dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
BOHLE: I did not know about the activity in Norway. I have already testified to that effect. I was very familiar with the activity in Greece which was along perfectly normal lines.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Very well. I want to leave that, and I just want to ask you two questions about another matter. Am I right in saying that the information -- and I am not going to argue with you now as to what type of information it was -- but the information that your organization sent back, was that passed on to the Defendant Hess?
BOHLE: Sometimes yes and sometimes no. It depended upon the nature of the information. If it was information on foreign policy it was, of course, sent to another office.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You were in fact acting as a pool of information, were you not? Let me explain myself: You were forwarding information that you received, to the SS?
BOHLE: Sometimes, yes; if not to the SS then probably...
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: To the Foreign Office?
BOHLE: Sometimes also to the Foreign Office.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: And to the Abwehr, were you not?
BOHLE: Very seldom, but it happened occasionally.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You say very seldom. Did you not have a liaison officer attached to your organization from the Abwehr?
BOHLE: No. I had only one assistant who maintained an unofficial connection with the Abwehr, if the occasion arose.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Perhaps we are talking about the same gentleman. Did you not have a Captain Schmauss attached to your head office in Berlin?
BOHLE: Mr. Schmauss has never been a captain but he was a political leader and honorary SS-leader. In the Army, I believe he was a sergeant. Moreover, he did not come from the Abwehr; he was chief of personnel of the Auslands-Organisation and his function as liaison was purely unofficial.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You say he was not a liaison officer between your organization and the Abwehr?
BOHLE: No, he was not an officer at all. He was not a member of the Wehrmacht.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I do not want to quibble with you about his rank. Was he, in effect, whatever he was, acting in a capacity of liaison between you and the Abwehr?
BOHLE: Yes, that is correct. LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES. Very well. Now, in addition to the information that Hess obtained through your system of reporting, that is, the Auslands-Organisation, did he also obtain information from those organizations which were dealing with the Volksdeutsche, that is to say, non-German citizens, racial Germans abroad who were not members of your organization, because you allowed only Ger-man citizens to become members of your organization. But others -- Volksdeutsche, I think you call them -- did Hess receive information from other sources about their activities?
BOHLE: I could not say, because I did not discuss it with Hess, and the affairs of the Volksdeutsche were entirely out of my field.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Dr. Karl Haushofer was for some time in 1938 and 1939 president of the VDA, was he not?
BOHLE: I believe so.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Which was an organization dealing with the activities of the Volksdeutsche in foreign countries. Is that correct?
BOHLE: Yes, I believe so. I am not familiar with this field.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: And, as you know, Hess and Karl Haushofer were great friends, were they not?
BOHLE: Yes, that is correct.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Haushofer had been Hess' pupil at Munich University; did you know that?
BOHLE: It was the other way around.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Do you not know that Hess received information from Haushofer as to the activities of these other organizations?
BOHLE: No, I know nothing about it.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Well, now, I do not want to catch you out. Is that your answer? Are you being honest to this Tribunal?
BOHLE: No. I wanted to add that the Deputy of the Fuehrer very painstakingly separated the "Auslandsdeutsche," that is, citizens of the Reich who worked abroad, and the "Volksdeutsche," and with equal care he made certain that I should have nothing to do with the question of Volksdeutsche. Therefore I knew nothing of these matters.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Hess as Deputy to the Fuehrer was in fact in, charge of all matters concerning Germanism abroad; was he not?
BOBLE: Yes, that is so, because he was born abroad. However, to my knowledge, he did not take charge of these matters in his capacity as Deputy to the Fuehrer. I do not believe that there was any connection.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Are you telling the Tribunal that just because he was born in a foreign country he had charge of all matters concerning Germanism abroad?
BOHLE: I believe so, because any other Reichsleiter of the Party might just as well have taken rare of these matters. However, I assume that Hess took over these functions simply because he was familiar with foreign countries.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I want to be quite clear. Whatever the reason was, he in fact did have charge of them. That is your evidence?
BOHLE: Yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Now, I just want to remind you of a passage in your interrogation in this building on the 9th of November. Do you remember that you were interrogated on the 9th ...
BOHLE: [Interposing.] : September?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: On 9 November last.
BOHLE: November, yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: You were interrogated by a Lieutenant Martin, the afternoon of that day.
BOHLE: By Lieutenant Martin, yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: Let me read a short extract from the transcript of that interrogation and ask you whether, hi fact, it is correct. You were being asked about the information which came back through the Auslands-Organisation. Is that correct?
BOHLE: That is quite correct, yes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: And as you have said it there, is that a correct description of the position that Hess was in with regard to information from abroad, from agents abroad? Does that correctly state the facts as they were?
BOHLE: So far as I can see, it is probably correct. I myself can judge only to the extent to which the reports concerned the Auslands-Organisation. About the others I can make only a guess; I cannot give definite information, because I was not acquainted with them.
LT. COL. GRIFF ITH-JONES: I have no further questions. Perhaps I might get the exhibits in order, the ones that I have referred to. The Yearbook of the Auslands-Organisation from which the stories about Norway and Greece came, becomes Exhibit GB-284. The two translations that you have are numbered Documents M-153 and M-156, both of which become Exhibit GB-284. The secret wireless telegram, which was Document Number M-158, becomes Exhibit GB-285; and the letter from Landesgruppenleiter Konradi, which was Document Number 3796-PS, becomes Exhibit GB-286.
BOHLE: May I add something to a point which was brought up by the British cross-examination?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
BOHLE: May I begin?
THE PRESIDENT: You may give a short explanation. You are not here to make a speech.
BOHLE: No, I do not want to make a speech. I merely wish to say the following on the question of secret transmitters which was brought up this morning: Although I am not familiar with the technique of these secret transmitters, I assume that a secret transmitter would be of use in a foreign country only if there were a receiving set in Berlin. I am quite certain that to my knowledge there was never such a receiving set, either in my office in Berlin or in any other office of the Auslands-Organisation, and therefore I may assume that such a receiving set did not exist.
COLONEL JOHN HARLAN AMEN (Associate Trial Counsel for the United States): Do you recall being interrogated on 11 September 1945, by Colonel Brundage?
BOHLE: Yes.
COL. AMEN: I want to read you a few questions and answers from your interrogation and ask you whether you recall being asked those questions and having made those answers: Do you remember being asked those questions and having made those answers?
BOHLE: That is absolutely correct.
COL. AMEN: And were those answers true when you made them?
BOHLE: Absolutely true.
COL. AMEN: And are they still true today?
BOHLE: They are still true.
COL. AMEN: So that you accept responsibility for everything which your office was conducting, is that true?
BOHLE: Yes, that is correct.
COL. AMEN: Who was Von Strempel?
BOFILE: Von Strempel was, I believe, counsellor to a secretary of a legation (Gesandtschaftsrat) in the foreign office, but I do not know him very well.
COL. AMEN: Was he not the first secretary of the German Embassy in the United States from 1938 until Pearl Harbor?
BOHLE: I cannot say definitely. I knew him only slightly and had absolutely no contact with him.
COL. AMEN: Well, he was interrogated with respect to the support of the German-American Bund by the Auslands-Organisation prior to 1938, and I want to read you just one or two questions and answers which he made and ask you whether they conform to your understanding of the facts. Do you understand?
BOHLE: Yes.
COL. AMEN: Does that conform with your understanding of the facts?
BOHLE: No, that is a completely false representation. The Auslands-Organisation gave no financial support whatever and had no connection with the German-American Bund. I have stated that clearly in many interrogations here in Nuremberg, and have signed an affidavit to that effect.
COL. AMEN: I know you have. So that if Von Strempel has sworn that that is a fact, your testimony is that he was not telling the truth. Is that correct?
BOHLE: I am of the opinion that if Von Strempel was legation secretary, or secretary of another office, he could not have known of the matter and he therefore testified about something which was not quite clear to him. In any event, what he said is not true.
COL. AMEN: Are you familiar with the fact that in 1938 an order was issued prohibiting members of the German embassies and consulates to continue relations or connections with the Bund?
BOHLE: It was a general order for German citizens abroad to resign from the Bund if they were members. But as far as I know, that order was issued some years previously about 1935 or 1936, by the Deputy of the Fuehrer upon my request.
DR. SEIDL: I object to this question; it has no connection with the evidence for which the witness Bohle was called. During his direct examination he was not questioned on any subject which has the slightest relation to the question of the activity of the German-American Bund. I do not believe that this form of interrogation is designed to test the witness, as it has not the slightest bearing on the subject.
COL. AMEN: It seems to me to have a very direct bearing on whether or not this organization was engaged in espionage work abroad and within the United States.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly; in the opinion of the Tribunal the questions are perfectly proper.
COL. AMEN: Is it not a fact that in spite of that order the foreign section of the Nazi Party nevertheless continued to support the Bund?
BOHLE: No, I was not aware of that and I consider it to be impossible.
COL. AMEN: Now I would like to read you one or two further extracts from the interrogation of Strempel and ask you whether these statements conform with your knowledge of the facts: Does that conform with your recollection of the facts?
BOHLE: No. In my opinion, that does not correspond to the facts. Naturally, I cannot say whether the consul, Dr. Draeger, maintained his contacts against my order, but there was an imperative order to withdraw completely from the Bund, because from the very beginning I objected strenuously to the activities of the Bund and was supported in my objections by the Deputy of the Fuehrer.
COL. AMEN: You were acquainted with Draeger, were you not?
BOHLE: Yes.
COL. AMEN: What was his position in the United States, insofar as your organization was concerned?
BOHLE: He was a liaison man (Vertrauensmann) of the Auslands-Organisation for the individual Party members in the United States.
COL. AMEN: He was what was known as a confidential agent, was he not?
BOHLE: No, he was not, naturally, but we had...
COL. AMEN: And as a matter of fact, you called him a "confidential agent" in your interrogation, did you not?
BOHLE: No. I called him a "Vertrauensmann," and this was translated into "confidence man." I did ...
COL. AMEN: Well, I will accept that correction. He was a confidence man for your organization in the United States. Correct?
BOHLE: Correct, yes, that is true.
COL. AMEN: And in addition to him there were other confidence men of your organization in the United States? Correct?
BOHLE: Yes, correct.
COL. AMEN: Will you tell the Tribunal what their names were and where they were located?
BOHLE: One was Wiedemann, consul general in San Francisco. There was also Consul Dr. Gissling in Los Angeles and Consul Von Spiegel in New Orleans I believe, but I do not know; perhaps it was Boston. It was one of the two. I believe these are all.
COL. AMEN: And each of those individuals made reports from time to time which were forwarded to you through Draeger. Is that not a fact?
BOHLE: No, they made no reports to me. I cannot recall that I ever saw a report from Wiedemann, Spiegel, or Gissling. That was not their job.
COL. AMEN: Draeger made the reports to you, did he not?
BOHLE: Draeger made the reports to the Auslands-Organisation in Berlin or to me personally. Mostly to my office.
COL. AMEN: And contained in those reports were various items of information collected by other confidential agents? Isn't that correct?
BOHLE: I do not know, because I am not familiar with these reports and I cannot say whether there was anything to report. We had no Party organization in the United States, because it had been dissolved by Rudolf Hess in April 1933.
COL. AMEN: So you say; but you nevertheless had an individual in Germany whose duty it was to read and pass upon these reports from Draeger as they came in. Is that not a fact?
BOHLE: So far as I know, and I believe my information is correct; the reports that we received were of a purely technical nature. We merely had few Party members in the United States whose card index and membership fees had to be looked after in order to preserve their privileges as Party members. Political activity in the United States was forbidden and did not actually exist.
COL. AMEN: But I am suggesting to you that in spite of the order the activities of your organization nevertheless continued. Now, is it not a fact that there was an individual in your organization in Germany who received these reports from the United States regularly?
BOHLE: It was my assistant, Mr. Grothe, who ...
COL. AMEN: I beg your pardon?
BOHLE: It was my assistant, Mr. Grothe.
COL. AMEN: Correct. Why didn't you tell me that before when I asked you about the individual who read these reports from the United States as they came in?
BOHLE: Please repeat the question. I did not fully understand it.
COL. AMEN: Well, I will withdraw that question. After Grothe received these reports from the United States regularly, to whom did he report the substance of those reports?
BOHLE: So far as I know, he usually kept them, because they contained nothing of interest and he himself was not in a position to use them. Mr. Grothe had an honorary position with us because of his advanced age and took over this branch of the office because it was of no importance at all in the Auslands-Organisation.
COL. AMEN: So that you were in no position to know what was contained in those reports? Is that correct?
BOHLE: That is for the most part correct.
COL. AMEN: So you do not know whether they were important or not and you do not know whether they contained information relative to espionage matters or not. Is that correct?
BOHLE: I am sure that if they had contained such information, Grothe would have submitted them to me.
COL. AMEN: Well, outside of that, you have no knowledge of it whatsoever. Is that correct?
BOHLE: That is correct.
COL. AMEN: Now, let me just read you one or two more excerpts from the interrogation of Von Strempel: Does that conform to your knowledge of the facts?
BOHLE: I have not the slightest idea of this report by Herr Von Thomsen. This is the first time that I have heard of protests from the Embassy in Washington regarding prohibited connections between Dr. Draeger and the Bund.
COL. AMEN: You know who Thomsen was, do you not?
BOHLE: Thomsen was Charge d'Affaires in Washington.
COL. AMEN: And you know that from time to time various officials of the Bund came over here and had conferences with repre-sentatives of your organization and of the Fuehrer, do you not?
BOHLE: I have heard that they visited the Fuehrer but they did not visit me and we had no conferences of any description.
COL. AMEN: I did not say with you. I said with representatives of your office; perhaps your friend, Mr. Grothe?
BOHLE: That might be possible but I cannot say definitely because he did not report to me on this matter. They could not have discussed any official matters with Grothe, because he knew very well that I completely repudiated the activities of the German Volksbund in America.
COL. AMEN: In any event, however, you accept responsibility for everything which was done in your organization. Correct?
BOHLE: Naturally.
THE PRESIDE NT: Do either of the other Chief Prosecutors wish to cross-examine? [There was no response.] Then, Dr. Seidl, you can re-examine if you wish.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, you have already answered a question that I intended to ask you, that is, that there was no secret transmitter in Germany which would have been in a position to broadcast secret communications to foreign countries. I ask you now, did you yourself have a transmitter in Germany?
BOHLE: I myself had no transmitter.
DR. SEIDL: Did the Auslands-Organisation have such a trans-mitter?
BOHLE: I consider that to be absolutely impossible; if there had been one, I would have known of it. I never saw one.
DR. SEIDL: Is it correct that in order to communicate with Germans overseas by radio you yourself did not use code on the German network?
BOHLE: That is correct.
DR. SEIDL: You stated previously that the Deputy of the Fuehrer, Hess, was your immediate superior?
BOHLE: Yes.
DR. SEIDL: Were the directives given to you by the Deputy of the Fuehrer of a general nature, or did he go into the details of the work of the Auslands-Organisation?
BOHLE: The Deputy of the Fuehrer gave only general directives and left all the details to me because I had his complete confidence. In his general directives he impressed upon me repeatedly in the sharpest terms the fact that it was my duty to avoid any measures by the Auslands-Organisation that might be detrimental to foreign relations.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire. [The witness left the stand.]
DR. SEIDL: Your Honors, before I go on to my next witness -- that is the witness Strolin -- I should like to submit the suggestion or rather the application to the Tribunal that the affidavit of the witness Gaus be handled in the same way as the interrogation of the witness Bohle. Gaus has already been admitted as a witness for another defendant. However, the Defense Counsel for the other defendant waived his right to call this witness. The situation is the same as it was in the case of Bohle; therefore it would be preferable, in my opinion, to hear the witness Gaus now and to read his sworn statement to him during his examination as has been done in other cases, for instance in the case of Blaha.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the affidavit been translated yet and submitted in the various languages to the Chief Prosecutors?
DR. SEIDL: I do not know whether the translation is complete. At any rate, this noon I submitted six copies of the affidavit to the Translation Division.
THE PRESIDENT: Can you tell me, Sir David or Colonel Pokrovsky?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, I have not seen this affidavit, and, My Lord, with regard to the last one, we got it hurriedly translated into English, but it was only by the kindness of my Soviet colleagues, who allowed the matter to go on without a Russian translation and left it to my delegation to deal with, that the matter went on. Otherwise, my Soviet colleagues would have asked the Tribunal to have it put back. It is very difficult when these affidavits are sought to be put in at the last minute without having given us a chance of seeing them.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps Colonel Pokrovsky could tell me whether he has seen this affidavit or had it translated yet.
COLONEL Y. V. POKROVSKY (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the U.S.S.R.): Members of the Tribunal, I fully share the viewpoint of Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe. It appears to me absolutely unacceptable to have this document presented immediately to the Tribunal. If I understood Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe correctly, he did not receive this affidavit. The Soviet delegation is in the same position. Besides, I would like to remind you that the question of this witness has already been discussed, that it has been definitely solved, and it seems to me there are no grounds for a further revision of this question.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, the Tribunal considers that the course which must be taken is that that affidavit must be translated and submitted to the Tribunal for their consideration, for this witness was allowed to the Defendant Ribbentrop, I think, and then he withdrew his application for the witness. You have not applied for the witness Gaus, and I would point out to you and to the other counsel for the defendants that it is very inconvenient that documents of this sort -- after all the question of witnesses and documents has been thoroughly gone into by the Tribunal -- should be presented at the last moment and without any translation whatever. But we will not go into it now, and it must be translated and submitted to the Tribunal in the three languages.
DR. SEIDL: Perhaps I might make one short remark in regard to the last point. Up to now I was always under the impression that a formal application to call a witness would not be necessary in the case of a witness who has already been admitted by the Tribunal for another defendant. That was undoubtedly so in the case of Gaus who was named as a witness for the Defendant Von Ribbentrop. Consequently I had no reason to make a formal application, since I would have the opportunity to interrogate the witness in cross-examination anyhow. I have just been informed by counsel for the Defendant Von Ribbentrop that, as his representative said last Saturday, he will forego calling the witness Gaus, and now I, in turn, apply to call Ambassador Dr. Gaus as witness regarding the statements in his sworn affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not know what you mean by saying you call him. You can apply to call him if you like, but you do not call him until you apply.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, Sir.
THE PRESIDENT: When we have seen this document, we will determine the question.
DR. SEIDL: The next witness admitted by the Tribunal for the Defendant Hess is the witness Karl Strolin. In order to save time I have also prepared an affidavit for this witness, and I ask the Tribunal to inform me whether we will follow the same procedure with this witness as with the witness Bohle, or whether the Prosecution agree that only the affidavit should be presented.
THE PRESIDENT: Have they seen the affidavit?
DR. SEIDL: I gave the affidavit to the Prosecution this morning.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I have got an English translation of the affidavit. There are one or two questions the Prosecution want to put to the witness, so I suggest that the most convenient course would be if Dr. Seidl did as he did with the last witness, to read the affidavit, and then after the affidavit is read, the few questions that the Prosecution desire to be put can be put to him.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, very well.