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you remember that toward the end of the war there were orders coming from some source or other stating that enemy airmen who had been forced to land were no longer to be protected. Do you know of that?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: That somewhere such orders were issued?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: What was the attitude of Defendant Von Schirach regarding such orders, and how do you know about it?
WIESHOFER: I talked about these orders with Herr Von Schirach. Von Schirach was always against the idea contained in the order, and he always said that these airmen, too, should be treated as prisoners of war. Once he said: “If we do not do that, then there is the danger that our enemies, too, will treat their prisoners, that is Germans, in the same manner.”
DR. SAUTER: Do you yourself know of cases where Defendant Von Schirach actually intervened on behalf of enemy airmen in that way?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Will you please tell us about it?
WIESHOFER: During one of the last air attacks on Vienna, in March 1945, an American plane was shot down and crashed near the headquarters of the Gau command post. That command post was on a wooded hill in Vienna to which part of the population used to go during air attacks. Von Schirach was watching from a 32-meter high iron structure on which he would always stand during air attacks, and he observed that a member of the American crew bailed out of the aircraft. He immediately ordered the commander in charge of this command post to drive to the place of the landing so as to protect the American soldier against the crowd and bring him to safety. The American soldier was brought to the command post and after the air attack he was handed over to the Air Force Command XVII as a prisoner of war.
DR. SAUTER: When did you leave Vienna?
WIESHOFER: I left Vienna with Herr Von Schirach on 13 April 1945.
DR. SAUTER: On 13 April together with the Defendant Von Schirach?
WIESHOFER: Together with Herr Von Schirach.
DR. SAUTER: Now, this is the last question I have to put to you: Witness, have you ever heard from Schirach’s lips anything to the effect that Vienna was to be held “to the last man” at all costs, or that destruction should be carried out in Vienna?
WIESHOFER: I have never heard him say either the one or the other.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have no further questions to put this witness.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, do you know the Prater in Vienna?
WIESHOFER: Yes, of course, I am Viennese.
DR. SERVATIUS: What sort of an institution is that?
WIESHOFER: The Prater is, or at least was, a pleasure park.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was it closed during the war?
WIESHOFER: The Prater was not closed during the war.
DR. SERVATIUS: What sort of people used to go there?
WIESHOFER: During the war you mean?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
WIESHOFER: Workers, employees, civil servants, that is the Viennese, the whole of Vienna.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you also see foreign workers there?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: A great many or just a few?
WIESHOFER: The situation in Vienna was such that we used to say that if you wanted to go to the Prater then you would have to be able to speak French and Russian, because with Viennese alone you could not get along. The Prater was overcrowded with foreign workers.
DR. SERVATIUS: How were these foreigners dressed, badly or well?
WIESHOFER: These foreigners were well dressed, so that you could not distinguish them from the population. Only when they talked could you recognize that they were foreigners.
DR. SERVATIUS: How did they look otherwise? As regards food, did they look starved?
WIESHOFER: As far as I myself could see, the workers looked perfectly well fed.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did the people have money?
WIESHOFER: They had lots of money. It was known that the “black market” in Vienna was almost entirely dominated by foreign workers.
DR. SERVATIUS: Could foreigners be seen only in the Prater or were they to be seen everywhere in the town?
WIESHOFER: Not only in the Prater, but also in the rest of the town, in cafés, of which there are so many in Vienna, in restaurants, and in hotels.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no further questions.
MR. DODD: Whom, besides the Defendant Von Schirach, do you know of these defendants? And by “know” I mean know personally, or have some acquaintanceship with the person, or had something to do with the person?
WIESHOFER: Personally, I only know Herr Funk.
MR. DODD: Do you know Sauckel?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: Well, who else?
WIESHOFER: I know Herr Seyss-Inquart, but I did not have any personal dealings with him. I was the adjutant of Von Schirach.
MR. DODD: How do you know Funk?
WIESHOFER: I was invited by Herr Funk a few times. Officially, as adjutant of Herr Von Schirach, I had some dealings with him, and apart from that, he invited me several times privately.
MR. DODD: Were you in the SS at that time, when you were invited by Funk?
WIESHOFER: At that time I was in the Waffen-SS as an officer.
MR. DODD: By the way, when did you first join the SS?
WIESHOFER: I joined the Waffen-SS on 26 June 1940.
MR. DODD: Were you in any other branch of the SS besides the Waffen-SS?
WIESHOFER: I was also in the General SS.
MR. DODD: When did you join the General SS?
WIESHOFER: In June or July 1939.
MR. DODD: So you were actually in the SS from as far back as 1939?
WIESHOFER: In the General SS; yes.
MR. DODD: Now, you also became an SS Obersturmführer at one time, did you not?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: When was that?
WIESHOFER: I became Obersturmführer about 21 June 1944.
MR. DODD: When did you join the SA?
WIESHOFER: I joined the SA on 9 May 1932.
MR. DODD: Did you know the Strasshof Camp, S-t-r-a-s-s-h-o-f?
WIESHOFER: This is the first time I have heard that name.
MR. DODD: Well, it may have been mispronounced. It was a camp located outside Vienna.
WIESHOFER: I do not know which camp you mean. I understood Strasshof. I do not know of any such camp.
MR. DODD: Yes, something like that. You never heard of that camp?
WIESHOFER: Never.
MR. DODD: And you were in Vienna from what year?—19...?
WIESHOFER: I was born in Vienna.
MR. DODD: Well, I know you were, but I am talking about your service with the Defendant Schirach. You were there with him for how long?
WIESHOFER: From the beginning of October 1940.
MR. DODD: And you never heard of Strasshof?
WIESHOFER: No.
MR. DODD: Did you have much to do with the files of this Defendant Von Schirach?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: What would you say you had to do with them? What was your responsibility?
WIESHOFER: I merely had to see to it that files were presented in good time for the conference, and that after they had been used they were returned to the Central Bureau.
MR. DODD: Where would you go to get a file for Von Schirach that had to do with the Reich Defense Commission for that district or that defense district? Where would you go to get a file that had to do with matters concerning the Reich Defense Commission? Now, let us assume a situation—let me make it clear to you. Say that Von Schirach tells you he wants a file about a certain matter that has to do with the Reich Defense Commission. You had to have it on his desk by a certain hour and see that it was there, as you say. Tell the Tribunal just what you would do, where you would go, who you would talk to, and how you would get that for him.
WIESHOFER: That would be simple for me. I would apply to the Chief of the Central Bureau, knowing that he would probably have to go to the Regierungspräsident to obtain that file. That is what I assume. I myself would only have gone to the Central Bureau.
MR. DODD: You had a central filing place, did you not, for all of your files, whether they were under the Reich Defense Commission or the Gauleiter or the civil government of Vienna; is that not so? They were all kept in one place?
WIESHOFER: They were not all together in one place; only a part of the files were in the Central Bureau. I cannot tell you which part because I have never had anything to do with that.
MR. DODD: You left Vienna on 13 April, you say, with Von Schirach?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: I suppose, as his adjutant, you had to make considerable preparations for leaving for some days previously, did you not?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: What did you pack up? What did you take with you?
WIESHOFER: We did not take anything with us from Vienna. Von Schirach went by car, and the gentlemen on his staff went in two or three other cars. Nothing else was taken along from Vienna.
MR. DODD: Well, what did you do in the office; how did you leave it?
WIESHOFER: We had not used the office since, I think, the spring or early summer of 1944, because the “Ballhausplatz,” that is, the office of the Reich Governor, had a direct hit and Von Schirach could no longer work there. He was working in his apartment.
MR. DODD: In his apartment? And did he have all his files in his apartment or somewhere near at hand?
WIESHOFER: He had no files whatever in his apartment. They remained in the office, in that part of the Reich Governor’s building which was still being used and in which one could still work.
MR. DODD: Were any files taken out of the filing department of the Reich Governor’s Office when you left Vienna, or before you left Vienna?
WIESHOFER: I do not know anything about that. I know that an order existed, both for the State Administration as well as for the Party, that files must be destroyed when the enemy approached. Whether that was done or what actually happened to the files, I do not know.
MR. DODD: Who got that order?
WIESHOFER: The order, as far as the Party channels were concerned, went to the deputy Gauleiter, and as far as the State Administration was concerned, to the Regierungspräsident.
MR. DODD: Did you also receive an order to start moving your files to places of safety some time in the spring of 1945 or even the late winter of 1944?
WIESHOFER: I have no recollection of such an order.
MR. DODD: Do you know that some 250 folders of your files were moved to a salt mine outside Vienna? Do you know anything about that?
WIESHOFER: No, I hear that for the first time.
MR. DODD: Do you know that there is such a mine near Vienna? You have lived there quite a while, I gather.
WIESHOFER: No. It is not near Vienna—if I may be permitted to put this matter right—but near Salzburg; we never lived there. I only know that this mine exists.
MR. DODD: How far is it from Vienna?
WIESHOFER: Approximately 350 kilometers.
MR. DODD: You do not know anything about any files being taken there. You are sure about that, are you?
WIESHOFER: I am absolutely certain; I do not know anything about that.
MR. DODD: I have just one other question to ask. I suppose you knew the defendant pretty well. He is a little older than you, but you had worked for him for some time. Is that not so?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: Why did you not join the Army instead of the SS when you wanted to do something for your country?
WIESHOFER: When I was called up, the Waffen-SS was considered the elite unit and I preferred to serve in such a guards unit, if I may say so, than in the general Armed Forces.
MR. DODD: Was it partly due to the fact that you had been in the General SS since 1939?
WIESHOFER: No. That had nothing to do with it. Many members of the General SS went to the Forces.
MR. DODD: Did you talk this matter over with your superior, the Youth Leader Von Schirach, before you joined the SS in 1939, and the Waffen-SS later on?
WIESHOFER: No. Might I remind you that I did not join Von Schirach until October 1940, whereas I joined the Waffen-SS on 26 June 1940.
MR. DODD: Yes, but you were, I suppose, a young man and you were in touch with the Reich Youth organization in 1939 when you joined the General SS. Is that not a fact? Were you not a part of the Youth organization in 1939?
WIESHOFER: No. I was not taken into the Youth Officers Corps until April 1944 when I became Bannführer. Before that I had nothing to do with it.
MR. DODD: Well, I do not think you understand me. It is not too important, but how old were you in 1939? You were 24, approximately, were you not?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
MR. DODD: And were you not then in some way affiliated with the Hitler Youth or the Youth organization in Germany, either as a member, or having something to do with it?
WIESHOFER: No. Neither as a member nor in any other way. Of course I knew Youth Leaders in Carinthia, yes.
MR. DODD: You were quite a speech maker for the Party, were you not, during your lifetime?
WIESHOFER: I spoke at several meetings in Carinthia between April 1938 and May 1940.
MR. DODD: At about how many meetings would you say you spoke in that period of 2 years?
WIESHOFER: During that time I spoke at about 80 meetings.
MR. DODD: Before an average of about, say, 3,000 persons per meeting?
WIESHOFER: I also spoke in very small villages. I would say that the average attendance would be about 200.
MR. DODD: That is all I have.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you want to re-examine?
DR. THOMA: What were the subjects you talked about at these meetings?
WIESHOFER: Our subject was given to us by the Reich Propaganda Ministry. The meetings were conducted in such a way that every speaker was able to talk on general matters. For instance the subject might have been “With the Führer to Final Victory,” or “Why Welfare for the Nation?” or “Why Winter Relief?” Such subjects were always given.
DR. THOMA: Did you spread Rosenberg’s Myth of the 20th Century?
WIESHOFER: No.
DR. THOMA: Did you speak about such subjects?
WIESHOFER: Never; in view of my education I would not have been in a position to do so.
DR. THOMA: Have you ever read this Myth?
WIESHOFER: I have not read the Myth.
DR. THOMA: Did you speak to youth at these meetings?
WIESHOFER: I did not speak to youth—that is, not particularly to youth.
DR. THOMA: Thank you.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I do not wish to put any questions to the witness; thank you very much.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Witness, did Schirach have any authority to intervene in case of Jews who were being deported from Vienna?
WIESHOFER: He had no authority to do so, but he did it.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): How many times did he intervene?
WIESHOFER: I cannot recollect a single case where Von Schirach did not intervene when he received a petition.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): I did not ask that; I asked how many times he intervened.
WIESHOFER: I cannot give you any figure without being inaccurate. It is difficult to say.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did he intervene many times, or a few?
WIESHOFER: No. He intervened often.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did you see the order to the Police not to protect aviators? You said it was in writing, did you not?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Who signed it?
WIESHOFER: The order was signed by Bormann.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And was it distributed to the Police in Vienna?
WIESHOFER: By the Police? If I have understood you rightly, you were talking about the order that Gauleiter must not intervene on behalf of Jews.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): No. This was the order about not protecting aviators who had crashed. You said you saw that order, did you not?
WIESHOFER: I did see the order, yes. I can no longer remember whom it came from and to whom it was addressed. It was merely sent to our office for our information. We were not called upon to take any action.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Do you not know whether or not the Police had a copy of it?
WIESHOFER: Please, will you be good enough to repeat the question?
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Do you know whether or not the Police in Vienna had copies of the order?
WIESHOFER: That I do not know.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did you ever know Himmler?
WIESHOFER: I have seen him.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did he give you any instructions?
WIESHOFER: No.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did you get any instructions from the SS?
WIESHOFER: In which way do you mean?
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Any instructions from the SS directly when you were in Von Schirach’s office?
WIESHOFER: No.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): None at all?
WIESHOFER: None at all. I cannot recollect any.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): I think you said once that Schirach sent a command to save American aviators from the crowd, did you not? Do you not understand?
WIESHOFER: Yes, I understand, and I did say that.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And what other efforts did Von Schirach make to protect aviators from the crowd? Did he make any other efforts?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did he issue any orders to the Police or take it up with the Police?
WIESHOFER: Von Schirach’s opinion was known. In the circles...
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): I did not ask you the opinion. Did he issue any orders to the Police or talk to the Police?
WIESHOFER: I have no recollection of that.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Well, you would know if he had, would you not?
WIESHOFER: If I had been present when he gave the orders then I would know it, but it is possible that he talked when I was not there.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did you say you had access to the secret files?
WIESHOFER: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): What was kept in the secret files?
WIESHOFER: I did not understand the question.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): I asked you what was kept, what was put in the secret files, what sort of papers?
WIESHOFER: There were secret files which came from the Supreme Party Headquarters, secret files which came from the Minister of the Interior; there were things which made one wonder why they were called “secret.” But as far as details of these files are concerned, I cannot, of course, today remember them.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And I suppose any documents, any reports, that were marked “secret” would be put in those secret files, would they not?
WIESHOFER: Reports from us to higher departments, or do you mean from the top downwards?
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Reports coming in to you.
WIESHOFER: They would then have been filed in the secret archives.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And SS secret reports would go in the secret files, would they not?
WIESHOFER: SS reports did not come to us, because we were not a service department of the SS.
THE PRESIDENT: If you have no questions yourself, Dr. Sauter, then the witness may retire.
DR. SAUTER: No.
[The witness Wieshofer left the stand.]
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in Schirach’s document book there are still a few documents which, up to now, have not been expressly presented; but I believe it is not necessary to read these documents to you. To save time, I should like, if I may, to refer to the documents and ask you to take judicial notice of them; for instance, of the affidavit of Frau Hoepken, which is incorporated in the document book under Number 3 and which has already been submitted somewhere else.
There is only one document, Mr. President, about which I want to give a very brief explanation. In the Schirach document book, under Number 118(a), there is the farewell letter of the explorer Dr. Colin Ross. With reference to this Dr. Colin Ross, when the documents were dealt with, the Prosecutor said that the body of Dr. Ross had not been discovered. My first reaction was of course surprise, and I made inquiries as to what actually had been done with these bodies and I discovered that in fact on 30 April 1945, the day before the arrival of American troops, the bodies of Dr. Colin Ross and his wife were found in the house of Defendant Von Schirach at Urfeld, on Lake Walchen. They had both first taken poison and then, to be quite sure, Dr. Ross shot his wife and then himself. German soldiers who were still at Urfeld on Lake Walchen as patients at the time then buried the bodies quite close to the house of the Defendant Von Schirach.
In the autumn the American Governor ordered that the bodies were to be transferred to the cemetery, but eventually he rescinded that order and permitted the bodies to remain where they had originally been buried.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, can you indicate in what way you will submit this document has any relevance at all? We have read the document. It does not appear to have any striking relevance.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, we have submitted this document because it is to prove, or at least indicate, that the Defendant Von Schirach, together with this Dr. Colin Ross, continuously worked to maintain peace, and later on to limit the war. Therefore it is submitted only to show that the Defendant Von Schirach worked for peace.
THE PRESIDENT: The document does not mention Von Schirach or in any way indicate that he had worked for peace.
DR. SAUTER: But it says in the document, “We have done everything in our power to prevent this war, or...”
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the word “We” must mean the people who “leave this world by our own will,” namely Dr. Colin Ross and his wife. It does not refer to Von Schirach.
DR. SAUTER: We do not know that. Why should it not also refer to Von Schirach?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, because there is such a thing as grammar. The document begins “We leave this world by our own will.”
DR. SAUTER: As to that, Mr. President, may I remind you that this name, Dr. Colin Ross, has been mentioned very often during this trial in connection with the peace efforts of the Defendant Von Schirach, and that Dr. Colin Ross, together with his wife, was living in Schirach’s apartment when they committed suicide.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, very well, Dr. Sauter, if you wish to draw our attention to it, you may do so.
DR. SAUTER: Thank you. Mr. President, this letter was not really meant for the public; the original of the letter was left behind by Dr. Ross, and a number of carbon copies were sent to personal friends. In this way we found this letter of Dr. Colin Ross. I do not think there is anything else I have to say.
THE PRESIDENT: I have not said anything critical of the letter. If you want to read some sentences of it, read them; if you do not we will take judicial notice of it. As I tell you, we have already read this letter.
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I am not stopping your reading a sentence of it, if you want to read a sentence of it.
DR. SAUTER: It is of course not necessary, Mr. President, if you have taken cognizance of it. I have nothing else to say, and at this point I can end my case for the Defendant Von Schirach.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, have you offered in evidence all the documents which are in these books?
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Then they will be numbered with the numbers which are in the books.
DR. SAUTER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, then we will take judicial notice of them all.
MR. DODD: Well, Mr. President, there is one here which the Tribunal expressly ruled on—the affidavit of Uiberreither. The Defendant Von Schirach was told he would have to present Uiberreither if he were to use this affidavit. He has not been presented here and now the affidavit is being offered. We expressly asked that he be called here if this affidavit was to be submitted to the Tribunal.
DR. SAUTER: I am not making any reference to Uiberreither’s affidavit, and I will forego calling the witness Uiberreither.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Dr. Sauter.
MR. DODD: Then the affidavit is not offered?
THE PRESIDENT: No, it is not being offered.
MR. DODD: That is Page 135.
THE PRESIDENT: Then it will not be admitted, and we will adjourn now.