Afternoon Session
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will not sit in open session Saturday next, nor will it sit in open session on any Saturday in the future unless it gives notice that it is going to do so.
Yes, Dr. Thoma?
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, yesterday I mentioned an affidavit of Dr. Heinz Oeppert, Reichshauptstellenleiter. I have now received this affidavit, and I have also already conferred with Mr. Dodd about it.
I now beg the permission of the High Tribunal to submit this affidavit. Mr. Dodd has no objections to the submission of this affidavit.
May I read a very brief passage from this affidavit, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT: Can you tell us what the affidavit is about?
DR. THOMA: Yes, Mr. President. This Dr. Oeppert had the Office of Ideological Enlightenment in the office of the Führer’s deputy for the supervision of the entire ideological and intellectual framing of the Party. Concerning this activity and this office he testified that it involved almost exclusively a reporting and registration of events in this sphere.
Any active interference in the church policy of the State or the Party would not have been possible even if they had wished it, for this office had no executive facilities of any kind. There were constantly very intense differences with the State and Party organizations which participated in this sphere of activity, that is, between the Propaganda Ministry and the Church and the SD and Party Chancellery. The suppression of certain ideological groups and sects as well as the measures taken against individual clergymen, as far as I know, were taken by the SD or the Gestapo without the knowledge or authority of this office.
I am asking the High Tribunal to take judicial notice of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. THOMA: Exhibit Number Rosenberg-51.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Fritz. On behalf of Fritzsche—is anyone representing Dr. Fritz?
DR. ALFRED SCHILF (Counsel for Defendant Fritzsche): Dr. Schilf for Dr. Fritz, who is absent, representing the Defendant Fritzsche.
Mr. President, Dr. Fritz applied in writing last Monday concerning two affidavits which are still outstanding, one an affidavit by the journalist—the English journalist, Clifton Delmar—and the other an affidavit by His Excellency Feldscher, then Minister of the protective power in Berlin, now in Berne. Neither of these affidavits has arrived yet, and we are asking the High Tribunal if we may submit and be allowed these documents later.
I have no further comments. No other applications have been made.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you—I did not hear the name of the second one. Was it Feldscher?
DR. SCHILF: Excellency Feldscher, Minister of the protective power. He is now at Berne in Switzerland.
THE PRESIDENT: Have these affidavits been placed before the Prosecution?
DR. SCHILF: No, Mr. President, they are not yet available. They have not arrived yet.
THE PRESIDENT: I see. Are they affidavits or interrogatories?
DR. SCHILF: They are two interrogatories, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Interrogatories, I see. Well then, when the interrogatories come back answered, they can be shown to the Prosecution if they want to put in cross-interrogatories; and then they can be translated and submitted to the Tribunal.
Dr. Schilf, there was an application—I am not sure whether it was in writing or whether it was only oral—with reference to Schörner and Voss, and one other man, whose statements were used in cross-examination by the Prosecution. I think they were affidavits, I am not sure; and there was an oral application, I think, to cross-examine those persons. Do you want that to be done, or have you withdrawn that?
DR. SCHILF: Mr. President, that application has not been withdrawn, but it was put in only as an auxiliary application, to have effect only if the interrogation notes submitted by the Russian Prosecution—it seems to me that these interrogation notes cannot be considered as affidavits, but only interrogation records of a police character.
And Dr. Fritz made application to the effect that if these three documents were to be used as documents of evidence, we cannot waive the cross-examination. These three documents were used in the examination of the Defendant Fritzsche only in part, and only short passages were submitted to the defendant in his examination. Every detail there he has...
THE PRESIDENT: What you were saying is that in case the Prosecution do not want to use the whole of these documents, but only the parts which were put to the Defendant Fritzsche in the course of cross-examination, then you do not need to have those persons, Voss and Schörner, called for cross-examination; but if the Prosecution wish to put in the whole document, then you want to cross-examine them. Is that right?
DR. SCHILF: Mr. President, that is correct.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you meaning that you are asking the Tribunal to strike out the passages in the Defendant Fritzsche’s evidence which deal with these statements or are you merely meaning that if the Prosecution wish to use, not only the parts which they have put to the defendant in cross-examination but other parts of the document, that in that event you would like to cross-examine the deponents Voss and Schörner?
DR. SCHILF: Mr. President, we only want the cross-examination to take place in case the Court should regard the three interrogation records, as a whole, as documentary evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, then you do mean what I first of all put to you.
Well, perhaps the Prosecution, General Rudenko, would tell us whether he is wanting to put in the whole document or whether he has put enough of it in.
GEN. RUDENKO: Mr. President, as I have already stated to the Tribunal, when these written statements were submitted, the records of the interrogations were written down in agreement with the rules of procedure which is in existence in the Soviet Union. The Prosecution will only use those parts which were read here before the Tribunal and on which the Defendant Fritzsche was cross-examined.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, then it is not necessary to have those witnesses brought here for cross-examination. Very well.
DR. SCHILF: Yes, indeed, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Then that brings the Tribunal to the end of the evidence for the Defense, with the exception of two witnesses who are to be—who are here and to be called on behalf of the Defendant Bormann.
DR. FLÄCHSNER: Mr. President, on behalf of the Defendant Speer may I submit in addition a document which has already been translated and is known to the Prosecution. This is the Führer protocol of 3 January 1943. This shall have the Document Number Speer-35. I had already listed it as Exhibit Number 35 in the index of the documents submitted by me which I gave the Court. Only at that time it had not yet been translated. I should like to submit it now.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly.
What I wanted to say was that that concludes the whole of the evidence on behalf of the defendants with the exception of interrogatories which have already been granted, the answers to which have not yet been received. Of course, those interrogatories, subject to their being admissible, will be admitted when the answers are received and that applies also to anything in the shape of an affidavit which has been allowed by the Tribunal; but otherwise the evidence for the defendants is now closed with the exception of Dr. Bergold.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I have another question regarding the appearance for testimony of the witness Walkenhorst. In case he is not called as a witness, I have an affidavit at my disposal, which I have received; and I assume that I may submit this in case this witness is not examined here before the Court. It deals with a very brief question, namely, the telephone conversation which Sauckel had regarding the evacuation of the Buchenwald Concentration Camp. Walkenhorst happened to be the man at the other end of the wire. I have an affidavit on this one question.
Of course, if the witness is being questioned here in Court I shall ask him; but in case he is not examined I request that this be held open.
THE PRESIDENT: You are speaking of Walkenhorst?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, the witness Walkenhorst.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he is just going to be examined now.
DR. SERVATIUS: I hope so, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: But—I believe he is here.
I have before me a list of supplementary applications but I think that they have all been dealt with in the discussion which we have had during the last 2 days. And if there is any other matter which the defendants’ counsel wish to raise they should raise it now.
Well then, I take it then, that as I said, the evidence for the Defense is now concluded, subject to the reception of documents which I may describe as outstanding, either interrogatories or affidavits.
DR. MARX: Mr. President, may I be permitted, please, to introduce three more documents with the permission of the Tribunal. They concern the following questions:
When considering what influence the paper published by Streicher exercised on the German population, it is of decisive importance to know how the circulation of this paper developed and to what circumstances the fact is to be attributed that, within a certain period of time, there was a marked increase in its circulation.
I set myself the task of determining from the mastheads of the weekly paper, Der Stürmer, how its circulation developed.
THE PRESIDENT: But—we have already dealt with this application. We have had the application before us and we have considered it and we have refused it.
DR. MARX: Yes, I beg your pardon, Mr. President; it concerns the following:
Quite by accident, when looking at various issues of this newspaper, I ascertained that in the year 1935 a marked jump in circulation took place and the Defense would like to prove that this increase is not to be traced to an increased demand by the German people but rather to the fact that high Party offices exercised their influence and, together with a new publishing management, brought about a threefold increase. Naturally, it is of essential significance whether a threefold increase results from a demand by the people or whether, as in this case, the German Labor Front intervened in the person of Dr. Ley, and a special publicity number was published, which was then circulated by Dr. Ley’s efforts and by using the huge machinery of the German Labor Front.
That is something I want to prove and I am of the opinion that it is of importance to the Defense.
I have three documents along these lines, Mr. President; and with the permission of the Tribunal I shall read a directive, and I ask that I be allowed to introduce it as evidence. From this it appears that Dr. Ley as the leader of the German Labor Front, gave the order to all the offices of the German Labor Front to circulate this special edition and to see to it that it was widely circulated in the factories, and so forth. For, indeed, it is one of the essential points of the Indictment that the German people were influenced against the Jews by Der Stürmer and by the Defendant Streicher, and thereby later made ripe to support the measures in the East, even to the extent of mass extermination.
Therefore, I ask that this evidence be admitted and that it be declared relevant.
THE PRESIDENT: You said you have got three documents. The first one is a directive from Ley?
DR. MARX: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. What are the other two?
DR. MARX: One is an excerpt from the newspaper Der Stürmer in May 1935, Number 18, which reads as follows:
“Bernhardt, who fled from Berlin to France, writes in the Pariser Tageblatt (Paris, 29 March 1935) under the heading, ‘Stürmer Circulation Increases Threefold,’ as follows:
“ ‘The support which the pornographer Streicher received from the highest offices of the Reich in circulating his Stürmer helped him to triple his circulation within less than a year...’ ”
THE PRESIDENT: Wait. You have already told us that the circulation of the Stürmer went up threefold. It is not necessary to repeat it all again. We only want to know what the documents are. The first one is a directive of Ley. The second one is an issue of Der Stürmer. What is the third one?
DR. MARX: And the third—the third is a summary of the circulation from January 1935 until the middle of October 1935; and from this it appears that, within the period of 1 year, the circulation increased from 113,800 to 486,000. Anybody will probably...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that is quite sufficient. We do not want to know any more about it.
DR. MARX: Very well, Mr. President. Then, may I be permitted...
COL. PHILLIMORE: My Lord, I—it is entirely in the hands of the Tribunal, but we should see no objection from the Prosecution’s point of view to admitting these documents. The first would appear to directly link the Defendant Streicher with another of the conspirators. It would be a most important document.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Dr. Marx. Then the three documents will be admitted.
DR. MARX: I should like to submit the documents under Exhibit Numbers 19, 20, and 21.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. MARX: I beg your pardon, Mr. President. May I make one more remark? Why the matter came about now and was so delayed is that I personally did not know anything about it before. It was only by accident that I learned this from Der Stürmer’s masthead. It was previously unknown to me, and I considered it—considered it from my point of view as pertinent evidence. I ask to be excused for not submitting it before now.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I naturally do not wish to submit any further evidence; but I should like to ask you to clarify a question, a question of law.
At this time interrogations are going on constantly in the commissions in order to gather evidence with regard to the organizations. Witnesses are being interrogated there whom we here do not know, and documents are being submitted which we have not yet seen. It will be several weeks before we know the results of this evidence about the organizations.
Now we defense attorneys, who are working here, are thinking of the following case: It could happen, for instance, that one of these defendants could be incriminated by some new testimony about the organizations, or that documents might be submitted which we, as Defense Counsel for these defendants, would absolutely have to take into consideration in our pleas, or to which we would have to offer evidence in rebuttal.
Now we are agreed that the evidence here should be concluded, but we would naturally like to reserve the right in such cases to learn the results of the hearings for the organizations.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you will find, when you look carefully at the order which the Tribunal made, that this matter was provided for and that, if there is any matter in the course of the hearing of the case against the organizations which in any way materially or directly affects any of the individual defendants, the Tribunal, of course, has discretion to hear counsel for that defendant upon the matter; and I think that is specifically dealt with in the order that we have made.
DR. SAUTER: This order is known to us, of course, Mr. President; but we just wanted to be clear on this point, that this order will still remain in force, even if the presentation of evidence here is concluded.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly.
Do the Prosecution wish to make any application to the Tribunal?
COL. PHILLIMORE: I have eight documents to put in. My Lord, they are documents which it is intended to refer to in the final speech; and accordingly I would not propose to do more than just to indicate their nature to the Tribunal and put them in very quickly. I have a list of them which I will hand up first.
THE PRESIDENT: Are they documents which have not yet been offered in evidence? It may be convenient to see their nature.
COL. PHILLIMORE: Yes, My Lord; I am offering them in rebuttal.
THE PRESIDENT: You have a list here?
COL. PHILLIMORE: Yes, My Lord, the first document is...
THE PRESIDENT: Have they been communicated to the defendants’ counsel?
COL. PHILLIMORE: No, My Lord; I have copies here.
The first document, 1519-PS, contains orders for the treatment of Soviet prisoners of war. My Lord, that is not strictly offered in rebuttal; but the Tribunal has had before it a document, EC-338, which was put in as Exhibit USSR-356. That document consisted of a commentary by Admiral Canaris on these orders, and Your Lordship may remember the document. Defendant Keitel had made certain notes on it on which he was cross-examined, the reference in the shorthand notes being Pages 7219 to 7223 (Volume X, Pages 622-625). My Lord, it seems appropriate that the actual orders should be before the Court and not merely the commentary.
My Lord, that will be GB-525, and the Tribunal will see it consists of a covering letter from the Defendant Bormann to Gauleiter and Kreisleiter covering the OKW letter signed by General Reinecke, the head of the Prisoners of War Organization; and then there follow the actual regulations.
THE PRESIDENT: Has not this been in before?
COL. PHILLIMORE: My Lord, I am told not. What was put in was the commentary on this document, which was by Admiral Canaris. It was included—this document was included in the Keitel document book, but it was not formally put in.
THE PRESIDENT: I see. You mean it will be GB...
COL. PHILLIMORE: 525, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
COL. PHILLIMORE: My Lord, the second document, D-912, will be GB-526. This is a series of broadcasts from German stations between 6 September and 22 October 1939, monitored by the British Broadcasting Corporation and dealing with the Athenia.
My Lord, I offer that document in view of the Defendant Raeder’s evidence. The Tribunal will remember that, according to him, the article on the 23 October in the Völkischer Beobachter came as a complete surprise. The reference in the shorthand notes is 9832, Page 9832 (Volume XIV, Page 80).
My Lord, it also arises out of the question, I think, put to the Tribunal—put by the Tribunal to the Defendant Fritzsche; and it confirms his evidence that broadcasts blaming Mr. Winston Churchill for being responsible for the sinking of the Athenia started at the early part of September and went right on through the month. Actually, these broadcasts, the Tribunal will see—the first on 6 September. I might read perhaps one sentence in the second line:
“The German press refutes the accusations of the British press that the German submarine had sunk the Athenia. Churchill, as one of his first actions, ordered the Athenia to be sunk in order to stir up anti-German feeling in the U.S.A.”
Well, then there are similar broadcasts from other stations on that day, again on the 7th, the 11th, the 25th. I have not got the one on the 27th, put in by General Rudenko; but there is one by the Defendant Fritzsche on 1 October, and so on, culminating with a broadcast by Goebbels on the 22d, the day before the article appeared. My Lord, that will be GB-526.
The next document, 3881-PS, is an extract from the proceedings before the Peoples’ Court on 7 and 8 August 1944, when seven defendants were tried for the attempt on Hitler’s life. My Lord, I am only putting in a translated extract, but the photostat is in fact complete. I should have said that what is before the Tribunal is only a translation of certain extracts, but the exhibit contains the complete record of the proceedings. My Lord, I...
THE PRESIDENT: Unless we have it translated, we shall not be able to have it in evidence.
COL. PHILLIMORE: My Lord, we do not intend to refer to more than the translated extracts.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
COL. PHILLIMORE: I only said that for the benefit of Defense Counsel, who may wish to look elsewhere.
My Lord, I put that in in view of the Defendant Jodl’s evidence that it was only because British generals obeyed orders that the German generals were now being tried. That is Page 11043 of the shorthand notes (Volume XV, Page 383). And the passages—the nature of the passages is that the president of the Peoples’ Court is refusing to accept the defense of superior orders put forward by the defendants. My Lord, that will be GB-527.
My Lord, the next document is D-181, which I offer as Exhibit GB-528. It is a letter by a Gauleiter to Gauamtsleiter, Gauinspektor, and Kreisleiter on the subject of the law of hereditary health and sterilization on the ground of imbecility. It is an important document in connection with the Defendant Frick, and I put it in in view of the statements made on his behalf by his counsel at Page 8296 (Volume XII, Page 162) of the shorthand notes, My Lord, when he said in effect that Frick had no control over the political police and that Himmler’s subordination to him was purely nominal.
My Lord, there are a number of references in the letter to the fact that the decree—and indeed its administration—was the responsibility of the Defendant Frick.
My Lord, the next document is of a similar nature, and I attribute it to the same page of the shorthand notes. It is Document M-151, and I offer it as Exhibit GB-529. It consists of three letters on the subject of the murder of mental patients in institutions. The first is dated the 6th of September and addressed by the supervisor of a sanatorium at Stetten to the Reich Minister of Justice. It sets out the feeling of insecurity in the neighborhood of the sanatorium administered by its inspector, in view of the number of deaths which are occurring.
The second, dated the 10th, is a letter from the Minister of Justice acknowledging the complaint and saying that it has been passed to the Defendant Frick.
And the third, of the same date, is the Minister’s letter to his colleague passing the complaint to him.
My Lord, the next document is again on the same subject. It is Document M-152, and I offer it as Exhibit GB-530. It consists of four letters.
The first, dated the 19th of July 1940, is addressed to the Defendant Frick as Reich Minister of the Interior, by Bishop Wurm, the Provincial Bishop of the Württemberg Evangelical Provincial Church. My Lord, it again sets out the mass of complaints he is receiving and then goes on to deal with the wickedness of the practice which is apparently going on.
The second letter, dated the 23d of August, is a letter to the Minister of Justice referring to the letter sent to the Defendant Frick.
The third, of the 5th of September, is a letter to the Defendant Frick reminding him of the previous letter of the 19th of July to which no reply had been received.
And, on the 6th of September, the next letter is a parallel communication again to the Minister of Justice.
Finally, on the 11th of September, the last page of the document, there is a memorandum on the Minister of Justice’s file indicating that an official of the Ministry had informed the Bishop’s dean, presumably Dean Keppler, that the matter was entirely one for the Defendant Frick.
My Lord, the next document, D-455, which I offer as Exhibit GB-531, is a pamphlet prepared by the German. Military Government authorities in Belgium. It comes from the files of the German War Office, the OKW, and it is entitled, Belgium’s Contributions to Germany’s War Economy, and is dated the 1st of March 1942.
My Lord, I offer it in view of the general evidence that German occupation was benevolent, and that—the Tribunal has heard, again and again, the suggestion that they did a great deal of good to the countries they occupied. This document is a very graphic illustration of the falsity of that evidence out of the mouths of the Defense.
My Lord, if I might take the Tribunal very quickly through it, at Page 3 is a chart of the population figures in terms of employees, and it shows that more than half the working population was working for Germany. Of the 1,800,000 workers and employees in Belgium, 901,280 were employed with the German Armed Forces and in the German interests.
My Lord, at Page 4 is a comparison between Belgium, Holland, and France in terms of percentage of workers employed as slave labor.
My Lord, at Page 5 is a statement of the production figures for the Belgian contribution to Germany, in—I think it is the seventh line, it is summed up: “Output to the value of 1,200 million Reichsmark.”
Page 6—there is a comparison between the coal taken from Belgium and the same amount produced in the year in the Ruhr.
At Page 8 there is comparison of iron, with the total amount of iron used in the West Wall.
Page 9, cement; Page 10, textiles; Page 11, metals. There is a statement there which contains a sentence about the summing up of what had been taken out: “It was possible to achieve these results only by exhausting the last reserves of the country.”
At Page 12 there is a chart of how the metal collection has affected individuals. It is a comparison between Belgium, Holland, and France.
At Page 13 there is a statement about the contribution to traffic; and a chart on Page 14.
At Page 15 it appears that the contributions in money exceeded the total earning—earned income of the Belgian workers for the last year.
At Page 16 there are figures with regard to the quantity of gold taken for safekeeping in the Reichsbank.
Page 18 deals with shares, a comparison with the total share capital of I. G. Farben, the comparison being 700 million Reichsmark as against the share capital of I. G. Farben of 800 millions.
Then there is a statement with regard to rations, showing that Germany had imported food into Belgium but that, despite that, the rationing was the lowest of all western countries.
And finally, on the last page, there is an indication of the change in the Belgian rations by comparison between 1938 and under the benevolent rule of the German Military Government in 1941. My Lord, it speaks for itself.
My Lord, I—My Lord, the last document, D-524, is a similar pamphlet referring to France. It comes from the same source, and I offer it as Exhibit GB-532.
My Lord, owing to a breakdown in electric power, I have not been able to finish photostating the English copies, but I will hand them in, if I may, subsequently and for the moment I hand up German photostats.
My Lord, I offer it in view of the Defendant Sauckel’s evidence, at Page 10617 of the shorthand notes (Volume XV, Page 52), where he said that the total slave labor figure was not more than 5 millions. My Lord, at Pages 8 and 9 of this document, the Tribunal will see the slave labor position of Germany at the end of 1943, so that to this must be added slave labor drawn in during 1944. My Lord, it amounts to just under 7 millions, of which 1,462,000 were prisoners of war, so that the figure of slave labor at the date was slightly over 5 millions; that is, slave labor excluding prisoners of war was slightly over 5 millions, and to that, as I say, one must add the increase during 1944.
My Lord, on Page 8 are the figures and comparisons: Men, civilians, 3,631,000; prisoners of war, 1,462,000; women, 1,714,000. And then it is set out how that is divided by countries. And on Page 9 is merely an illustration in color.
My Lord, the rest of the pamphlet merely gives figures illustrative of what was taken from France, very similar to those in the case of Belgium. And I would not propose to take the Tribunal through it unless it is desired that I should do so.
My Lord, I think I gave that a number, Exhibit GB-532.
My Lord, that is all the documents that I have to offer. I understand my friend, Mr. Dodd, has some.
MR. JUSTICE ROBERT H. JACKSON (Chief of Counsel for the United States): May it please the Tribunal, at the time of the cross-examination of the Defendant Hermann Göring we confronted him with a document, numbered 3787-PS, It was received as Exhibit USA-782. It was the report of the second meeting of the Reich Defense Council. Göring acknowledged the authenticity of the minutes as presented to him in the German text. But the document at that time had not been translated, and consequently it was not possible to read into the record the many parts of that document which we considered important as bearing upon his credibility and testimony, and as bearing upon the denials of many other of the defendants that they knew of the planning of the war and that they knew—participated in it.
I would now like to read from the record part of this which we consider extremely important as rebuttal testimony received from several of the defendants.
On the face of it, it is a letter of transmittal dated the 10th day of July 1939, from the supreme command of the Armed Forces, on the subject, “Second Meeting of the Reich Defense Council.”
One hundred copies were prepared, and our copy is the 84th. It is labeled “most secret” and merely transmits in the name of the chief of the supreme command of the Armed Forces the enclosed document to following parties, among others. I shall name only the ones to which we have attached some importance: To the Party, the Führer’s Deputy, the first copy; to the Chief of the Reich Chancellery; to Ministerpräsident, Field Marshal Göring, the Reich Minister and Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force; to the Foreign Office; to the Plenipotentiary General for Reich Administration are nine copies, including copies for the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Education, the Minister for Church Affairs, and the Reich Office for Planning; also to the Plenipotentiary General for Economy, including copies for the Minister of Economy, the Ministry of Food and Agriculture, the Ministry of Labor, the Chief Forester, and the Commissioner for Price Control; to the Minister of Finance; the Minister of Transport, Motor Transport, and Roads; and the Minister of Railways; the Post Minister; the Minister of Enlightenment and Propaganda; the Reichsbank Directorate; the General Inspector of German Roads; the Armed Forces, including nine copies for the OKH, five copies for the OKM, the Reich Minister for Air and Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force; the supreme command of the Armed Forces; a series of other copies being enclosed.
The enclosure is a report of the second meeting of the Reich Defense Council, held on a date to which we attach importance, the 6th day—the 23d day of June 1939.
“Place: Large conference room of the Reich Air Ministry.
“Commencement: 1110; termination: 1355.
“President: Ministerpräsident, General Field Marshal Göring.
“Persons present...”
I shall name only those to which we attach some importance, because the list is very long:
The Führer’s Deputy; the Chief of the Reich Chancellery, Dr. Lammers; Reichsministerpräsident General Field Marshal Göring’s staff, Secretary of State Körner, Secretary of State Naumann, Councillor Bergbohm, and several others; Plenipotentiary General for Reich Administration, Reichsminister Frick, Reichsführer SS Himmler and uniformed police, Daluege; Plenipotentiary General for the Economy, Reichsminister Funk; the Reichsminister of Finance Von Krosigk; Minister of Transport; General Inspector of German Roads, Dr. Todt; supreme command of the Armed Forces, Generaloberst Keitel, Warlimont, and Generalmajor Thomas; supreme command of the Army, by—from the General Staff, General of Artillery Halder; supreme command of the Navy, General Admiral—Grossadmiral Raeder; Reich Minister for Air Force, Milch and Bodenschatz, both of whom were witnesses here.
The contents, summarized, I will not read.
The minutes of the meeting:
“Ministerpräsident, General Field Marshal Göring emphasized in a preamble that according to the Führer’s wishes the Reich Defense Council was the determining body in the Reich for all questions of preparation for war. It is to discuss only the most important questions of Reich defense. They will be worked out by the Reich Defense Committee.
“Meetings of the Reich Defense Council are to be convened only for these decisions which are unavoidable. It is urged that the departmental chiefs themselves be present.
“Distribution of labor.
“I. The President announced the following directives to govern the distribution and employment of the population in wartime.
“1. The total strength of the Armed Forces is determined by the Führer. It includes only half of the number of those fit and liable for military service. Nevertheless, their disposition will involve difficulties for economy, the administration, and the whole of the civil sphere.
“2. When a schedule of manpower is made out, the basis on which the question is to be judged is how the remaining number, after those required for the Armed Forces have been withdrawn, can be most suitably employed.
“3. Of equal importance to the requirements of the Armed Forces are those of the armament industry. It, above all, must be organized in peacetime as regards material and personnel in such a way that its production does not decrease but increases immediately with the outbreak of war.
“4. The direction of labor to the vital war armament industry and to other civilian requirements is the main task of the Plenipotentiary General for Economy.
“a. War armament covers not only the works producing war materials, but also those producing synthetic rubber (Buna), armament production tools, hydrogenation works, coal mining, et cetera.
“b. (1) As a rule, no essential and irreplaceable specialists may be taken away from ‘war decisive’ factories, on whose production depends the course of the war, unless they can be replaced.
“Coal mining is the most urgent work. Every worker who is essential to coal mining is ‘indispensable.’
“Note: Coal mining has even now become the key point of the whole armament industry, of communications, and of export. If the necessary labor is not made available for it now, the most important part of the export trade, the export of coal, will cease. The purchase of coal in Poland will stop. The correct distribution of labor is determinative. In order to be able to man these key points with the right people, severe demands will shortly be submitted to the Führer which, even in the current mobilization year, will under certain circumstances lead to an exceptional war economy, for instance, to the immobilization of lorries and to the closing down of unessential factories owing to lack of coal.
“In addition, there is the supplying of Italy and other countries such as Scandinavia with coal (to maintain the German supplies of iron).”
I shall omit certain parts of the document which do not seem particularly important to our argument and pass to Item 2, Page 9 of the English translation:
“(2) A second category of workers liable for military service will be called up during the war after their replacements have been trained. A decisive role is played by the extensive preliminary training and retraining of workers.
“(3) Preparations must be made for replacing the mass of other workers liable for military service, even by drawing on an increased number of women. There are also disabled servicemen.
“(4) Compulsory work for women is of decisive importance in wartime. It is important to proceed to a great extent with the training of women in important war work, as replacements and to augment the number of male workers.
“(d) In order to avoid confusion when mobilization takes place, persons working in important war branches, that is, administration, communications, police, food, will not be removed at first. It is essential to establish the degrees of urgency and importance.
“In the interests of the auxiliary civilian service, provided by every European people to gain and maintain the lead in the decisive initial weeks of a war, efforts must in this way be made to insure by an efficient organization that every German in wartime not only possesses his mobilization orders but has also been thoroughly prepared for his wartime activity. The works must also be adapted to receive the replacements and additional workers.”
I shall skip to the bottom of Page 10, Item 6:
“The Plenipotentiary General for Economy is given the task of settling what work is to be given to prisoners of war, to those in prison concentration camps and penitentiaries.
“According to a statement by the Reichsführer SS, greater use will be made of the concentration camps in wartime. The 20,000 inmates will be employed mainly in workshops inside the concentration camps.
“IV. Secretary of State Dr. Syrup, of the Reich Ministry of Labor, made a report on the allocation of labor in the event of mobilization and the schedule of manpower for the war.”
This seems a little detailed; but it is, I think, very important, showing the totality of the mobilization planned months before the war started and indicating, as we shall argue, preparations for a war more extensive than the mere brush with Poland.
“The figures for the schedule of manpower, drawn up experimentally, could only be of a preparatory character and merely give certain guiding principles. The basis of a population of 79 millions was taken. Of these, 56.5 millions are between the ages of 14 and 65. It is also possible to draw upon men over the age of 65 and upon minors of between 13 and 14. The disabled and the infirm must be deducted from the 56.5 millions. Most prisoners are already employed in industry. The greatest deduction is that of 11 million mothers with children under 14. After deduction of these groups, there remains an employable population of 43.5 millions: 26.2 million men—after deducting 7 million members of the Armed Forces, 19.2; 17.3 million women—after deducting 250,000 nurses et cetera, 17.1 for the whole of Germany’s economic and civil life. The President does not consider women over the age of 60 as employable.
“8. The number of workers at present employed and of employees (two-thirds of the wage workers) distributed over 20 large branches of industry amounts roughly to the following: 24 million men (excluding 2 million service men), 14 million women.
“9. No information was then available regarding the number which the Armed Forces will take from the individual branches of industry. Therefore an estimate was made of the numbers remaining in the individual branches of industry after 5 million servicemen had been called up.
“The President’s demand that the exact number liable to military service be established, is being complied with. These inquiries are not secret apart from figures given and formations.”
I shall skip the next paragraph, 10, as of no importance.
“11. Apart from the 13.8 million women at present employed, a further 3.5 million unemployed women, who are listed on the card index of the population, can be employed.
“2 million women would have to be redirected; that is, a transfer can be made to agriculture and to the metal and chemical industry, from the textile, clothing, and ceramic industries, from small trading, insurance and banking businesses, and from the number of women in domestic service.
“12. The lack of workers in agriculture, from which about 25 percent of the physically fit male workers will be withdrawn, must be made up by women (2 in the place of 1 man) and prisoners of war. No foreign workers can be counted on. The Armed Forces are requested to release to a great extent owners and specialists such as milkers, tractor drivers, 35 percent of whom are still liable for call-up.
“13. The President emphasized that factory managers, police, and the Armed Forces must make preparations for the employment of prisoners of war.
“14. In the agricultural sphere preparations must also be made to relieve bottlenecks by help from neighboring farms, systematic use of all machines and laying in stocks of spare parts.
“15. The President announced that in wartime hundreds of thousands of workers from nonwar industries in the Protectorate are to be employed under supervision in Germany, particularly in agriculture. They are to be housed in barracks. General Field Marshal Göring will obtain a decision from the Führer on this matter.”
I shall omit 16.
If I may say as I offer this, it seems rather detailed as showing the extent of preparation already accomplished at the time, in June of 1939:
“17. a. The result of the procedure of establishing indispensable and guaranteed workers is at present as follows: Of 1,172,000 applications for indispensability, 727,000 have been approved and 233,000 rejected.”
I shall pass to “c” near the bottom of the page:
“The orders to supplementary personnel to report for duty are ready and tied up in bundles at the labor offices.”
The meeting proceeds to consider production premiums in connection with wages, and I pass to 21, a detail which I offer as indicating that a long war was in anticipation.
“When labor is being regrouped, it is important—and with specialists even essential—that the workers are retrained for their work in the new factory, in order to avoid setbacks in the initial months of the war. After a few months have passed even the replacement of most of the specialists must be possible.”
I pass to the Point V:
“The Plenipotentiary General for Economy, Reich Minister of Economy Funk, stated his opinion on the fluctuations of the schedule of manpower, from the viewpoint of the carrying on of industry.
“24. a. In accordance with the verbal agreements made with the OKW, the regulations regarding indispensable personnel have been laid down and the certificates of indispensability issued.”
I shall pass to Point Number 25 on Page 15:
“In reply to the request by the speaker that when withdrawing workers for the naval dockyards, more consideration should be shown for the important sections of industry, particularly export and newspaper concerns, the President pointed out the necessity of carrying out the naval building program as ordered by the Führer in full.”
I pass to the large heading VI:
“The Plenipotentiary General for Administration, Reich Minister of the Interior, Dr. Frick, dealt with the saving of labor in the public administration.
“27. The task is primarily a problem of organization. As can be seen from the surveys, which were submitted to those attending the conference, showing how the authorities, economic and social services are organized, there are approximately 50 different kinds of officials in the district administration, each quite independent of the other—an impossible state of affairs. Formerly there were in the State two main divisions, the state civil service and the Wehrmacht. After the seizure of power, the Party and the permanent organizations (Reichsnährstand, et cetera) were added to these, with all their machinery from top to bottom. In this way the number of public posts and officials was increased many times over. This makes public service more difficult.
“28. Since the war tasks have increased enormously.”—The context makes it clear that that is the preceding war.—“The organizing of total war naturally requires much more labor, even in the public administration, than in 1914. But it is an impossibility that this system should have increased its numbers 20 to 40 fold in the lowest grade alone. For this reason, the Reich Ministry of the Interior is striving for uniformity of administration.”
A small conference—small commission was created. I offer Number 29 in connection with Göring’s testimony that they ceased to function:
“Instead of further discussions before the whole assembly, the forming of a small commission which will make definite proposals is recommended. Extensive preparatory work has been undertaken.”
And a note by the committee that the committee had been functioning.
Point 30:
“The President requested that the commission’s proposals be submitted. It was an important section for the preparation for war.”
I shall pass to the large subdivision C which relates to increasing the efficiency of the communications service, starting with the receipt of a report from the Army General Staff.
“31. Eighteen months ago the result of the examination of the plan for strategic concentration showed that the transport service could not meet all the demands made on it by the Armed Forces. The Minister of Transport confirmed this statement. The 1938 part of the Four Year Plan will presumably be completed in August 1939.
“32. Shortly after this program was drawn up demands were made on the Wehrmacht which had changed completely compared with the traditional use of the Wehrmacht at the beginning of a war. Troops had to be brought to the frontier, in the shortest possible time, in numbers which had until then been completely unforeseen. The Wehrmacht was able to fulfill these demands by means of organizational measures but transport could not.
“33. In the field of transportation Germany is at the moment not yet ready for war.”
I offer the detail which follows, in contradiction of the statements repeatedly made by a number of witnesses that the movements of the Wehrmacht in the Rhineland, the Anschluss, and all the rest of it, even Czechoslovakia, were surprise movements.
“a. In the case of the three operations in 1938/1939 there was no question of an actual strategic concentration. The troops were transported a long time beforehand near to the area of strategic concentration by means of camouflaged measures.
“b. This stop-gap is of no use whatever when the time limit cannot be fixed or is not known a long time beforehand, but when an unexpected and almost immediate military decision is required. According to the present situation transport is not in a position, despite all preparations, to bring up the troops.”
“a” is unimportant for my purposes, “a” on Page 18. “b” and “c” represent steps to be taken to meet the deficiency. On Page 19 I shall not bother to read the statements on 38, showing the preparation of highways from east to west and from north to south.
I read Number 39, if I may:
“The President remarked that even in peacetime certain vital supply stores of industry and the Armed Forces are to be transferred to the war industrial centers to economize in transport later on.”
I shall pass to Point Number 41 on Page 20:
“To sum up, the President affirmed that all essential points had been cleared up at this meeting.”
The American branch of the Prosecution has some additional documents which Mr. Dodd will submit, if it is agreeable to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now.
[A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, you have got some other papers to put in?
MR. DODD: I would like to offer, Mr. President, Document 4006-PS, which is the bulletin of the Reich Minister for Armament and Ammunition; and it is a matter that the Tribunal, in our judgment, may take judicial notice of. It is an official publication, but it will be quite helpful in connection with the labor program as between Sauckel and Speer; and it is offered for that purpose, to clear up some of the doubts that may have arisen after the Speer and Sauckel testimony. I think there is no necessity to read it at all but simply to offer it. And it would become Exhibit USA-902.
And then I would like to offer Document 1452-PS. This is a report of a conference of the chiefs with the chief of the department of the Economic Armament Office, and I would just like to read a short excerpt from it. It is Document 1452-PS, dated the 24th of March 1942. It says:
“Conferences of the chiefs with the chief of the department. Report of the chief of the department on the conference on the 23d of March with Milch, Witzell, Leeb, in Minister Speer’s office. The Führer looks upon Speer as his principal mouthpiece, his trusted adviser in all economic spheres. Speer is the only one who has something to say today. He can interfere in any department. He already disregards all other departments.”
The remainder of the document we do not wish to quote, I do not think it is necessary because the text is not changed any by what we have quoted from it. That becomes Exhibit USA-903.
Now, we also have here some photographs, Mr. President; and these are offered with respect to the Defendant Kaltenbrunner. They were turned over to us by our colleagues of the French Prosecution. And the first one is Document F-894, which becomes Exhibit USA-904. That is a picture showing Himmler congratulating someone, Kaltenbrunner immediately to his rear.
THE PRESIDENT: How are they identified?
MR. DODD: I will submit it—well, these are all captured documents, of course, but—you mean in the picture, Mr. President?
THE PRESIDENT: No, I mean by capture or any other way. Where do they come from?
MR. DODD: Well, I assume them to be all captured documents. Oh, I see now—there are affidavits attached to each one which explain their source. Here, this first one is a man by the name of François Boix, who says that he is a photographer and was interned at Mauthausen and so on; and he attests that this photograph was taken, and so forth. I think that is sufficient—I assume it is—to identify the picture. I believe that each one of them has a similar statement.
Now the next one is Document F-896, which becomes Exhibit USA-905. And this as well on the back of the original bears an affidavit by François Boix.
The next one is Document F-897, which becomes Exhibit USA-906. And this as well, bears the affidavit of François Boix and shows Kaltenbrunner and Himmler and other SS officials.
And then, lastly, Document F-895, which becomes Exhibit USA-907; and this picture we particularly call to the Tribunal’s attention. It, as well, bears the certificate of François Boix. Kaltenbrunner is there in the second row, Himmler and Hitler in the immediate center between Kaltenbrunner and, apparently, Martin Bormann, taken at a concentration camp, which appears from the picture of the inmates on the left side.
Then we wish to offer a very short affidavit, which is Document 4033-PS and we offer as Exhibit USA-907—no, 8, 908. It is the deposition of Oswald Pohl, P-o-h-l, dated the 28th of May 1946. The affidavit—the substance of the affidavit reads as follows:
“I can say with absolute certainty that while on official business at Mauthausen I saw and spoke to SS Obergruppenführer Kaltenbrunner...”
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. Was Pohl called as a witness?
MR. DODD: No, Sir, he was not, he was not called. That was Puhl, P-u-h-l. The names are similar.
“...I saw and spoke to SS Obergruppenführer Kaltenbrunner there at the officers’ mess on the right-hand side of the camp entrance either in the autumn of 1943 or the spring of 1944. I took lunch with him there at the mess table.”
And then another affidavit, Document 4032-PS, which becomes Exhibit USA-908—no, 909. I think it is unnecessary to read this; it has been translated. It is the deposition of one Karl Reif, R-e-i-f, in which he states that he saw Kaltenbrunner either in May or June, about midday, in 1942 in the camp at Mauthausen.
That is all we have to offer, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Do the other members of the Prosecution wish to offer any other evidence?
[There was no response.]
Then now we can pass to evidence to be called on behalf of Bormann. Dr. Bergold, will you call the witnesses you wish to call—Kempka.
DR. BERGOLD: Gentlemen of the Tribunal, I shall call the witness Kempka.
[The witness Kempka took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name, please.
ERICH KEMPKA (Witness): My name is Erich Kempka.
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. BERGOLD: Witness, in what capacity were you employed near Hitler during the war?
KEMPKA: During the war I worked for Adolf Hitler as his personal driver.
DR. BERGOLD: Did you meet Martin Bormann in that capacity?
KEMPKA: Yes, I met Martin—Reichsleiter Martin Bormann in this capacity at that time as my indirect superior.
DR. BERGOLD: Witness, on what day did you see the Defendant Martin Bormann for the last time?
KEMPKA: I saw the Reichsleiter, the former Reichsleiter Martin Bormann, on the night of 1-2 May 1945 near the Friedrichstrasse railroad station, at the Weidendammer Bridge. Reichsleiter Bormann—former Reichsleiter Bormann—asked me what the general situation was at the Friedrichstrasse station, and I told him that there at the station it was hardly possible...
THE PRESIDENT: You are going too fast. He asked you what?
KEMPKA: He asked me what the situation was and whether one could get through there at the Friedrichstrasse station. I told him that was practically impossible, since the defensive fighting there was too heavy. Then he went on to ask whether it might be possible to do so with armored cars. I told him that there was nothing like trying it.
Then a few tanks and a few SPW (armored personnel carrier) cars came along, and small groups boarded them and hung on. Then the armored cars pushed their way through the antitank trap and afterwards the leading tank—along about at the middle of the tank on the left-hand side, where Martin Bormann was walking—suddenly received a direct hit, I imagine from a bazooka fired from a window, and this tank was blown up. A flash of fire suddenly shot up on the very side where Bormann was walking and I saw...
THE PRESIDENT: You are going too fast. You are still going much too fast. The last thing I heard you say was that Bormann was walking in the middle of the column. Is that right?
KEMPKA: Yes, at the middle of the tank, on the left-hand side.
Then, after it had got 40 to 50 meters past the antitank trap, this tank received a direct hit, I imagine from a bazooka fired from a window. The tank was blown to pieces right there where Martin—Reichsleiter Bormann—was walking.
I myself was flung aside by the explosion and by a person thrown against me who had been walking in front of me—I think it was Standartenführer Dr. Stumpfecker—and I became unconscious. When I came to myself I could not see anything either; I was blinded by the flash. Then I crawled back again to the tank trap, and since then I have seen nothing more of Martin Bormann.
DR. BERGOLD: Witness, did you see Martin Bormann collapse in the flash of fire when it occurred?
KEMPKA: Yes, indeed, I still saw a movement which was a sort of collapsing. You might call it a flying away.
DR. BERGOLD: Was this explosion so strong that according to your observation Martin Bormann must have lost his life by it?
KEMPKA: Yes, I assume for certain that the force of the explosion was such that he lost his life.
DR. BERGOLD: How was Martin Bormann dressed at that time?
KEMPKA: Martin Bormann was wearing a leather coat, an SS leader’s cap, and the insignia of an SS Obergruppenführer.
DR. BERGOLD: Do you therefore believe that if he had been found wounded on that occasion he would have been immediately identified, by this clothing, as being one of the leading men of the Movement?
KEMPKA: Yes, indeed.
DR. BERGOLD: You said that another man was walking either beside or ahead of Martin Bormann, namely a Herr Naumann of the Propaganda Ministry?
KEMPKA: Yes, it was the former State Secretary, Dr. Naumann.
DR. BERGOLD: Was he approximately at the same distance from the explosion?
KEMPKA: No, he was about 1 or 2 meters ahead of Martin Bormann.
DR. BERGOLD: Have you seen anything of this State Secretary Naumann subsequently?
KEMPKA: No, I have not seen him again either, nor Standartenführer Dr. Stumpfecker.
DR. BERGOLD: Then you crawled back, did you not?
KEMPKA: Yes.
DR. BERGOLD: And nobody else followed you?
KEMPKA: Certainly. Always, when you passed this antitank trap, you would run into defensive fire; a few only would remain lying on the spot while the rest always retreated. But those on that tank I have never seen again.
DR. BERGOLD: Gentlemen of the Tribunal, I have no further questions for this witness.
MR. DODD: I have no questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Do the Defense Counsel want to ask him any questions?
[There was no response.]
[Turning to the witness.] How many tanks were there in this column?
KEMPKA: That I cannot say at the moment—possibly two or three. There may have been four, but there were more SPW cars, armored personnel carriers.
THE PRESIDENT: How many were there of them?
KEMPKA: More and more came up, and then some of them drove away again. They tried to break through at that point. Possibly one or two tried. The others withdrew after the tank was blown up.
THE PRESIDENT: Where did the column start from?
KEMPKA: That I do not know. They came quite suddenly—there they were, I assume that they were tanks which had withdrawn into the middle of the town and were also trying to break out in a southerly direction.
THE PRESIDENT: When you say they were there suddenly, where do you mean they were? Where did they pick you up?
KEMPKA: I was not picked up. I left the Reich Chancellery...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, where did they join you? Where did you first see them?
KEMPKA: At the Weidendammer Bridge, behind the Friedrichstrasse station. They turned up there during the night.
THE PRESIDENT: Where was it that Bormann first asked you whether it would be possible to get through?
KEMPKA: That was at the tank barrier behind the Friedrichstrasse station at the Weidendammer Bridge.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean that you met him in the street?
KEMPKA: Yes. Martin Bormann was not present when we left the Reich Chancellery; he did not appear at the bridge until between 2 and 3 o’clock in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: You met him there just by chance, do you mean?
KEMPKA: I only met him by chance, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Was there anybody with him?
KEMPKA: State Secretary Dr. Naumann from the Ministry of Propaganda was with him, as well as Dr. Stumpfecker who had been the last doctor who was with the Führer.
THE PRESIDENT: How far were they from the Reich Chancellery?
KEMPKA: That is—are—up to—from the Reich Chancellery to the Friedrichstrasse station is approximately a quarter of an hour’s walk under normal circumstances.
THE PRESIDENT: And then you saw some tanks and some other armored vehicles coming along, is that right?
KEMPKA: Yes, yes indeed.
THE PRESIDENT: German tanks and German armored vehicles?
KEMPKA: Yes, German armored cars.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you have any conversation with the drivers of them?
KEMPKA: No, I did not talk to the drivers. I think State Secretary—former State Secretary Dr. Naumann did.
THE PRESIDENT: And then you did not get into the tanks or the armored vehicles?
KEMPKA: No, we did not get in—neither State Secretary Dr. Naumann nor Reichsleiter Bormann.
THE PRESIDENT: You just walked along?
KEMPKA: I just walked along, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And where were you with reference to Bormann?
KEMPKA: I was behind the tank, about—on the left-hand side behind the tank.
THE PRESIDENT: How far from Bormann?
KEMPKA: It was perhaps 3 or 4 meters.
THE PRESIDENT: And then some missile struck the tank, is that right?
KEMPKA: No, I believe the tank was hit by a bazooka fired from a window.
THE PRESIDENT: And then you saw a flash and you became unconscious?
KEMPKA: Yes, I suddenly saw a flash of fire and in the fraction of a second I also saw Reichsleiter Bormann and State Secretary Naumann both make a movement as if collapsing and flying away. I myself was thrown aside with them at that same moment and subsequently lost consciousness.
THE PRESIDENT: And then you crept away?
KEMPKA: When I recovered I could not see anything and then I crawled away and crawled until I bumped my head against the tank barrier.
THE PRESIDENT: Where did you go to that night?
KEMPKA: I waited there for a while, and then I said farewell to my drivers, some of whom were still there; and then I stayed in the ruins of Berlin, and on the following day I left Berlin.
THE PRESIDENT: Where were you captured?
KEMPKA: I was captured at Berchtesgaden.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): How near were you to the tank when it exploded?
KEMPKA: I estimate 3 to 4 meters.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And how near was Bormann to the tank when it exploded?
KEMPKA: I assume that he was holding on to it with one hand.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Well, you say you assume it. Did you see him or did you not see him?
KEMPKA: I did not see him on the tank itself. But to keep pace with the tank I had done the same thing and had held on to the tank at the back.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Did you see Bormann trying to get on the tank just before the explosion?
KEMPKA: No, I did not see that. I did not see any effort on Bormann’s part which indicated that he wanted to climb onto the tank.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): How long before the explosion were you looking at Bormann?
KEMPKA: All this happened in a very brief period. When I was still talking to Bormann the tanks turned up and we passed the tank trap right away and after 30 or 40 meters the tank was hit.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): What do you call a brief period?
KEMPKA: Well, while we were talking, that was perhaps a few minutes only.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And how long between the conversation and the explosion?
KEMPKA: I cannot tell you the exact time, but surely it was not a quarter of an hour, or perhaps rather not half an hour.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Had you been in the Chancellery just before this?
KEMPKA: I left the Reich Chancellery in the evening about 9 o’clock.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Have you ever told this story to anyone else?
KEMPKA: I have been interrogated several times on this subject and have already made the same statement.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And who took your interrogation, some officers?
KEMPKA: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Of what army, what nations?
KEMPKA: I have been interrogated by various officers of the American Army, the first time at Berchtesgaden, the second time at Freising, and the third time at Oberursel.
MR. DODD: As a result of the Court’s inquiry there are one or two questions that occur to me that I think perhaps should be brought out which I would like to ask the witness, if I may.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly.
MR. DODD: You were with Bormann, were you, at 9 o’clock in the bunker in the Reich Chancellery on that night?
KEMPKA: Yes, indeed. I saw him for the last time about 9 o’clock in the evening. When I said farewell to Dr. Goebbels, I also saw Martin Bormann down in the cellar; and then I saw him again during the night about 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning.
MR. DODD: Well, maybe you said so, but I did not get it if you did. Where did you see him at 2 or 3 in the morning prior to the time that you started to walk with him along with the tank?
KEMPKA: Before that I saw him at the Friedrichstrasse station between 2 or 3 in the morning, and before that I saw him for the last time at 21 hours in the Reich Chancellery on the preceding evening.
MR. DODD: Well I know you did. But did not you and Bormann have any conversation about how you would get out of Berlin when you left the Reich Chancellery bunker at about 9 o’clock that night?
KEMPKA: I took my orders from the former Brigadeführer Milunke. I was not receiving direct orders from Reichsleiter Bormann any more.
MR. DODD: I did not ask you if you got an order from him. I asked if you and Bormann had not—and whoever else was there—had not discussed how you would get out of Berlin. It was 9 o’clock at night and the situation was getting pretty desperate. Did you not talk about how you would get out that night? There were not many of you there.
KEMPKA: Oh yes, there were about 400 to 500 people in all still in the Reich Chancellery and those 400 or 500 people were divided into separate groups, and these groups left the Chancellery one by one.
MR. DODD: I know there may have been that many in the Chancellery. I am talking about that bunker that you were in. You testified about this before, have you not? You told people that you knew that Hitler was dead as well as Bormann. And you must have been in the bunker if you know that.
KEMPKA: Yes, I have already testified to that effect.
MR. DODD: Well, what I want to find out is whether or not you and Bormann and whoever was left in that bunker talked about leaving Berlin that night before you left the bunker?
KEMPKA: No, I did not speak about it any more to Reichsleiter Bormann at that time. We had marching orders only to the effect that if we were successful we should report at Fehrbellin where there was a combat group which we were to join.
MR. DODD: You are the only man who has been able to testify that Hitler is dead and the only one who has been able to testify that Bormann is dead, is that so, so far as you know?
KEMPKA: I can state that Hitler is dead and that he died on 30 April in the afternoon between 2 and 3 o’clock.
MR. DODD: I know, but you did not see him die either, did you?
KEMPKA: No, I did not see him die.
MR. DODD: And you told the interrogators that you believe you carried his body out of the bunker and set it on fire. Are you not the man who has said that?
KEMPKA: I carried out Adolf Hitler’s wife, and I saw Adolf Hitler himself wrapped in a blanket.
MR. DODD: Did you actually see Hitler?
KEMPKA: I did not see all of him. The blanket in which he was wrapped was rather short, and I only saw his legs hanging out.
MR. DODD: I do not think I will inquire any further, Mr. President.
DR. BERGOLD: I have no further questions either.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
DR. BERGOLD: Gentlemen of the Tribunal, the witness Walkenhorst is also still present here. It appears to me that there is a misunderstanding between the High Tribunal and myself. I stated Saturday that I did not wish to call any more witnesses besides the witness Kempka, and I expressly waive the witness Walkenhorst.
THE PRESIDENT: What was he? What did you ask for him to prove in the first instance?
DR. BERGOLD: I had originally called him as a substitute...
THE PRESIDENT: We have got your application.
DR. BERGOLD: But after talking to witness Klöpfer, whom I have also waived, I am also waiving the witness Walkenhorst because he does not appear to me to be competent enough to testify on what I wanted him to testify about.
My entire presentation of evidence, therefore, is now completed, except for the two documents which the Tribunal have already granted me, namely, the decree about stopping the measures against the churches and Bormann’s decree from the year 1944, with which he forbade members of the Chancellery to be members of the SD. Those two documents I have not yet received. When I have received them I shall submit them.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
Dr. Servatius, you have some question or affidavit you wanted to get from this witness Walkenhorst, did you not?
DR. SERVATIUS: I have an affidavit from this witness Walkenhorst which deals briefly with the question of the telephone conversation which Sauckel had at that time about the evacuation of the Buchenwald Camp. He has been accused of having ordered the evacuation of the camp when the American army approached. Now this witness Walkenhorst has accidently been found and it turns out that oddly enough he was the man with whom Sauckel spoke. He has confirmed to me in an affidavit that Sauckel demanded that the camp should be surrendered in an orderly way.
That is all I wanted to ask this witness. I can submit it here in the form of an affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Do the Prosecution want the man called or will the affidavit do?
DR. SERVATIUS: I am satisfied with handing over the affidavit.
COL. PHILLIMORE: My Lord, as far as the Prosecution are concerned, an affidavit would suffice.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then I shall submit the affidavit and I will give the exhibit number together with my list.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, there is one other matter to which I wish to draw the attention of defendants’ counsel.
The Tribunal have been informed as to the length of the speeches of certain of the defendants’ counsel which have been placed before the Translation Division for translation, and in the case of the Defendant Keitel and in the case of the Defendant Jodl the speeches which have been put into the Translation Division seem to be very much longer than the Tribunal had anticipated and quite impossible to be spoken in 1 day.
Would counsel for the Defendant Keitel explain to the Tribunal why that is and what steps he has taken to shorten his speech?
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, I have sent a letter to the Court today which I believe is not yet in the Tribunal’s possession. In it I requested that in the case of the Defendant Keitel I should be permitted to exceed the regular length of time, which had been limited to 1 day for the big cases. When, at the request of the Tribunal, I stated the time which my final speech would take, I had my manuscript completed. This manuscript would have taken about 7 hours. I gave that manuscript to the Translation Division in that form because it was no longer possible to alter it. I submitted the first part last Wednesday and then the second part on Saturday morning.
If the Tribunal, in accordance with its decision, fixes 1 day, that is, 5½ hours of actual speech, as the maximum and is unwilling to depart from that ruling in any case, not even in the case of the Defendant Keitel, who has been particularly seriously implicated, then I shall be forced to eliminate certain passages from the manuscript and to submit them only in writing. I hope the Tribunal will also decide whether that is possible.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, the Tribunal takes note of the fact that when you were asked how long your speech would take, you said, I think, 7 hours.
DR. NELTE: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: 7 hours. Well, according to the estimate which has been given to the Tribunal, the speech which you submitted for translation would take about 13 hours. That is nearly double as long as you yourself said, and it is almost exactly double the length of the speech which has been submitted for the Defendant Ribbentrop, whose case is almost as extensive if not quite as extensive; and it appears to the Tribunal to be out of all reason to put in a speech which will probably take nearly double the time that you yourself stated. The speech you put in is more than double the length of the speech which has been put in on behalf of the Defendant Göring.
DR. NELTE: Naturally, I am unable to know by what points of view the counsel for Reich Marshal Göring or Foreign Minister Von Ribbentrop are guided and governed. I can only be guided by my own views and sense of duty.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps that is a matter of comparison, it is true, but you said 7 hours yourself, and you now put in a speech which will probably take 13.
DR. NELTE: I believe, Mr. President, that I shall make that speech in 7 hours, if I have 7 hours speaking time.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal has given this matter a very full consideration, as you are aware; and they have said that every speech must be made in 1 day and that will take up some considerable time for the whole of the defendants to make their speeches.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, I shall wait for your decision. If I am confined to 1 day, then I shall have to leave out certain parts from my manuscript. But in that case I should have to ask that the remainder be taken cognizance of by the Tribunal, because every thing that I have included in my manuscript is the minimum of what should be delivered on such a comprehensive case.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, we will consider that application for you to be allowed to put in the other passages in your speech; and we will let defendants’ counsel know what our decision is upon that.
Dr. Siemers, the Tribunal has now received a full report showing the immense trouble taken by the Secretariat to find or to try and find the witness Schulze, Otto Schulze, for you since you first asked for him in February of this year; and the Tribunal would like to know what steps you have taken in the meantime to try and find him.
DR. SIEMERS: I believe, Mr. President, that there was no need to find the witness because, actually, it was known that he was living in Hamburg-Blankenese and because, in my opinion, he is still in Hamburg-Blankenese; and I have given this address to the General Secretariat many times.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you knew what the General Secretary’s office were doing about the matter. You knew that they were unable to find him at the address. You knew that they had sent the interrogatories to Washington because they were told he had been taken over there, and we are told that you have been in Hamburg yourself.
DR. SIEMERS: That the interrogatory was sent to Washington is something which I have known only since last Friday, after my return from Hamburg. I personally did not anticipate that such a mistake or such a misunderstanding could arise. Unfortunately, I also do not know how it did arise. Far be it from me to make any kind of accusation. I have merely requested that if the document were received, then the Tribunal should agree to receive it in evidence later. Unfortunately, I cannot submit it today. I immediately informed the General Secretariat of the address once more; I do not know anything more than this address in Hamburg, either. In my opinion, Admiral Schulze is not in captivity. It is possible that during my absence some misunderstanding occurred, but I myself heard that only last Friday.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I cannot understand why, during all these months that you have been here and have had full opportunity of seeing the General Secretary and have received all the assistance which you and all the other defendants’ counsel have received from the General Secretariat, that you should not have helped the General Secretary better to find this witness. That is all.
We will adjourn now.