dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR. STEINBAUER: Did not a part escape this operation by way of the Allocation of Labor?
WIMMER: As far as I know, yes; but I have no detailed knowledge of it.
DR. STEINBAUER: Do you know what happened to the diamonds confiscated after the battle of Arnhem
WIMMER: These diamonds were placed in safety in Arnhem, during artillery fire, by a German office, the Economic Testing Office I believe, and then after some time they were taken to Berlin, from where, as indeed I learned in Holland, after the surrender they were brought back to Amsterdam again.
DR. STEINBAUER: How was the financial economy in the administration? Was the tax money used sparingly, or was a very lax management displayed?
WIMMER: I am not really competent in this field. The Commissioner General for Finance and Economy could say much more about that and with much greater authority than I can, but so far as my impressions went, I may say...
THE PRESIDENT: If he is not competent to speak about it, I do not see why he should speak about it.
DR. STEINBAUER: Mr. President, the witness Fischbock cannot be found. However, as a deputy of the Reich Commissioner, this witness must know something about the general features of it. I will ask him for details. Did the Reich Commissioner save fairly large sums of money in his budget and deposit them in a special fund?
WIMMER: Yes.
DR. STEINBAUER: You know nothing about foreign currency restrictions, apparently?
WIMMER: No.
DR. STEINBAUER: How were raw materials, manufactured items, and foodstuffs requisitioned in the civilian branch of the administration?
WIMMER: It was regulated by an ordinance in the Reich Commissioner's ordinance bulletin and can be seen there. As a matter of principle, the requisitions were sent from the Reich to the Reich Commissioner and the Reich Commissioner passed them on to the Dutch offices concerned, which then carried out those requisitions themselves.
DR. STEINBAUER: So it was not the German offices, but the Dutch offices headed by the Dutch secretaries general?
WIMMER: Yes. They also were authorized to do this by a special decree.
DR. STEINBAUER: Did the Reich Commissioner or his offices take anything from the large museums?
WIMMER: I did not quite understand that. From where?
DR. STEINBAUER: From the public museums.
WIMMER: No. I do not recall a single case, and I would have had to know about it because the museums were under me.
DR. STEINBAUER: Yes, that is why I asked you. Were there possibly any archives that were carried away?
WIMMER: In general, no; but an exchange of archives was probably worked out during the occupation, which had been under consideration even before the war. There was an exchange of archives between, in particular, the "Hausarchiv," but also other Dutch archives, and German archives, and-to be exact, this was done according to where they came from-on the so-called principle of origin.
DR. STEINBAUER: Was it possible for everybody to confiscate what he wanted, or was that controlled in any way?
WIMMER: No, that was controlled, and the respective regulations were again repeated in an especially stern decree of the Reich Commissioner during the last year. Those who transgressed or intended to transgress these regulations were given serious warning. There were only two agencies which, according to the decree, were allowed to carry out confiscations at all, and these were the Police and the Armed Forces.
DR. STEINBAUER: In conclusion, I should like to refer back once again to the Armed Forces operations. Was that discontinued in the fall? By "Armed Forces operation" I mean the deportation of those members of the population able to carry arms.
WIMMER: That was stopped on the basis of an objection made by myself on behalf of the Reich Commissioner to General Student, who at that time was chief of the army group, and under whose jurisdiction the Netherlands also came at that time.
DR. STEINBAUER: Then one last question. Can you remember the Jewish Library Rosenthaliana?
WIMMER: Yes.
DR. STEINBAUER: What happened to that?
WIMMER: As far as I know, it remained in the Netherlands.
DR. STEINBAUER: Was that not to have been removed?
WIMMER: Yes. There were such intentions, but since this library was public property, the property of the City of Amsterdam, the Reich Commissioner, upon my suggestion, ordered that this library was to remain in Holland.
DR. STEINBAUER: Mr. President, I have concluded the questioning of this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other defendants' counsel want to ask questions? Do the Prosecution wish to cross-examine?
M. DEBENEST: Witness, you were selected to fill the of lice of commissioner general in the Netherlands by Seyss-Inquart himself?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: You had known Seyss-Inquart for several years?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: Had you not been one of his assistants ever since 1938?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: Is it true that during the occupation of the Netherlands a large number of members of the NSB and pro-German elements were appointed not only to leading positions, but also to subordinate positions in the Dutch police, and that they were charged with executing orders issued by the occupation authorities, such as the arresting of Jews, members of the resistance, and hostages?
WIMMER: I can confirm the fact that members of the NSB and of groups friendly to the Germans were employed in high and low positions by the Reich Commissioner. However, as to their proportional part within the total of Dutch civil servant employment in the civilian branch, I believe that even at the end of the occupation period the participation of these groups in proportion to the Dutch population was not greater...
M. DEBENEST: I spoke to you expressly about the police; reply to that point.
WIMMER: You mean only the police?
M. DEBENEST: I told you, the police.
WIMMER: Yes, that is known to me. However, I do not believe that those members of pro-German groups received special assignments, but rather I believe that they received their assignments in exactly the same way as the other civil servants in the same positions. I cannot, however, say anything in detail about that, because I had very little to do with the police.
M. DEBENEST: When officials of the Dutch police refused to carry out orders which had been given to them by the occupation authorities and abandoned their posts, did not the German authorities take members of their families as hostages-women and children, for instance?
WIMMER: I cannot recall that.
M. DEBENEST: In no case?
WIMMER: That relatives of police officials were arrested? Members of their families?
M. DEBENEST: Yes, of those who were not carrying out the orders of the German authorities.
WIMMER: I do not remember that.
M. DEBENEST: That is fine. Well, perhaps you may remember that members of families of Dutch citizens who offered resistance in one way or another were arrested as hostages?
WIMMER: I have heard about that.
M. DEBENEST: There were some hostages arrested in such cases, for example, were there not? There were hostages arrested in those cases?
WIMMER: You call it "hostages." Do you also use that expression in cases where the individuals concerned did not have to expect that they would lose their lives, that it would cost them their heads?
M. DEBENEST: So far I have been asking you the questions, and you have been answering them. For instance, did you not receive protests from the Board of the University of Amsterdam against the fact that the wife and children of a professor of that university had been arrested as hostages?
WIMMER: I do not remember that. It is possible, however, that such a complaint came to the Main Department for Education, which belonged to my Commissariat.
M. DEBENEST: In any case, you do not deny the fact?
WIMMER: I could not deny it 100 percent, but I do not know anything about it.
M. DEBENEST: Another question. Following the declaration of loyalty which was imposed on the students, those who refused, were they not forced to present themselves immediately for work, and were they not deported to Germany without waiting for their group to be called up?
WIMMER: Yes, but not by the Labor Service. Do you mean the Office for the Allocation of Labor?
M. DEBENEST: That is of little importance; but they were deported to Germany for that reason, were they not?
WIMMER: Yes, by virtue of a decree by the Higher SS and Police Leader.
M. DEBENEST: Is it not true that numerous and extensive reforms were introduced by the Reich Commissioner in all the activities of the life of the Dutch people, and that these reforms were all contrary to the Constitution?
WIMMER: One cannot say that.
M. DEBENEST: But there were reforms, were there not?
WIMMER: Certainly, yes, which were caused by the necessities of war and the fact of the occupation. And there is a third factor involved, too, which was that there were measures necessitated by the absence of the head of the State and the Government.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Debenest, would it not be better to put the particular points you want to him, rather than general questions, which will enable him to deal with the matter at length?
M. DEBENEST: Yes, Mr. President. [Turning to the witness.] Did the civil administration service in the Netherlands enjoy a certain freedom?
WIMMER: Yes, a great deal of freedom.
M. DEBENEST: I am going to read to you a passage from a report by the Defendant Seyss-Inquart, a report drafted on 19 July 1940. You shall tell me whether you still maintain the reply that you have just given me. This is what Seyss-Inquart wrote: "The civil administration"-he means the civil administration in the Netherlands-"at present finds itself in a sufficient and otherwise progressive way under the direction and control of the German authorities." Is the answer which you have just made in agreement with what Seyss-Inquart wrote?
WIMMER: If mention is made in Dr. Seyss-Inquart's reply that the control was in German hands, that can only mean that the supervision was in the hands of German authorities, for it is naturally to be taken for granted that the German occupation authorities reserved for themselves a certain control and supervision over Dutch legislation, as well as over all important acts of administration and government; and if everything went as it should, important decrees could not be issued without the approval of the occupying power.
M. DEBENEST: That is enough. The Tribunal will judge your answer with regard to this document. Will you explain why a civilian government was established in the Netherlands, whereas no such government was set up in other countries, such as Belgium, for instance?
WIMMER: I do not know the real reason for that, but from what I have heard and could find out myself the main reason was that Germany attached the greatest value to establishing a good relationship with the Netherlands, and the leaders in the Reich probably thought that this could be more easily done through men of the civilian administration. than through the Armed Forces.
M. DEBENEST: More exactly, were they not pursuing a political goal in this, the goal of placing the country in the hands of the National Socialists, in order to bring about some sort of Germanic federation of Germanic states?
WIMMER: Whenever I spoke with the Reich Commissioner about such things, the Reich Commissioner expressed the point of view that the Dutch people had all the characteristics of a distinct and independent people and therefore should remain independent and sovereign as a state. It goes without saying that during the occupation period the Reich Commissioner and the German administration maintained fairly close contact with these parties and groups which were pro-German, and I do not have to give any reasons for that. But that the Netherlands, especially during a period of occupation, were not going to accept completely the political ideology of the occupying power was quite clear to the Reich Commissioner, as indeed to anyone who was able to judge the conditions at all reasonably.
M. DEBENEST: You said a few moments ago, if I understood correctly, that the Reich Commissioner did not want to force the secretaries general of the Netherlands to make decisions which might be contrary to their conscience, and if they felt uneasy about it, they could ask for their dismissal. Is that what you stated?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: Did he dismiss any secretaries general who had not asked to resign?
WIMMER: There was only one exception, that of Secretary General Spitzen. That was the Secretary General to the Ministry of Waterways who did not carry out an order of the Reich Commissioner and in spite of this did not hand in his resignation.
M. DEBENEST: What secretary general was this? In which department?
WIMMER: That was the Ministry of Waterways; that was the Ministry that was responsible for canals, reclaimed land, highways, inland waterways' and so forth.
M. DEBENEST: Is that the only case that you knew of?
WIMMER: That is the only case of which I knew.
M. DEBENEST: In what year was that?
WIMMER: That, I believe-one moment-at any rate, that was in 1944; in the summer, I believe.
M. DEBENEST: Do you not remember the dismissal of the Secretary General for National Defense, Mr. Ringeling?
WIMMER: The dismissal of the Secretary General for National Defense was not a matter for the Reich Commissioner, but fell within the jurisdiction of the military commander, since by virtue of the Fuehrer's decree all military matters fell within the jurisdiction of the military commander.
M. DEBENEST: Why was he dismissed?
WIMMER: That is not known to me.
M. DEBENEST: Try to refresh your memory with the aid of Seyss-Inquart's report and then we will see whether this was in agreement with the head of the Armed Forces. This is what the defendant writes: "One of the secretaries general tried..."
THE PRESIDENT: M. Debenest, the witness does not know anything about it, apparently.
M. DEBENEST: He says that he does not know the reasons, Mr. President, but he adds-he had previously added-that it was in agreement with the military authorities.
THE PRESIDENT: It is a matter which would come under the competence of the military authorities; and he does not know about it. That is what he said.
WIMMER: All the matters of the Ministry for National Defense fell within the jurisdiction of the military commander, for it is perfectly clear that everything of a military nature which took place or was directed in the Netherlands there was directed by this Ministry, and it is clear that the commander, the German military representative of the Reich, was competent in this sphere.
THE PRESIDENT: If you have a document which proves that the man's dismissal was done by Seyss-Inquart, I suppose you can put it to him.
M. DEBENEST: I wanted simply to demonstrate that the answer he gave was inexact, merely by reading four lines of the document.
THE PRESIDENT: As I said, if you have a document which proves that the man's dismissal was by Seyss-Inquart, you can put it to him.
M. DEBENEST: That is what I intended to do, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Do it; put it to him, then.
M. DEBENEST: I do not have the original in German. I handed it in yesterday evening to the Secretary of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Read it to him, M. Debenest. Read it to him.
M. DEBENEST: That is what I am going- to do, Mr. President. [Turning to the witness.] Here is what Seyss-Inquart wrote: "One of the secretaries general tried to appeal to the authority of Winkelmann"-Winkelmann was the military chief-"concerning the question of the continuation of work in armament factories for the Armed Forces, but this official . . ."
WIMMER: I did not understand that. Will you please read the last two sentences once more?
M. DEBENEST: ". . . concerning the matter of the continuation of armament factories for the Armed Forces. But this official was immediately dismissed."
WIMMER: But that does not say that the Reich Commissioner dismissed this official.
M. DEBENEST: Certainly it is not said that the Reich Commissioner did it; but it is none the less clear in this report that the Reich Commissioner indicates here that when an official, no matter who he may be, does not obey the orders which are given to him, he is dismissed from his office and he quotes this case as an example.
WIMMER: But here it is a question of the military branch. What I have said before deals exclusively with the civilian sector branch, the Reich Commissioner's branch. It is perfectly clear and possible that in a report to Hitler the Reich Commissioner should speak about other things also, because he was the guardian of the interests of the Reich. And he reported about other things to his superior, besides those which were exclusively within his sphere of activity. Nor do I know whether by these officials or these workers, for example, the secretary general is meant, the Secretary General for National Defense.
M. DEBENEST: Very well. We will leave this question. Did you not require that the Secretary General for Education should place the Kamerlingh Onnes laboratories in Leyden at the disposal of the German authorities for research on atomic energy?
WIMMER: But only in the Netherlands; not in Germany.
M. DEBENEST: But if it was not for Germany, the Secretary General for Education had perfect freedom to decide for himself; you did not have to intervene, did you?
WIMMER: No. That was a German measure which had been demanded by the Reich and which was now carried out in such a manner that all the materials, machinery, and so on, remained in the Netherlands, and German scientists were to have the opportunity to carry out their researches there. Moreover I do not believe that that had anything to do with atomic matters. Who said that?
M. DEBENEST: You claim that important public libraries and private libraries were not confiscated or transported to the Reich? You said so just now, is that not a fact?
WIMMER: Just now? I did not talk about libraries at all just now.
M. DEBENEST: But just now when Seyss-Inquart's defense counsel was questioning you, you certainly said, unless I misunderstood you, that no libraries had been transported to the Reich which came from the Netherlands.
WIMMER: I did not say that. Will you please show me that in the transcript?
M. DEBENEST: Then it is doubtless a mistake. Were not the professors of the University of Amsterdam threatened with the death penalty if they handed in their resignations, and did you not threaten them yourself?
WIMMER: I neither expressed such a threat, nor do I know of any such threat. I consider it quite impossible that anybody could have uttered such a threat.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn now. [The Tribunal adjourned until 14 June 1946 at 1000 hours]
M. DEBENEST: I still have a few questions to put to this witness. Witness, in view of the answers which you made yesterday about the libraries which have been looted and taken to Germany, I would like to read to you a few lines taken from a document which I submitted the day before yesterday to the Tribunal. This document is F-803, Exhibit RF-1525, on Page 34 of the French text. This is c report from the Minister of Education and Art of the Netherlands We find the following: "The collections as well as the libraries of the International Institute for Social History at Amsterdam have been closed down. The library, which has about 150,000 volumes, as well as a very important collection of newspapers, has been taken to Germany. The Library Rosenthaliana of the University of Amsterdam, which belongs to the city, has been packed in 153 crates and has also been taken to Germany. Famous collections concerning natural history of the College of St. Ignace at Valkenburg and the Museum of Natural History at Maastricht have also been taken to Germany, as well as the library which belonged to it. "In 1940 all the property of the Freemasonry Lodges was confiscated and taken away to Germany. It included the well-known Klossiana Library."
THE PRESIDENT: M. Debenest, haven't you put enough for the purpose of your question now? We have got the document already and you have put about half a dozen libraries which you are suggesting to him were taken to Germany, and you want to know what he has to say to it, I suppose. It is not necessary to go into the whole detail.
M. DEBENEST: What do you think about this story, Witness' Are these facts correct?
WIMMER: The question which you have put to me was answered in part yesterday, as far as it concerns the property of Freemasons It was said yesterday, and I confirmed it, that it is known to me that the property of the organizations, but not of the individual members, was confiscated.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not an answer to the question. The question is, was it true that these libraries were moved to Germany?
WIMMER: I know nothing of the removal of these libraries.
M. DEBENEST: But you did, nevertheless, claim that the Rosenthaliana Library had remained in the Netherlands, did you not?
WIMMER: The Rosenthaliana, I said that.
M. DEBENEST: The Rosenthaliana, yes; the report specifies that it was packed in 153 crates and taken to Germany.
WIMMER: I do know that instructions were given by the Reich Commissioner that this library was to remain in Amsterdam. If it was removed in spite of this, the action was contrary to instructions and I have no knowledge of it.
M. DEBENEST: But still it was you who were responsible for education, or at least for supervising education in arts?
WIMMER: Yes, but not of the arts.
M. DEBENEST: No, but as far as the libraries and universities were concerned?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: It is rather curious that you should not have been kept informed of this.
WIMMER: I do not know whether the library was removed or not.
M. DEBENEST: Very well, then. According to the statements which you made yesterday evening you seem to claim that the Reich Commissioner did all he could for the Dutch nation; is that not so?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: At any rate, he always did everything he could to avoid the worst; is that so?
WIMMER: Yes.
M. DEBENEST: On the other hand, you know that numerous people in that country were interned, deported, and shot; that that nation was hampered and coerced in every sphere, under threat of heavy penalties and reprisals. Finally you know that that country was looted. Who were then the people who ordered these crimes and committed them?
WIMMER: I said that the Reich Commissioner did for the country what he could, and prevented as much as he could. In a 5 year period of occupation measures had to be taken which were difficult for the country to bear. I do not deny the fact; it is undeniable. I would ask you to formulate your question more concretely, and to mention the actions which you call crimes. The question is too general for me to answer it "yes" or "no," or even briefly.
M. DEBENEST: Who ordered the arrests?
WIMMER: Which arrests?
M. DEBENEST: The arrests of the Dutch people, of course.
WIMMER: The arrests were ordered by the Higher SS and Police Leader; he was chief of police.
M. DEBENEST: Who ordered the internments?
WIMMER: Which internments? Do you mean internments in the concentration camps?
M. DEBENEST: In concentration camps and in internment camps.
WIMMER: They were ordered by the Higher SS and Police Leader. That was his department.
M. DEBENEST: Who chose the hostages?
WIMMER: The Police.
M. DEBENEST: Who appointed Ranter as Commissioner for Public Security?
WIMMER: As Commissioner General for Public Security? He was appointed by the Reich Commissioner, but his main function was that of the Higher SS and Police Leader. For this function he was appointed by the Reichsfuehrer SS.
M. DEBENEST: But he had been appointed-I suppose you know the order-to assist the Reich Commissioner in his job of helping with the Police and for security.
WIMMER: He was to be at the disposal of the Reich Commissioner, but the Reich Commissioner did not have the unconditional right to issue instructions to the Higher SS and Police Leader. The Reichsfuehrer SS had this right. The appointment as Secretary General for Security was a formality. It was made because the Reichsfuehrer SS wished the Higher SS and Police Leader to have this title too. Originally he was not to be appointed Commissioner General.
M. DEBENEST: You therefore consider that Seyss-Inquart had no authority over Rauter?
WIMMER: Yes.