dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MEYER-WENDEBORN: I could not issue instructions for prisoners of war; only the Armed Forces could do that. But I carefully saw to it that foreign workers in our district were well treated. And if a beating or some such incident occasionally occurred, I immediately had the workers removed through the Labor Office, and the people for whom they had been working were on purpose left without help for some weeks.
DR. SERVATIUS: Instructions about unjust treatment of these foreign workers did not reach you?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No. On the contrary, I was asked to see to it that they were well treated.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was the attitude of the Political Leaders in your Kreis with regard to the critical political problems which we mentioned earlier an exceptional one, or was that also the attitude outside your Kreis, as far as you could judge? Was it a general attitude?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: Before the war, I had the feeling that that attitude was general. Also during the war; and then while I was in the Fallingbostel Camp and helped to obtain affidavits, I was able to convince myself finally that what I am saying here was generally true for those thousands.
DR. SERVATIUS: You checked and collected these affidavits?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you not reject -unfavorable ones?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, I never did that. There were no unfavorable ones.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then how do you explain the incidents which actually happened, for example, in connection with the Church question and the Jewish question?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: We never knew of the whole extent of these things; we heard very little. It did happen that one man or another who had not forgotten some-experience from the period of the struggle to power misunderstood some instructions and wanted to do stupid things. But in general we did not experience such incidents and knew nothing about them.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then none came to your knowledge?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did not the attitude of the SS, and particularly the refusal to give you permission to visit a concentration camp, cause strong misgivings? You heard rumors about these concentration camps, did you not?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: I did not consider this refusal to let me visit a concentration camp as an attempt to conceal crimes, but in view of the character of the SS, I assumed that it was a form of self-glorification, and that the SS thought: These camps are in our charge and are not the affair of the Political Leaders.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you approve the methods of the Party in every way?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, I did not always approve, and I discussed this mattei7 with my old-time Gauleiter.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you have serious objections?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, my objections were not serious objections, but after this Jewish affair in November, I had to point out the effect which it would have abroad. I had heard that men in high positions did not at all approve, and that gave me courage to voice my own misgivings.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you ever consider whether you should continue in office or resign?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: If I had resigned, I would not have improved matters, but only aggravated them; for I had been in the Kreis for 20 years and my successor could not have known my men so well; as it was, I could recognize mistakes in time and correct them.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that all you want to ask?
DR. SERVATIUS: I wanted to put one or two more questions in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal will adjourn. [The Tribunal adjourned until 31 July 1946 at 1000 hours]
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, did you consider the Blockleiter and the Zellenleiter as Hoheitsträger?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No.
DR.SERVATIUS: Do you not know that in the Organization Book of the Party, the Blockleiter and the Zellenleiter are defined as Hoheitsträger?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: I read that, but I was never able to follow it because the Organization Book started from assumptions which were not given.
DR. SERVATIUS: What do you understand by the term Hoheitsträger?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: The Hoheitsträger is the leading representative of the Movement in his district. He is entitled to give orders to his subordinate Political Leaders and Party members. Moreover, his official and private bearing must at all times be such that non-Party members and State officials will respect him and will listen to him without any legal obligation to do so.,
DR. SERVATIUS: You spoke of the rights which the Political Leaders have. Did the Blockleiter and Zellenleiter also have these rights?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, they did not have them and did not want them.
DR. SERVATIUS: Had the Blockleiter and Zellenleiter any authority to call on the SA, the SS, or the Police?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, they were powerless to do so.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then it is true that the Blockleiter and the Zellenleiter were only assistants to the Ortsgruppenleiter and had no powers of their own?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: The Blockleiter and the Zellenleiter -were the noncommissioned officer corps of the Ortsgruppenleiter.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions to put to this witness.
LIEUTENANT COLONEL J. M.G. GRIFFITH-JONES (Junior Counsel for the United Kingdom): I have certain new documents, two or three pages, in connection with other matters. If the Tribunal wishes it I could present these documents perhaps quickly in the way the Tribunal indicated to Sir David or I could put it in the form of cross-examination. Whatever the Tribunal thinks most convenient.
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Griffith-Jones, if it does not interfere with your case or cross-examination, perhaps it would be better to put the documents in, simply indicating the page or subject.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: That will be done.
THE PRESIDENT: If there is anything particular with this witness you may have ...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: The first matter with which I was intending to deal is the action taken by the Leadership Corps in connection with elections, and I would refer the Tribunal to Document D-34 which will become Exhibit GB-540. I understand the Tribunal has copies of that document. That is a letter from the NSDAP District Memel, dated 26 May 1936 and addressed to Kreisleiter and Organisationsleiter. It is from the NSDAP, Memel District, and translated from the German. It refers to the Reichstag elections of 29 March 1936 and states that in pursuance of an inquiry from the Reich Minister of the Interior, Party member Dr. Frick, a report is to be made on any civil servants who did not record their votes on 29 March 1936: "As far as such cases are known within your Ortsgruppe or your Stuetzpunkt, you will report them to me by name, at the latest by 3 June of this year..." The expression "Stuetzpunkt section"-this is a smaller organization than an Ortsgruppe and was eventually abolished but in 1936 still existed. "...you will report them to me by name at the latest by 3 June of this year. The information will have to be correct under all circumstances." Then the last paragraph, My Lord. "This circular has to be destroyed immediately after the matter is settled." My Lord, the next document is Document D-897, which becomes Exhibit GB-541, and that is a document in connection with the plebiscite of 1938. The first point I make on that is that it shows that the activity referred to in the letter I have just mentioned was not an isolated case. My Lord, the second point upon this document is that it shows the close co-operation between the Security Police and the Political Leaders. On Page 1 of that document appears a special order, dated 4 April 1938, from the Security Service of the Reichsfuehrer SS at Erfurt, which is in Thuringia, the Gau of which Sauckel was Gauleiter.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It is "top secret, strictly confidential," addressed to all heads of sections and to Stuetzpunktleiter: "Stuetzpunktleiter are to report, not later than 1800 hours on 7 April 1938, all persons in their district about whom it is safe to assume (with 100 percent certainty) that they will vote "no" at the impending plebiscite. (Do not forget the International Jehovah's Witnesses.) "Heads of sections are to support the Stuetzpunktleiter locally as much as possible in this matter. "This matter is also to be carried out in closest collaboration with the Ortsgruppenleiter of the Party. The Ortsgruppenleiter will be instructed by the Aussenstellenleiter (head of the branch office) personally after 1800 hours on 5 April 1938." I think I can omit the next paragraph and then I go on: "The tremendous responsibility which the Stuetzpunktleiter have, in particular with regard to this report, is stressed once more. The Stuetzpunktleiter must have no doubts as to the possible consequences for the persons listed in their report. Special attention should be paid as to whether the persons who impart such information to the Stuetzpunktleiter and from whom the Stuetzpunktleiter make their inquiries are not motivated by personal reasons; even Political Leaders are not excepted from this. "The confidential nature of this order is again emphasized. "The order is to be minutely memorized and thereafter destroyed immediately. Every Stuetzpunktleiter is personally responsible to me for the complete destruction of this order." The reasons for the necessity for accuracy appear from the following documents. On Page 2 there are set out certain sections of the population about whom inquiries have got to be made and who have to be particularly watched. It will be seen in the first paragraph: "Increased attention is to be devoted to participation in and the results of the plebiscite on 10 April 1938, particularly in small towns and villages.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It must, above all, be ascertained whether the opponents are to be found in Marxist and other circles of opposing ideologies." Then under the heading "Catholicism," I draw the attention of the Tribunal to Number 2: "Was any attitude expressed during church services and similar meetings?"
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn. [A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will, if it is convenient to the officers of the Court, not have any further recess before 1 o'clock.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: My Lord, I had reached Paragraph Number 2 under "Catholicism" on the second page of Document D-897: "Was any attitude expressed during church services and similar meetings?" Perhaps I might be allowed to ask one question of the witness upon that. Witness, when the Ortsgruppenleiter is charged with making the report on these matters, would it be the Block- and Zellenleiter that he would ask for information as to what was expressed in the various church services throughout his Ortsgruppe?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Would you tell the Tribunal who it would be, if it would not be the Zellenleiter?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: The Ortsgruppenleiter himself would have asked for this confidential information, if it had been inquired for at all.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Do you think the Ortsgruppenleiter would be able to attend every church service in this Ortsgruppe himself? Do you think that is physically possible for any Ortsgruppenleiter?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, they would not have been able to do that, but for such information they would always have had special men from whom they would have obtained advice and information.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Those special men who provided them with advice and information are the Zellen- and Blockleiter, are they not?
MEYER-WENDEBORN: No, they are not.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. Well, we will leave that. The next heading is "Protestantism." I again draw attention to Paragraph 2 under that heading: "Was any attitude expressed about the Anschluss or the plebiscite during services?" And the next paragraph: "What comment did the Church press make?" And again Number 5: "Were the bells of all religious communities rung on the evening of 9 April 1938 following the Fuehrer's speech in Vienna?" Witness, would it be the Block- and Zellenleiter who would report whether the church bells were rung on that evening in their districts?
MEYER-WENDEB0RN: They would have been able to say that, for if they had been rung, the Block- and Zellenleiter would have heard them too.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I turn to the next page of the document, the next to the ultimate paragraph: "It is suggested that the election officials be contacted in a suitable manner where necessary. The exertion of any kind of pressure, however, must be desisted from." I turn to the next page, Page 3 of the English translation, which is a report from the branch office of the Security Service of Weissensee, dated 25 April, and we begin to see how the instructions regarding the election were carried out: "Prior to the election, Party member Paul Fritsche from Weissensee, Thuringia, completed a register of all persons suspected of voting 'no.' On the election day every person included on this list received from a specially selected official a voting paper which was marked with a number imprinted by means of a ribbonless typewriter." Then it describes how the procedure worked. The next page, I quote from the middle of the large paragraph: "The election official ... did not throw the envelope into the voting I box immediately, but tried to push it under the cardboard which is placed on the voting box to cover the slit, so as to be able to open the envelope later at an opportune moment." The next document, the next page, another report from another branch of the Security Service: "To all Ortsgruppenleiter of the NSDAP of the Kreis of Erfurt-Weissensee: "The below-mentioned persons on their appearance in your Ortsgruppen area for the purpose of carrying out their voting duty, are to be specially watched and the Kreisleitung of Erfurt (SD office) is to be notified immediately." There are many names; and lastly: "By order of the Kreisleiter, this matter is to be strictly confidential." On the next page there is another report about a Jehovah's Witness, Robert Siering, and his wife, who appeared in a voting center on Sunday morning and deposited their votes after both had been advised of their duty to vote by the Police in Griefstedt and had been threatened with the removal of their child in case of nonparticipation.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: My Lord, the next document, still on the same subject, is D-902, which will become Exhibit GB-542. On the first page of that exhibit we have a report sent to the Erfurt branch office of the Security Service, marked confidential. It is not clear by whom it is signed. It is dated 7 April 1938, and reads as follows: "After thorough and most careful examination in the area of the Ortsgruppe of Melchendorf and in the closest co-operation with the Ortsgruppenleiter, we have come to the following conclusion: "The following persons will in 9.11 probability vote 'no' at the forthcoming plebiscite." Then, after setting out the names, it gives what they call  "explanations" in the case of each: "Explanation: 1) Wilhelm Messing, taken into protective custody in 1933 because of illegal activity for the Communist Party..."-and so on-"2) Walter Messing, also taken into protective custody in 1933 for slandering the SA." I do not think I need bother with anything further on that page. I draw the attention of the Tribunal to the last three paragraphs on the next page: "Guenther Hartung, 113 Johannesstrasse, entrance Wallstrasse, must be reported as being an enemy of the State and opposed to the plebiscite. "Hartung must be described as morally totally degenerate and it is necessary to lock him up in spite of his advanced age (70 years). "Among other things, he referred to the German troops on their entry into Austria as loafers. Sufficient witnesses testifying against Hartung are available." My Lord, on the next page, another report in connection with the plebiscite, I draw the attention of the Tribunal to the penultimate paragraph: "The wife of the Jew Bielschowski ... who was dragged along just before closing time of the plebiscite, voted 'no,' as can be proved." Now, turn to some pages ahead, Page 7 of the English translation, which describes how the votes were screened in another area by a ribbonless typewriter, and then again on Page 9 of the translation, another report: "The laborer Otto Wiegand ...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: was requested four times to record his vote on the day of the election and finally voted only under duress." And the next report on the same page: "The married woman Frieda Schreiner ... did not vote in spite of being repeatedly invited to do so. The above is a fanatic member of the former association of International Jehovah's Witnesses. "The husband, who holds the same opinions and who was recently involved in criminal proceedings because of them, recorded his vote. To be sure, this was probably exclusively for fear of renewed arrest." My Lord, the other portion of that document that I referred to is on Page 11, where there is shown an extract from the local newspaper recording the united German vote, which has been obtained by the Security Service with co-operation of the Leadership Corps in the way in which we have seen. My Lord, again to emphasize that these were not isolated cases, I would refer the Tribunal to a document which has already been put in, and it will be found on Page 91 of the small document book that Sir David handed to the Tribunal yesterday, Page 91 of that book, Pages 118 and 119 of the German. It is Document R-142, Exhibit USA-481. That, it will be seen, is a report again from the Security Service, but this time in Koblenz. I read the second paragraph: "The high percentage of 'no' votes and invalid votes in nearly all cases is due to the religious attitude of the population, whether they be Catholics or Protestants ... The district manager"-My Lord, that in the original is the "Kreisgeschäftsfuehrer," who is one of the staff officers of the Kreisleiter-"the Kreisgeschäftsfuehrer of the Kreis Kochem gave the assurance that it was mostly women who voted 'no' or whose votes were invalid. As became known here, a supervisory control was ordered at several of the..."
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Griffith-Jones, this is already in evidence, is it not?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Yes, this is in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think you need go into it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I am much obliged. I only drew the attention of the Tribunal to it. One further document which is also in evidence will be found at Page 55 of that same document book, at Page 55 and then 54, the documents being 849-PS, which is Exhibit USA-354, and 848-PS, Exhibit USA-353. The two documents together describe how the Party...
THE PRESIDENT: Colonel Griffith-Jones, I do not think you ought to comment upon documents which are already in evidence unless they are documents upon which the witness can throw light.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It is a little difficult to make the point which I would have made in cross-examining the witness on these documents if I only confine myself to the new ones without drawing the attention of the Tribunal to other documents which relate to the same matter.
THE PRESIDENT: If they are not new documents and you want to cross-examine the witness about them, you can put them to the witness.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well, Sir. I will leave that particular subject now. The other subject on which I had intended to cross-examine this witness is euthanasia, or merc y killing, and the part the Political Leaders played in those matters. My Lord, this is a new document, D-906, which becomes Exhibit GB-543. I would refer first of all to the second of the three documents which are printed on the first page of that exhibit; Number 2, Martin Bormann, 24 September 1940, a letter from the National Socialist German Workers' Party, the Fuehrer's Deputy, to the Gauleitung of Franconia, for the attention of Kreisleiter Zimmermann: "Your letter of 13 September 1940 was given to me by Party member Hoffmahn. The commission which was working at Neuendettelsau is under the control of Reichsleiter Bouhler. "The text of the notifications to relatives is being variously worded, as I was once more assured yesterday; naturally, however, it can happen sometimes that two families living close to each other receive letters with exactly the same text. "It is natural that the representatives of Christian ideology denounce the commission's measures; it must be equally taken for granted that all Party offices support, as far as necessary, the work of the commission." Then I go back to Number 1 on that page; Gaustabsamtsleiter for Franconia, Sellmer-that was another staff officer of the Gau staffhandwritten note from 1 October 1940: "Justice. Visit from Party member Blankenburg, Berlin. Action begins in the near future. So far hardly any failures have occurred. 30,000 finished. Further 100,000 to 120,000 are waiting. The circle of those who are initiated to be kept very small. If necessary the Kreisleiter is to be notified in, good time." Then it goes on: "The Fiffirer gave the order; the law is ready. At present only clear cases, that is 100 percent ones, are being settled. Later an extension will take place. From now on, notification will be given in a... "-it is not clear here from the print. And then at the end of the document-"Kreisleiter Sellmer...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: is to be informed." I go to Number 3 which, is a situation report by the Kreisleitung of Erlangen dated 26 November 1940, dealing with the elimination of mental patients: "On orders from the Ministry of thp Interior, signed Schulz or Schultze, a commission consisting, among others, of a north German doctor and a number of students appeared some time ago in the local sanatorium and nursing home." And then it describes how he examined the patients who were to be transferred to another institution on orders from the Reich Defense Commissioner and that: ". . . a Berlin transport company was to carry out the transfer and the head of the institution was to follow the directives of this company, which was in possession of the list of names." In this way three transports with a total number of 370 patients were in the meantime transferred to Sonnenstein near Pirna and to the Linz district. It goes on: "A further transport - is to leave in January of next year. The head of the institution ... And then it goes on for a few lines, and starts again: "Strangely enough various relatives received notification after the transportation that the patients had died. In some cases pneumonia and in others an infectious disease were given as the cause of death. "At the same time the relatives were further informed that it had been necessary to cremate the body and that, if they were interested, they could have the clothing of the deceased sent to them. The registry office of Erlangen was also informed by the institution of the various cases of death, and again either pneumonia or an infectious disease was given as the cause-illnesses which had no connection with the previous medical history so that it is to be assumed that false indications were given. The population is terribly disturbed about the transfer of patients, because they connect it with the cases of death which are becoming known in rapid succession. They speak in part openly, in part secretly, of an elimination of patients for which there is no kind of legal justification.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Just now,, in war times, such unrest among the population has a doubly unfavorable effect. Moreover, the events described above give the Church and religious circles cause to revive their attitude against National Socialism."
THE PRESIDENT: Under which part of Article 6 of the Charter does this come?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: It would come under Crimes against Humanity with respect to ...
THE PRESIDENT: Are they connected with war?