dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: The quotation which I want to read to you is on Page 1 of the translation of the document submitted by us to the Tribunal. It is a very short quotation. I shall proceed to read it into the record: ". . .The Fuehrer discussed the general situation with the Governor General and he approved of the work of the Governor General in Poland, especially the pulling down of the palace at Warsaw and the intention not to reconstruct the city . . ." Was it not true that the palace in Warsaw was destroyed by order of Frank?
BUEHLER: It is not known to me that the castle was destroyed. As far as I know there was at one time a project to pull it down, but the plan was abandoned.
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Tell me, please, was it not in your presence that the Defendant Frank on 21 April 1940 issued an order to apply police measures during the so-called recruitment of labor.
BUEHLER: I should have to see the minutes. I cannot remember it offhand. [The document was handed to the witness.]
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: The place which I should like to quote is on Page 46 of the document, the last paragraph. I quote: "Discussion with State Secretary Dr. Buehler, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Krueger, and Dr. Frauendorfer in the presence of Reich Minister Dr. Seyss-Inquart. "Subject of discussion is the deportation of workers, especially agricultural workers, to the Reich. "The Governor General stated that, as all methods in the way of appeals, et cetera , had been unsuccessful, one was now obliged to come to the conclusion that the Poles evaded this duty of work either out of malice, or with the intention of doing Germany indirect harm by not placing themselves at her disposal. He therefore asked Dr. Frauendorfer whether there were any measures left which had not yet been taken to win the Poles over voluntarily. "Reichshauptamtsleiter Dr. Frauendorfer answered this question in the negative. "The Governor General stated emphatically that a final decision was now required of him. The question now was whether one would not have to resort to some form of coercive measure." Was that not an order to apply coercive measures when recruiting labor?
BUEHLER: I will not contradict the statement, as I have seen the minutes. It is one of the utterances of the Governor General which, I believe, were not altogether made voluntarily but which in no way altered the course which I took on this question.
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Please answer the following question: Were you present at a discussion with Sauckel on 18 August 1942, and was it in your presence that Frank told Sauckel that he-as he put it-"joyfully" informed him that he had shipped a fresh convoy of workers to the Reich with the help of the Police.
BUEHLER: Together with my departmental heads who dealt with the recruitment of workers I had a conference with Reich Commissioner Sauckel before the visit to the Governor General took place. I cannot now remember whether I was present when Reich Commissioner Sauckel visited the Governor General. I ask to see the minutes.
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Please show the defendant, I mean the witness, the passage. [The document was handed to the witness.] I will now read into the record two short passages on Pages 918 and 920. Doctor Frank says: "I am very glad that I can inform you officially that up to this date we have sent to Germany over 800,000 workers. Only a short time ago you asked for another 140,000. I am happy to inform you officially that, in accordance with our agreement of yesterday, 60 percent of these newly requested workers will be sent by the end of October, and the other 40 percent will be dispatched to the Reich by the end of the year." Then I will ask you to pass on to Page 120. There is only one other sentence I want to quote: "Besides the 140,000, you can count on a further number of workers from the Government General during the coming year, for we will use the Police to get them." Does that not imply the use of Draconian police methods in the so-called recruiting of manpower?
BUEHLER: I do not recollect that I was present on that occasion, so I can in no way confirm whether that was said in this way.
MR. COUNSELLOR SMIRNOV: Mr. President, I have no more questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: [To Dr. Seidl.] Do you want to re-examine?
DR. SEIDL: I have a few more questions to ask the witness. First of all, I should like to clarify a misunderstanding which seems to have arisen. The question which I put to the witness in connection with Document Number USSR-93 referred only to Appendix 1, which has the title "Cultural Life in Poland." That appendix deals with directives regarding cultural policies which the administration of the Government General was supposed to have issued, and the way I understood the witness was that he only wanted to answer that particular question and not refer to the other appendices, such as, for instance, those dealing with confiscated art treasures. Perhaps it would have been better if he had not used the word "forged." At any rate, he wanted to say that he did not know the directives in question. [Turning to the witness.] Witness, is it correct that by far the greater number of Polish workers who were brought to the Reich were volunteers?
BUEHLER: May I, first of all, say that I by no means wished to accuse the Prosecution of committing a forgery. I merely wanted to point out that possibly they were using a forged document. I did not want to accuse the Prosecution itself of a forgery. Now, regarding the question put by defense counsel, I want to say that according to my observations by far the greater number of all the workers from the Government General went to the Reich voluntarily.
DR. SEIDL: So as to assist your memory, I am going to read a short quotation from the diary, which deals with the recruiting of workers. On 4 March 1940 the Governor General addressed a meeting of the town mayors of the Lublin district and stated the following regarding the recruitment of workers: "He rejected the issue of a new decree, as demanded by Berlin, containing particular coercive measures and threats of punishment. Measures which attract attention abroad should be avoided. The forcible transport of people had every argument against it." Does that conception reflect the true views of the Governor General?
BUTLER: I was not present during that conference, so I did not hear that utterance by the Governor General, but it does tally with those instructions and principles which the Governor General gave to me and which I have always resolutely observed and carried out.
DR. SEIDL: Were you present during a conference on 14 January 1944-I see you were there-it was a conference with the State Secretary Dr. Buehler, Dr. Koppe, and several others. I quote from it: "The Governor General resolutely opposes the employment of Police for carrying out such measures. Such a task is not a matter for the Police." Is it correct that the Governor General repeatedly opposed the use of Police in connection with the recruiting of workers?
BUEHLER: That was not the only occasion. The deputy of Reich Commissioner Sauckel was often attacked by him during public meetings when he talked about raids for recruiting workers; but I must state that Sauckel's deputy always declared that it was not he who had given instructions for these raids.
DR. SEIDL: The first quotation which the prosecutor submitted to you was an entry dated 25 January 1943. He asked you whether you regarded yourself as a war criminal. I shall now put to you another passage from that conference, at which you yourself were present. I quote from Page 7 of that entry in the diary. The Governor General stated: "State Secretary Krueger, you know that orders of the Reichsfuehrer SS can be carried out by you only after you have spoken with me. This was omitted in this instance. I express my regret that you have carried out an order from the Reichsfuehrer without first informing me, in accordance with the orders of the Fuehrer. According to that order, instructions of the Reichsfuehrer SS may be carried out here in the Government General only after I have previously given my approval. I hope that this is the last time that that is overlooked; because I do not want to trouble the Fuehrer about every single case of this kind." (Document Number 2233-PS.) I shall skip a sentence and continue to quote: "It is not possible for us to disregard Fuehrer orders, and it is out of the question that in the sphere of police and security direct orders from the Reichsfuehrer should be carried out over the head of the man who has been appointed here by the Fuehrer; otherwise I should be completely superfluous." I now ask you, is it correct that there were very frequently such disputes between the Governor General and the Higher SS Police Leader Krueger, and that the Governor General terminated these disputes by asking for cooperation, so that some sort of administration could function in this territory?
BUEHLER: Yes, that is correct, such disputes were our daily bread.
DR. SEIDL: The Prosecution has also submitted to you another exhibit, USSR-335 (Document Number USSR-335), the Court-Martial Decree, dated October 1943. I now ask you what the security situation was like in the Government General then, and would it have been at all possible at that time to control the situation with normal criminal procedure?
THE PRESIDENT: Doctor Seidl, has that not already been dealt with very fully in his examination in chief?
DR. SEIDL: I forego having this question answered again. Now one last question, which refers to art treasures. Is it correct that a portion of the art treasures which were found in the region of Upper Silesia were taken to the last official residence of the Governor General at Neuhaus to be safeguarded, and that the Governor General gave you instructions to prepare a list of these articles and send it to Reich Minister Lammers?
BUEHLER: The Governor General dictated a report to Reich Minister Lammers about the transfer of 20 of the most outstanding art treasures from the property of the Polish State. I was present when it was dictated and I took that report personally to State Secretary Kritzinger in Berlin. It was stated therein that these art treasures, so as to save them from the Russians, had been taken from Seichau, or whatever the place is called, to Schliersee. These art treasures were left unguarded in the official residence of the Governor General.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
DR. SEIDL: I have now completed the examination of witnesses, but as the document books have not yet been bound, I would like to suggest that at some later stage, perhaps after the case of Frick, could submit these document books.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, how many books are you presenting?
DR. SEIDL: A total of five volumes, but I myself have not received them yet.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the Tribunal approved the documents in five volumes?
DR. SEIDL: They are almost entirely documents which have already been submitted by the Prosecution and an agreement has been reached with the Prosecution regarding the documents.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then, we need not wait now for the document books. The document books will be considered by the Tribunal when they are put in and then, if you have anything in particular you want to say upon them in explanation, you may do so.
DR. SEIDL: Very well.
THE PRESIDENT: No doubt you will comment upon them in your final speech. You say that they are mostly documents which have already been put in, and therefore it would not be necessary to make any preliminary comment upon them. You will be able to deal with them in your final speech.
DR. SEIDL: But I should have liked to quote a few passages during my submission of evidence, since this is necessary to establish the connection, and as it would be impossible to do all that during my final speech; but I do not think that too much time will be lost through that.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Dr. Seidl, it would not be very useful to the Tribunal for you to make a commentary upon the documents at a later stage, when your witnesses have been finished and somebody else's-some other defendant's-witnesses have been interpolated; therefore, the Tribunal thinks it will be much better and much more convenient to the Tribunal if you defer your comments on the documents until your final speech. Well, Dr. Seidl, as I understand, you have two books which are before us now. Three is it?
DR. SEIDL: There is a total of Overbooks. The other three do not appear to have been bound.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, but you say that most of the documents in them are documents which are already in evidence.
DR. SEIDL: The diary of the Defendant Dr. Frank, which contains 42 volumes, has been submitted, but the Prosecution has used only those parts which appeared favorable for them. In my opinion it is, therefore, necessary that the connections should to some extent be re-established during the submission of evidence. Also, there are other documents in the document book which I believe should be read, at least in extract, before this Tribunal, but I shall, of course, limit myself to the absolutely necessary passages when I read the documents. I should like to suggest to the Tribunal that the matter be handled as it was in the case of the Defendant Von Ribbentrop, so that I submit the individual documents to the Tribunal as exhibits. There are several speeches by the Defendant Frank, there are decrees and legal regulations, there are two affidavits, and I really think that somehow an opinion with regard to them should be given during the submission of evidence; and, besides, individual documents will have to be given exhibit numbers. Up to now only one document has been submitted as evidence on behalf of the Defendant Frank, and that is the affidavit of the witness Dr. Buehler; but I have the intention of bringing a whole series of further documents formally to the notice of the Tribunal and would like to postpone that only because the Tribunal has not yet received the bound document books.
THE PRESIDENT: When will these other books be ready, Dr. Seidl?
DR. SEIDL: I was told that they would be completed by this evening.
THE PRESIDENT: How long do you think you will take in dealing with these books?
DR. SEIDL: I think that two hours will be enough.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal will adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, the Tribunal would like you to deal with your documents now, and insofar as they are documents which have already been put in evidence, unless you wish to refer to other passages in them, they think that you need only tell us what the documents are and put them in evidence, unless it is very important to you to refer to any particular document. So far as they are new documents, you will, no doubt, offer them in evidence and make such short comments as you think necessary. But the Tribunal hopes that you will be able to finish this afternoon. With reference to the other books that you have, we understand that you have all the documents in German yourself, and therefore you can refer us to those documents now.
DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, upon the wish of the Prosecution and also, I believe, of the Tribunal, I have reduced the original bulk of my document books considerably. The first five document books, as I had had them prepared, contained more than eight hundred pages. The new form is considerably shorter; but I have not received the German text of the new form, so that I am not in a position just now to give the number of pages to the Tribunal or to coordinate my page numbers with the numbered pages of the translations. If I may express a wish, it is that we should first wait until the fire document books in their new form are available, because otherwise it is very likely that the numbering of the pages would not correspond to the numbering of the individual documents as exactly as might be desired.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks it best that you should begin now with the first three volumes. We have them here.
DR. SEIDL: If the Tribunal has the first three volumes, then I will begin. I begin with Volume I. The first document on Page 1 is the decree of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor, dated 12 October 1939, concerning the administration of the occupied Polish territories. This decree defines in detail the authority of the Governor General. In Paragraphs 5 and 6 some of the limitations to the authority of the Governor General are included, which the witnesses Dr. Lammers and Dr. Buehler have already pointed out. This document bears the number 2537-PS and it will be Exhibit Frank-2. I pass to Page 3 of the document book. This document is the decree of the Fuehrer concerning the establishment of a State Secretariat for Security in the Government General, dated 7 May 1942. I quote Paragraph 2: "The State Secretary for Security serves at the same time as deputy of the Reichsfuehrer SS in his capacity as Reich Commissioner for the Preservation of German Nationality." On Page 4 I quote Paragraph IV: "The Reichsfuehrer SS and Chief of the German Police is authorized to give the State Secretary for Security direct instructions in the province of security and the preservation of German Nationality." This (document will be Exhibit Frank-3 (Document Number Frank-3). Following the decree of the Fuehrer of 7 May 1942 comes the decree for the transfer of authority to the State Secretary for Security, of 23 June 1942. I do not know whether that decree is already bound in that volume. Apparently that decree, which was added later, has not yet been translated.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the date?
DR. SEIDL: 23 June 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: We have one of 27 May 1942.
DR. SEIDL: That decree apparently has not yet been translated because it was added afterwards, and I will put it in the document book later. It will be Document Frank-4. In Paragraph 1 of that decree, we find, "The jurisdictions of the administrative and creative branches of the Police referred to in appendices A and B are now transferred to the State Secretary for Security." In Appendix 1 the spheres of authority of the Order Police are mentioned under 15 headings-no, I must correct that-26 headings; and in Appendix B the spheres of authority of the Order Police come under 21 headings. I pass now to Document Book I, Page 5. That is the decree of the Fuehrer concerning the appointment of officials and the termination of this status as officials in the sphere of the Government General, of 20 May 1942. I quote from the figure 3, Paragraph 2: "The Governor General's sphere of activity does not, in the sense of this decree, include officials belonging to the province of the Reichsfuehrer SS and Chief of the German Police in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, or those belonging to the Customs Frontier Service." (Document Number Frank-4(e).) I pass to Page 6 of the document book, the decree of the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor, for the Preservation of German Nationality, of 7 October 1939, which is already Exhibit USA-305 (Document Number 686-PS): The next document is the letter from Reich Marshal Goering to the Chief of the Security Police and the SD, of July 1941.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I suggest that an exhibit number be given as we go along so that we can follow better, and later on have some track of the exhibits as they go in. The last one and this one have not been given any exhibit number.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Francis Biddle, Member for the United States): The last one was Frank-5, was it not?
THE PRESIDENT: No. Frank-5 was the one of the 27th of May 1942.
MR. DODD: We did not know that; we did not get the number over the speaker. I am sorry.
THE PRESIDENT: It may not have been stated but I took it down as that myself. Will you take care to state each time, Dr. Seidl, what the exhibit number is that you are giving. You are dealing now with the letter of the 31st of July 1941.
DR. SEIDL: Yes. This letter has a USA number, namely, 509.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Wait a minute, perhaps I made a mistake. Yes, Mr. Dodd, I think I made a mistake. The reason why Dr. Seidl did not give a number was because it was already in evidence as USA-305. I made a mistake. It was not Frank-5. He only got to Frank-4. The next one is USA-509.
DR. SEIDL: 509 (Document Nu mber 710-PS). I pass to Page 10 of the document book. That is an order, a directive rather, of the High Command of the Armed Forces concerning Case Barbarossa, USA-135 (Document Number 447-PS), and I quote Paragraph 2: "It is not intended to declare East Prussia and the Government General an operational area of the Army. On the other hand, on the basis of the unpublished Fuehrer decrees of 19 and 21 October 1939 the Commander-in-Chief of the Army is authorized to enact measures that are necessary for the execution of his military task and for the security of his troops." I pass to Page 11 of the document book, a directive for the execution of the Fuehrer decree concerning the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, of 27 March 1942. I quote Paragraph 4: "The Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor will have at his disposal for the performance of his tasks the authority delegated to me by the Fuehrer to issue instructions to the highest Reich authorities, their subordinate offices, as well as to the offices of the Party and its formations and affiliated organizations; to the Reich Protector; to the Governor General; to the military commanders and the chiefs of the civil administrations." This document becomes Exhibit Number Frank-5 (Document Number Frank-5). The next document is on Page 12-the decree by the Fuehrer, concerning a Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, of 21 March 1942, from which it can be seen that his authority to issue instructions included the Government General. It becomes Exhibit Number Frank-6 (Document Number Frank-6). The document on Page 13 of the document book deals also with the authority of the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor to issue instructions. It is already Exhibit USA-206 (Document Number 3352-PS). The document on Page 15 is a letter from Professor Dr. Kubiowicz, Chairman of the Ukrainian Control Committee, to the Defendant Dr. Frank.
DR. SEIDL: It already has the Exhibit Number USA-178 (Document Number 1526-PS); and I will read only the first sentence from that document, in order to show what the relation was between the Defendant Dr. Frank and the author of that letter. I quote: "Complying with your wish I send you this letter, in which I should like to state the abuses and the painful incidents which create an especially difficult position for the Ukrainian population within the Government General." Then I pass on to Page 16 of the document book. That is an excerpt from Exhibit USA-275 (Document Number 1061-PS), namely, the report of SS Brigadefuehrer Stroop about the destruction of the Warsaw ghetto. I quote the second paragraph of Section II, from which it can be seen that the order came directly from the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler: "When the Reichsfuehrer SS visited Warsaw in January 1943, he ordered the SS and Police Leader in the District of Warsaw to transfer to Lublin the armament factories and other enterprises of military importance which were installed within the ghetto, including the workers and the machines." The affidavit which the Prosecution submitted during the cross examination of the Defendant Kaltenbrunner should then really follow after Page 16 of the document book.
COLONEL Y. V. POKROVSKY (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the U.S.S.R.): As far as I can gather, there has been some misunderstanding on this point. Under the number mentioned by Dr. Seidl in his document book there is no document referring to the Warsaw ghetto, but there is a document from the Chief of Police and SS in Galicia relating to the solution of the Jewish problem in Galicia. I should like this elucidated.