dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
THOMS: I did not say that. I did not say that Herr Puhl must have noticed something peculiar. I merely said that, if any objections were to be raised, then they would have to come from Herr Puhl, since he was as well aware of the character of these deliveries as I was. And, if there was any suspicion, then Herr Puhl's suspicion would probably have been aroused more strongly than mine.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you told us earlier that special secrecy was ordered in this connection, but at the same time you mentioned that quite apart from this SS affair, there were also other business matters which apparently had to be handled with special secrecy. Is that true?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: You need not give us any names, but I would only like to know what the other affairs were?
THOMS: These are matters which had to do with the conduct of the war. There were transactions in gold, and perhaps also in foreign currency, et cetera.
DR. SAUTER: They were not criminal affairs, therefore?
THOMS: No, not criminal.
DR. SAUTER: Then, Witness . . .
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the Tribunal thinks that this is getting too far away from the point really to ask him about other deliveries.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, but the question is already answered, Mr. President. Witness, because of this secrecy in connection with the SS deliveries which reached the Reichsbank, I should be interested in knowing, insofar as they were realized by the Reichsbank, whether any accounts were rendered, as I assume to be the case from the documents before us?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: By your Main Treasury?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: To whom were these accounts sent?
THOMS: They were sent to the Reichsfuehrer SS' office direct; that is to say, they were collected by Melmer directly from the bank.
DR. SAUTER: Did they not go to any other office?
THOMS: And then they were officially passed on to the Foreign Currency Department.
DR. SAUTER: To the Foreign Currency Department, that is, to a State Department?
THOMS: No, that is a department of the Reichsbank which in turn is the link with the Directorate.
DR. SAUTER: Were not these accounts also transmitted, or did they not go, to the Reich Ministry of Finance?
THOMS: The liaison man, Melmer, always received two accounts, that is, in duplicate. Whether the Reichsfuehrer's office sent one copy to the Reich Ministry of Finance, I do not know.
DR. SAUTER: Were these accounts really treated confidentially, that is, kept secret?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: For instance, the accounts with the Municipal Pawn Broker's Office?
THOMS: In the account with the Municipal Pawn Broker's Office the depositor was not named.
DR. SAUTER: What happened to these gold teeth?
THOMS: They were melted down by the Prussian State Mint. The gold was then refined and the fine gold was returned to the Reichsbank.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you said earlier that at the beginning of 1943 certain articles had arrived stamped "Auschwitz." I think you said at the beginning of 1943.
THOMS: Yes, but I cannot tell you the exact date now.
DR. SAUTER: You said "We all knew that there was a concentration camp there." Did you really know that as early as the beginning of 1943, Witness?
THOMS: Naturally, now I can...
DR. SAUTER: Yes, now of course, we all know it. I am talking about the time at which this happened.
THOMS: I cannot say that for certain. I made that statement on the strength-I beg your pardon, that is, probably-these deliveries were probably not handled until as late as 1945 or 1944 in the late autumn. It is possible that something about Auschwitz had already leaked out.
DR. SAUTER: Now, you said under Number 14 of your statement that one of the first clues to the source of these articles -apparently meaning the concentration camps-was the fact that a parcel of paper was stamped "Lublin." This was early in 1943. And another indication was the fact that some items bore the stamp "Auschwitz." "We all knew"-I've already emphasized this before for a very good reason-"we all knew that these places were the sites of concentration camps." That's your statement, and I now repeat the question. Of course we all know it now; but did you, Herr Reichsbank Councillor, know at the beginning of 1943 that there was this huge concentration camp at Auschwitz?
THOMS: No. To that positive type of question I must say no, I did not know it, but...
THE PRESIDENT: He did not say anything about a huge concentration camp at Auschwitz.
DR. SAUTER: No, that was a rhetorical exaggeration of mine. I said that we knew from the Trial that there was a huge concentration camp there.
THE PRESIDENT: Did he know it? Did he know that there was a huge concentration camp in 1943? He has not said so.
THOMS: I can answer "no" to your question, but this is the point: I assume that this slip marked "Auschwitz" came from a delivery which was probably made in 1943, but was not dealt with until much later; and I made that statement when I was already in Frankfurt, so that the name "Auschwitz" was familiar to me. I admit that there may be an exaggeration insofar as I did retrospectively tell myself that that was a concentration camp, you see. But I know that at the time, somehow, our attention was drawn to the name "Auschwitz," and I think we even asked a question about the connection; but we received no answer and we never asked again.
DR. SAUTER: Well then, Witness, I have one last question. The Prosecution has shown us the Document 3947-PS. I repeat, 3947-PS. Apparently this is the draft of a memorandum which some department in the Reichsbank seems to have prepared for the Directorate of the Reichsbank. It is dated 31 March 1944, and it contains the sentence on Page 2 which I shall read to you because it refers to Defendant Funk and to Defendant Goering. This is the sentence: "The Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich, the Delegate for the Four Year Plan, hereby informs the German Reichsbank, in a letter of 19 March 1944, copy of which is enclosed,"-incidentally, the copy is not here, at least I have not got it-"that the considerable amounts of gold and silver objects, jewels, and so forth, at the Main Trustee Office East should be delivered to the Reichsbank according to the order issued by Reich Minister Funk"-the defendant-"and Graf Schwerin-Krosigk, Reich Finance Minister. The conversion of these objects should be accomplished in the same way as the 'Melmer' deliveries." That is the end of my quotation. Defendant Funk tells me, however, that he knew nothing about such instructions, and that such an agreement or such a letter was entirely unknown to him and that he did not know anything at all about the "Melmer" deliveries.
MR. DODD: I must object to the form of the question. I have objected before that it is a long story anticipating the answer to the question put to the witness. I think it is an unfair way to examine.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, you know, do you not, that you are not entitled to give evidence yourself? You are not entitled to say what Funk told you, unless he has given the evidence.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, this is not one of our witnesses. His is a witness who has volunteered for the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, it is not a question of whose witness he is. You were stating what Funk told you, and you were not referring to anything that Funk had said in evidence, and you are not entitled to do that.
DR. SAUTER: As you were Reichsbankrat I should be interested to know whether you knew anything about these orders which are mentioned in the letter of 31 March 1944 from an office of the Reichsbank, and whether the Defendant Funk was concerned with this?
THOMS: I think I can remember that instructions actually did exist which stated that gold from the Main Trustee Office East should be delivered to the Reichsbank. I am not absolutely certain whether this sentence is from a note written by the Deputy Director of the Main Treasury, Herr Kropp, to the Directorate of the Reichsbank at the time. I am fairly certain that originally such instructions were actually given, but I want to point out that the Main Treasury through the Precious Metal Department was against accepting these valuables because technically they were not in a position permanently to assume responsibility for such considerable deliveries of miscellaneous articles. This instruction was cancelled later on through Herr Kropp's intervention. The deliveries from the Main Trustee Office East to the Reichsbank, especially to the Main Treasury, were not undertaken. I believe, however, I am right in saying that originally instructions of the type which you have just described did exist.
DR. SAUTER: Did you see that instruction yourself?
THOMS: I think that in the files of the Precious Metals Department, which are in the hands of the American Government, there will be carbon copies of these instructions.
DR. SAUTER: Was that instruction signed by the Defendant Funk?
THOMS: That I cannot say.
DR. SAUTER: Or by some other office?
THOMS: I really cannot tell you at the moment, but I cannot assume that it is the case because if the text reads, "from the Finance Minister and Herr Funk," then some other department must have signed.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have no further questions.
MR. DODD: May I ask one or two questions on re-direct examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. DODD: Herr Thoms, there wasn't any exaggeration about the fact that you did find a slip of paper with the word "Auschwitz" written on it among one of these shipments, was there?
THOMS: No. I found the note.
MR. DODD: Now, I suppose you found lots of things among these shipments with names written on them. There must have been something that made you remember "Auschwitz," isn't that so?
THOMS: Yes.
MR. DODD: Well, what was it?
THOMS: I must assume-I mean that I know from my recollection that there was some connection with a concentration camp, but I cannot say. I am of the opinion that it must have happened later. It is really...
MR. DODD: Well, I don't care to press it. I just wanted to make perfectly clear to the Tribunal that you told us that you did remember "Auschwitz" and it had such a meaning for you that you remembered it as late as after the surrender of Germany. That is so, isn't it?
THOMS: Yes.
MR. DODD: I have no further questions.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): You said there were about 77 deliveries, is that right?
THOMS: Yes, there were over 70.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): How large were the deliveries? Were they in trucks?
THOMS: They varied in size. Generally they arrived in ordinary cars, but sometimes they arrived in trucks. It depended. When there were bank notes, for instance, the bulk was smaller and the weight was less. If it was silver or silver articles, then the weight was greater and a small lorry would bring it.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): There were several lorries, or trucks, in each delivery, usually?
THOMS: No, the deliveries were not so large as that. There was at the most one truck.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And one other question: Do I understand you to say that these articles were transferred to new containers?
THOMS: Yes, they were put into ordinary bags by the Reichsbank. The bags were labeled "Reichsbank."
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Bags marked with the Reichsbank's name on the bag?
THOMS: Yes, on which the word "Reichsbank" was written.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire. [The witness Puhl took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Now, Dr. SEIDL, do you want to ask the witness Puhl a few questions? Witness, you remember that you are still on oath?
PUHL: Yes, Sir.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, in connection with Document 3947-PS, USA-850, I have several questions to put to you. You heard earlier when the witness Thoms was examined that this letter contains a paragraph which refers to Reich Marshal Goering and which is connected with the Main Trustee Office East. Is it true that this Main Trustee Office was an office which had been established by a Reich law and that its right to confiscate had also been specifically outlined by Reich law?
PUHL: I cannot answer the second part of your question without looking it up since I am not a legally trained man. The Main Trustee Office East was an officially established office-whether by a law or by a decree, is something I cannot tell you at the moment.
DR. SEIDL: To your knowledge, did the Main Trustee Office East have any connection with the SS Economic Administration headquarters, that is to say, with the office of Pohl?
PUHL: I have never observed that.
DR. SEIDL: Is it obviously out of the question, at least when you read the letter, that the Main Trustee Office East and its deliveries could in any way be connected with the "Melmer" action?
PUHL: That very probably is so, yes.
DR. SEIDL: You mean there was no connection?
PUHL: That there was no connection.
DR. SEIDL: You mentioned this morning that among the business transactions which the Reichsbank handled very. unwillingly were those with the Customs Investigation and the Currency Control Offices. The last part of this paragraph which refers to the Defendant Goering contains a sentence which refers to the conversion of objects of a similar type which were taken from the occupied western territories. Is it true that, particularly in the occupied western territories, both the Currency Control Offices and the Customs Investigation Offices obtained rich booty?
PUHL: The total of the valuables which were brought in by both these offices is unknown to me. I rather doubt that it was extraordinarily big. However, they were fairly large sums, mostly, of course, in foreign currency.
DR. SLIDE: I have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, do you want to ask him anything?
MR. DODD: After having heard Herr Thoms' testimony, do you wish to change any of your testimony that you gave this morning?
PUHL: No.
MR. DODD: And your affidavit that you gave under oath, do you wish to have it remain as it is?
PULL: Yes.
MR. DODD: That is all I have.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you know who Kropp, who signed under the word "Hauptkasse" in the letter of 31 March 1944, Document 3947-PS, is?
PUHL: Herr Kropp was an official of our Treasury Department. He had a comparatively responsible position.
THE PRESIDENT: Of which department?
PUHL: The Treasury Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. The witness can retire. [The witness left the stand.] Dr. Siemers.
DR. SIEMERS: Admiral Raeder, will you come up to the witness stand? [The Defendant Raeder took the stand.] May I remind you that I put the basic question whether the construction of the Navy was to serve aggressive or defensive purposes. The witness wishes to answer that question by referring to parts of the speech he made in 1928. It is Exhibit Number Raeder-6, Document Book 1, Page 5, and the speech itself begins on Page 17. Please go ahead.
RAEDER: First of all, I want to say that Minister Severing, whom I had asked for as one of my witnesses, brought this speech along of his own free will, as he still remembers the year 1928.
DR. SIEMERS: Mr. President, this is to be found on Page 16 of the document book. It is Raeder's letter to Minister Severing, dated 8 October 1928. Severing gave me this speech when he came to Nuremberg to appear as a witness.
RAEDER: I shall quote from Page 17, the fifth line from the bottom, to shorten the sentence somewhat for the interpreters: "The Armed Forces-I am speaking of course primarily for the Navy, but I know that today it is the same with the Army, because since 1919 its inner solidarity and training has been perfected with the greatest devotion and loyalty to duty-in their present structure, whether officer or soldier, in their present form of development and their inner attitude, are a firm and reliable support, I might even say, because of their inherent military might and in view of conditions within the Reich, the firmest and most reliable support of our German fatherland, the German Reich, the German Republic, and its Constitution; and the Armed Forces are proud to be that." I then turn to Page 3, and it is the sixth line: "If, however, the State is to endure, this power must be available only to the constitutional authorities. No one else may have it; that is, not even the political parties. The Wehrmacht must be completely nonpolitical and be composed only of servicemen who, in full realization of this necessity, refuse to take part in any activity of domestic politics. To have realized this from the outset and organized the Wehrmacht accordingly is the great and enduring achievement of Noske, the former Reichswehrminister, whom the meritorious Minister Dr. Gessler followed on this road with the deepest conviction." Then I talk about the composition of the Navy, and on the fourth page I continue, Line 7. Perhaps this is the most important sentence: "In my opinion, one thing is of course a prerequisite for the inner attitude of the serviceman, namely, that he is willing to put his profession into practice when the fatherland calls upon him. People who never again want war cannot possibly wish to become soldiers.
RAEDER: One cannot take it amiss if the Wehrmacht infuses into its servicemen a manly and warlike spirit; not the desire for war or even a war d revenge or a war of aggression, for to strive after that would certainly in the general opinion of all Germans be a crime, but the will to take up arms in the defense of the fatherland in its hour of need." Then I pass on to the last paragraph on Page 4. "One must understand-for it is in accordance with the essence of the Wehrmacht-if it strives to be as far as possible in a position to fulfil its tasks, even under the conditions today, dictated by the limitation of the Versailles Treaty." I then refer to the tasks of the small Navy, and that is on Page 5, second paragraph, Line 6. "Consider the extent of the German coast line in the Baltic and North Sea, chiefly the Prussian coast line, which would be open to invasion and to the ravages of even the smallest maritime nation, had we not at our disposal modern mobile naval forces at least up to the strength permitted by the provisions of the Versailles Treaty. Above all, think of the position of East Prussia, which in the event of the closing of the Corridor would be wholly dependent on overseas imports, imports which would have to be brought past the bases of foreign nations and in the event of war would be endangered to the utmost, or even be made impossible if we were not in possession of fighting ships. I ask you to remember the reports about the effect of the visits of our training ships and of our fleet to foreign countries, when, already in 1922, the model conduct of our ship crews testified to an improvement in the internal conditions of the Reich, and increased considerably the esteem for the German Reich." So much for this speech.
THE PRESIDENT: Since you are passing from that now, we might perhaps adjourn. [A recess was taken.]
DR. SIEMERS: Admiral, hanging over this Trial are the words: "Wars of Aggression are Crimes." We have just seen from your speech that, as early as January, 1928, you used these words, before the Kellogg Pact. In conclusion, I should like to ask you, did this principle of January 1928 remain your principle during the whole time of your command of the Navy?
RAEDER: Of course.
DR. SIEMERS: In connection with the Versailles Treaty, I should now like to submit an affidavit, because some figures are necessary here which are easier to present in writing than by interrogation. I shall submit Affidavit II by Vice Admiral Lohmann, Exhibit Number Raeder-8, Document Book 1, Page 39. For the guidance of the Tribunal, so that there may be no misunderstanding, I should like to point out that Vice Admiral Lohmann has nothing to do with the Captain Lohmann who was wellknown, almost famous, in the twenties. The Tribunal may remember that the Lohmann affair was mentioned in connection with the breaches of the Versailles Treaty. Captain Lohmann died in 1930, and has nothing to do with the present author of this affidavit; Vice Admiral Lohmann. I also remind the Court that the Lohmann affair took place before Admiral Raeder was in charge of the Navy, before 1928. I quote from the Lohmann affidavit the statement under Numera1 I.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you wanting to call this Admiral Lohmann as a witness?
DR. SIEMERS: No, I did not name him as a witness; I was satisfied with an affidavit, because of the many figures. The British Prosecution has already agreed to the affidavit being submitted, but asked that Admiral Lohmann might be cross-examined. It was arranged between Sir David and myself.
THE PRESIDENT: I see, yes. You do not need to go into all these figures of tons, do you? You do not need to read all these, do you?
DR. SIEMERS: No. I did not want to read the individual figures. I would point out that this affidavit does not deal with tonnage; it concerns Number Raeder-8, Page 39.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I have got the one. There are a good many tons in it, though.
DR. SIEMERS: I should like to read under Numeral I: "Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build eight armored ships. Germany, however, built only three armored ships, the Deutschland, the Admiral Scheer, and the Graf Spee."-I will skip the following. "II. Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build eight cruisers. Germany, however, built only six cruisers." I shall omit the details according to the wish of the Tribunal. "III. Under the Versailles Treaty, Germany was permitted to build 32 destroyers and/or torpedo boats. Germany, however, built only 12 destroyers and no torpedo boats." According to this, in building up the Navy, Germany in no way took advantage of the possibilities of the Versailles Treaty, and if I understand correctly, she specifically omitted the construction of offensive weapons, namely, the large ships. May I ask you to make a statement about this.
RAEDER: That is entirely correct. It is astonishing that at ibis period of time so little advantage was taken of the Versailles Treaty. I was reproached for this later when the National Socialist government came to power. They did not bear in mind, however, that the government at that time, and the Reichstag, were not inclined to let us have these ships. We had to fight hard for permission. But this failure to build up the Navy to the strength permitted has No relationship to the small breaches of the Versailles Treaty, which we committed mainly in order to build up, one could say, a pitiable defense of the coast in the event of extreme emergency.
DR. SIEMERS: I shall come back to Document C-32. It is established that during the time of the Versailles Treaty, Germany did not take advantage of the provisions of the Treaty, particularly in regard to offensive weapons. On the other hand, on the basis of the documents submitted by the Prosecution, it has been established and it is also historically known, that the Navy in building itself lip committed breaches of the Versailles Treaty in other directions. I should like to discuss with you the individual breaches which were presented with great precision by the Prosecution. But first I should like to discuss the general accusation, which I have already mentioned, that these breaches were committed behind the back of the Reichstag and the Government. Is this accusation justified?