dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Yesterday you were cross-examined and questioned about the retirement of the former Economics Minister Dr. Schmitt. Is it correct that Dr. Schmitt's retirement was the result of an illness lasting a month, that he had become incapable -of work after he collapsed in a faint during a session, and that therefore his retirement came about purely from reasons of his personal health?
SCHLEGELBERGER: That is what I was told.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Thank you. Then I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, with reference to your letters to Dr. Lammers, which I understand were of the 6th of March and the-6th of April 1942, about which you have just been asked-you remember them?
SCBLEGELBERGER: I remember the letters.
THE PRESIDENT: What I understand is that the conditions in the working camps in Poland were, in your opinion, such that it would be preferable for half-Jews to be sterilized?
SCHLEGELBERGER: That is my opinion.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may retire. [The witness left the stand.] I call on Dr. Pelckmann, Counsel for the SS.
MAJOR F. ELWYN JONES (Junior Counsel for the United Kingdom): If Your Honor pleases, before Dr. Pelckmann calls his SS witnesses, I have an application to make to the Tribunal with regard to the witness Sievers, who gave evidence before the Com-mission. Yesterday, My Lord, about 16 new documents of great impor-tance came to Nuremberg. They are from Himmler's files. Some of these documents are letters written by this man, Sievers, him-self. A.11 of them relate to the work of an important component part of the SS, namely, the Ahnenerbe, the SS Ancestry Heritage Research Organization, of which Sievers was the head executive. These documents also relate to the Institute for Scientific Research for War Purposes. My application is for leave to cross-examine Sievers before the Tribunal upon these documents. I make this application in view of the very great importance of these documents.' In my submission their contents should go upon the record of this Trial. I do submit that the documents should be put to Sievers personally. In my submission they wholly controvert the testimony he gave to the commissioner, and I imagine the Tribunal itself may well want to question Sievers. It is in any event my intention, if you will allow me, to put these documents in. I do not think it will take much more time if I put them to the witness himself.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness of whom you are speaking has been called before the Commission, I understand?
MAJOR JONES: Yes, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: But he has not been called before the Tribunal nor applied for?
MAJOR JONES: No.
THE PRESIDENT: He is still in Nuremberg?
MAJOR JONES: Yes, My Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: He is not one of the witnesses who has been granted to Dr. Pelckmann?
MAJOR JONES: No, Sir; he is an additional witness.
THE PRESIDENT: I see.
MAJOR JONES: Dr. Pelckmann opposes my application.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Very well. We will hear you upon that now, Doctor.
HERR HORST PELCKMANN (Counsel for SS): Your Lordship, I regret that I must oppose the request of the Prosecutor for per-mission to cross-examine the witness Sievers. I should like to say beforehand that by doing this I do not want to hinder the further clarification of the case of the SS and the further clarifica-tion of the charges against Sievers. My reasons are of a more fundamental kind and as follows. In no case can the cross-examina-tion take place before the Tribunal now. Sievers is not one of the witnesses I have summoned before the Tribunal. The cross- examination can take place, if at all, only before the Commission. I must also oppose it, however, purely for reasons of procedure. The Prosecution has for months, and perhaps years, been in pos-session of a very large quantity of documentary material, which had been confiscated. It was also in a position through its extensive auxiliary organizations, such as the CIC and the intelligence serv-ice, to examine witnesses who are in camps and whom it had already interrogated for more than a year. Therefore, it had every opportunity to prepare the cross-examination before the Com-mission. In my opinion, it would not be permissible for the Prose-cution, despite these advantages which it has over the Defense, to continue taking evidence before the Commission now. I shall expressly withdraw my objection if the request which I made months ago, to be allowed to look carefully through the Allied document offices for material for the Defense, is granted. I would consider that fair, in case the Tribunal wants to grant the request of the Prosecution. I would then be finally in a position to submit documentary material in rebuttal. I shall also expressly withdraw my objection if I am permRted, on the basis of the exculpating documents found in this way, to continue to examine witnesses before the Commission just as the Prosecution has now requested in the case of the witness Sievers.
HERR HORST PELCKMANN (Counsel for SS): One can see that the Prosecution was able to produce further incriminating evidence only by a thorough investigation of the documentary material in the document offices. In view of this, would it not be fair if the Defense, too, were given this opportunity to look for evidence in rebuttal?
MR. DODD: Mr. President, before the Tribunal rules on this application, I would like to make one statement. This is the second time, at least, that Dr. Pelckmann has inferred that because he has been denied access to the document room that there is something oppressive about it as regards the Defense. I want the record to be perfectly clear that we know what is in that document room, and we know perfectly well there is no document there that rebuts any evidence that has been offered in this case, and if there were, it would have been made available to this Tribunal and to these defendants. I think it is fair to say that we rather resent this implication from the Defense at this stage of these proceedings.
HERR PELCKMANN: May I add something to this? In my document book, if that is what counsel for the Prosecution meant, there are documents which I have found either in written material which has not yet been available or else in documents which I obtained after an exact description through the General Secretary and after decisions by the Court. However, I must say that I am by no means in a position to indicate the exact documents, as the High Tribunal requires in such cases, if I am not placed in a position in advance, just as the Prosecution is, to investigate the material in question. And this is the salient point. We see in this case how the Prosecution, in contrast to the Defense, especially with respect to the organizations, is able- to collect material ...
THE PRESIDENT: We have already heard you say that, and we fully understand the point. The Tribunal grants the application that this witness should be produced for cross-examination here. That witness has already given evidence before the Commission, and in the opinion of the Tribunal, it is of importance that his evidence should be given fully and should be brought to light fully before the Tribunal. As these documents have only just come into the hands of the Prose-cution, the Tribunal thinks it right 'that the documents should be put to the witness. It is the most convenient and the shortest course that they should be put to the witness before the Tribunal. As to Dr. Pelckmhnn's objections that the Defense are not being treated fairly with reference to the investigation of the documents, the Tribunal thinks there is no foundation for this complaint. It would not be proper to allow the Defense to have what is in- the nature of a fishing investigation into the thousands. of documents which are in the hands of the Prosecution. If the Defense can specify any document that they want, they will be given a view of that document. I have already said that in my opinion any document which is helpful to the Defense ought to be disclosed to them. That is the practice in the English courts, at any rate, and Mr. Dodd has informed the Tribunal now that if there were any document which were in any way helpful to the Defense in the Prosecution's docu-ment room, it would be made available to the Defense.
HERR PELCKMANN: I should like to say only that I did not say that the Defense was not being treated fairly, I said only ...
THE PRESIDENT: I am explaining to you why the Tribunal do not think it is possible that the Defense Counsel should be allowed to rove about in the Prosecution's document room. Now you may call your Witnesses.
HERR PELCKMANN: I call the witness Freiherr von Eberstein. [The witness Von Eberstein took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name?
FRIEDRICH KARL FREIHERR VON EBERSTEIN (Witness): Friedrich Karl Freiherr von Eberstein.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat this oath after me: I swear by God-the Almighty and Omniscient-that I will speak the pure truth-and will withhold and add nothing. [The witness repeated the oath.]
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. Go ahead.
HERR PELCKMANN: I will be very grateful to Your Lordship if the interpretation could be organized in such a way that tech-nical terms and the definitions of offices and personnel could be rendered, as much as possible, in the original text, the German text, because mistakes could frequently arise in the interpretation. In the SS organization there are so many special definitions which it is difficult to keep apart in an interpretation.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal thinks that it would be convenient to them if both the German denomination and the English were given-or the other language were given.
HERR PELCKMANN: Witness, were you before 1933 and after 1933 a member of the General SS (Allgerneine SS)?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, indeed.
HERR PELCKMANN: Had you already entered the so-called General SS in 1928?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, indeed.
HERR PELCKAUNN: Witness, I should like to ask you to pause after each question, just as I am going to try to pause after each answer. In 1928 did the SS have its own commander or was it under the commander of the SA?
VON EBERSTEIN: In 1928 the SS was under the Supreme SA Leadership. The Chief of Staff at that time was a Captain Von Pfeffer. Himmler was not yet Reichsfuehrer of the SS. The SS was led by a certain Heid under the Chief of Staff.
HERR PELCKMANN: In spite of this did the SS already form a special organization?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, it was together with the SA under the Supreme SA Leadership.
HERR PELCKMANN: Did you belong to the General SS only in an honorary capacity, that is to say, not in a professional posi-tion, or were you an official?
VON EBERSTEIN: I belonged to the SS outside my regular profession. I had been a civil servant since 1934.
HERR PELCKMANN: Well, did you get any payments as an SS leader?
VON EBERSTEIN: No, I had my salary. Before 1933 1 lived on my own fortune, and later I received the salary and in addition was reimbursed for my traveling expenses and got an extra allow-ance of 150 marks a month for sundries.
HERR PELCKMANN: If I understood you correctly, you re-ceived your salary as a civil servant?
VON EBERSTEIN: As a civil servant, yes indeed.
HERR PELCKMANN: And only a certain allowance extra for the expenses you had in the SS service?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, indeed.
HERR PELCKMANN: What were the reasons for your entering in the SS?
VON EBERSTEIN: At that time, in 1928-29, 1 was asked to join the SS because I had already been in the Party for some years and they considered my services valuable because I had been an officer. I joined the SS very willingly.
HERR PELCKMANN: Were you a veteran of the World War?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, I took part in the World War as an officer.
HERR PELCKMANN: What rank did you hold in the SS in 1930?
VON EBERSTEIN: In 1930 1 was Sturmfuehrer and Standarten--Adjutant.
HERR PELCKMANN: What rank did you hold in 1933?
VON EBERSTEIN: In 1933 1 was SS Gruppenfuehrer.
HERR PELCKMANN: Through your activities, did you acquire a good insight into the aims and activities of the SS before and after 1933?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes.
HERR PELCKMANN: You are a member of the German nobility, Witness?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes.
HERR PELCKMANN: Even in democratic countries, it is gen-erally assumed that the nobility belongs to the respectable classes of the population. How does it happen that you became a member of an organization which, according to the allegation of the Prose-cution, is supposed to have been criminal?
VON EBERSTEIN: I stood at all times for Germany, in keeping with the tradition of my family; and so when I became a member of the Party and of the SS, I felt that I was fulfilling a patriotic duty. Moreover, before 1933 a great number of aristocrats and members of German princely houses joined the SS, such as, for example, the Prince von Waldeck, the heir apparent of the Grand Duke von Mecklenburg, et cetera.
HERR PELCKMANN: After 1933 was this movement even stronger?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, after 1933, the Prince von Hohenzollern--Sigmaringen became a member, as well as the heir apparent of the Duke of Brunswick, Prince Lippe-Biesterfeld, General Graf von der Schulenburg, and many others.
HERR PELCKMANN: Do you know that Archbishop Gr6ber of Freiburg became a sponsoring member of the SS?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, I know that.
HERR PELCKMANN: I refer the Tribunal to Document Num-ber SS-45, which I shall hand in later. [Turning to the witness.] Do you believe on the basis of your experience at that time that the membership of such prominent personages made an impression on members of all classes in Germany?
VON EBERSTEIN: On the bourgeois classes of our population, most certainly.
HERR PELCKMANN: I mean, made an impression in the sense that people said, if such fine people belong to the SS and work for its aims, then the aims governing the organization must be really good and legal. Do you mean that in this sense?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes. In any case I am of the opinion, and it was also the opinion of my comrades, that at no particular time could we assume that the organization was following criminal aims.
HERR PELCKMANN: But did not the SS commit many acts of violence just before 1933, and was this not one of its aims?
VON EBERSTEIN: No. As its very name says, "Protection Detachment" (Schutzstaffel), this organization of the Party was set up in order to protect the leading personalities. Moreover, I might point out that as early as 1930 Hitler, in the trial of the Reichs-wehr officers, swore that his revolution would be an intellectual one and he planned to win the power in Germany by legal means. And, indeed, that came about through the elections, and so he became Chancellor of the German Reich.
HERR PELCKMANN: Please describe the activities of the SS, for instance in the year 1930 when you were in Thuringia, their numbers, increase in membership, and other such details.
VON EBERSTEIN: As I have already said, the SS was set up in 1928 and 1929 in Thuringia. Up to about the time of the Reich Party rally in 1929, we had in all Thuringia approximately 45 or 50 SS men. At the Reich Party rally there were SS men from all Germany, approximately 700 men. In 1930 there were election fights in Thuringia, which necessitated the intensified commitment of these few SS men in order to protect the speakers. There can be no question of any other service besides that of protecting the speakers. There were some roll calls at which it was announced which speakers each SS man had to accompany. This protection was made necessary by the extraordinarily bitter political battle, and one was glad if the men returned to their quarters in the evening without having been wounded.
HERR PELCKMANN: How large was the SS in comparison with the other Party organizations at that time? Please speak more slowly. I notice that the interpreters are having trouble keep-ing up with you.
VON EBERSTEIN: I beg your pardon. The SS was by far the smallest formation of the Party. According to an order of the Supreme SA Leadership, it could never have more than 10 percent of the numerical strength of the SA.
HERR PELCKMANN: Where were you in 1933?
VON EBERSTEIN: In 1933 1 was in Weimar, Thuringia.
HERR PELCKMANN: And in what position?
VON EBERSTEIN: As leader of SS Oberabschnitt Mitte, the biggest Oberabschnitt of the SS.
HERR PELCKMANN: How many SS men were under you at the time?
VON EBERSTEIN: After the seizure of power there were 10,000 to 15,000.
HERR PELCKMANN: What area did this number cover?
VON EBERSTEIN: The Free State of Saxony, the Free State of Thuringia and the Prussian Province of Saxony.
HERR PELCKMANN: How is the growth of the SS at this time to be explained?
VON EBERSTEIN: The increase can be explained, first, by the fact that the National Socialist Government had 'come to power and a large number of people wanted to show their loyalty to the new State. Secondly, after the Party, in May 1933, had ordered that no more members would be accepted, many wanted to become members of the affiliated organizations, such as the SS and SA, and thereby gain membership in the Party later on. But then again there were also others who sought the pleasures of sport and the comradeship of young men and were less politically inter-ested. The reasons were very diverse.
HERR PELCKMANN: But after this period of sudden growth, were the members carefully screened, and were the former entrance requirements, namely, completely irreproachable conduct, clean way of life, high professional efficiency, made even stricter?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, indeed. From about February or March 1934, Himmler ordered an investigation of all those SS members who had joined in 1933, a thorough reinvestigation which lasted until 1935, and at that time about 50,000 to 60,000 members throughout the entire Reich were released from the SS.
HERR PELCKMANN: Was it necessary to be a Party member in order to be admitted to the General SS?
VON EBERSTEIN: No, not at all. I already mentioned that before.
HERR PELCKMANN: But if Party membership was not neces-sary, can it then be correct that the SS, as the Prosecution main-tains, was the core of the Nazi regime, a group ideologically welded together, so that one can conclude therefrom that the strictest Nazi conditions, Nazi standards, were imposed upon admittance?
VON EBERSTEIN: The core of the regime was the political party as such, and this, indeed, lay in the hands of the Hoheits-träger. The leadership of the people was conferred upon the Hoheits-träger by Hitler as a privilege which they had and which they maintained until the end. That was the core of the regime. In the SS, to be sure, certain standards of selection were adhered to.
HERR PELCKMANN: But what did this selection refer to?
VON EBERSTEIN: The selection standards required a cer-tificate of good conduct from the Police. It was required that people be able to prove that they led a decent life and performed their duty in their profession. No unemployed persons or people who were unwilling to, work were accepted. In this respect, a careful selection was always required.
HERR PELCKMANN: But were not these principles of selection also extended to so-called racial conditions: height, health, origin?
VON EBERSTEIN: That was also prescribed; yes, indeed.
HERR PELCKMANN: And so, Witness, to sum it all up, the selection was not only made according to political but also to other circumstances which you have described?
VON EBERSTEIN: Yes, indeed.
HERR PELCKMANN: In 1933 and 1934, as an SS Gruppen-fuehrer and leader of the largest Oberabschnitt of the General SS, did you know of any excesses against Jews?
VON EBERSTEIN: No.
HERR PELCKMANN: During the testimony on another organi-zation we heard here of the so-called boycott of Jews in 1933 and 1934. Did you not, together with your men, participate in this?
VON EBERSTEIN: The SS did not participate in this boycott--I might say these excesses. In Dresden when I heard about these matters I held a muster and strictly forbade my men to take part in them.
HERR PELCKMANN: Did you believe that you were com-mitting a crime against humanity through the efforts to diminish the influence of the Jewish people in public life and economy to the percentage they represented in the total population?
VON EBERSTEIN: No.
HERR PELCKMANN: Did you want to attain this goal, which according to your ideology was probably in your mind, by the use of violence?
VON EBERSTEIN: No, under no circumstances. Indeed the SS had no influence at all on these matters.
HERR PELCKMANN: Was not the SS particularly strict to see to it that points of the Party program should not be realized by individual actions?
VON EBERSTEIN: Even before 1933 there were extraordinarily strict regulations. These regulations prohibited any individual action. For example, we had a very strict regulation against car-rying any weapons, because it would have endangered the political activity of the Party if the Police had found weapons on us at that time. Even later on, Himmler repeatedly issued strict orders not to undertake any kind of action.
HERR PELCKMANN: Did you believe that by the repression of Jewish influence, which according to the National Socialist principles was constantly in your minds as an ideology-did you believe that thereby you were already making preparations for a new war, and, indeed, that by this planned new war the influence of an opposition within Germany would be made impossible?
VON EBERSTEIN: This is an artificial interpretation, in my opinion. I do not understand it. As far as the SS was concerned the Jewish problem had been solved by the State, by the an-nouncement of the Nuremberg laws in 1935, laws which, by the way, surprised us. I remember, too, that at that time Hitler had warned us very strongly against going beyond these laws and pointed out the tremendous responsibility which was placed in the hands of the German people by this law.
HERR PELCKMANN: Did you perhaps believe that you could do something to prepare a war of aggression if you, or if the Party, or if the State excluded Communists or Socialists from public life?
VON EBERSTEIN: No.
HERR PELCKMANN: Well, did., you ever consider anything like this at all?
VON EBERSTEIN: No. This question appears to me confused for the circumstances were such that these matters never entered our minds.
HERR PELCKMANN: What preparations did you notice in the SS for a war of aggression?
VON EBERSTEIN: No preparations.
BERR PELCKMANN: Was the General SS given military training?
VON EBERSTEIN: No, it was not trained militarily, for sport and small caliber rifle shooting and drill exercises cannot be considered military training. May I also point out that Himmler forbade me and other SS leaders to participate in troop maneuvers as reserve officers of the Aimed Forces after 1934 or 1935. From this alone it is perfectly obvious that no military training was given to the SS men or even planned. Moreover, every SS member like any other German citizen, had to perform his military service within the Armed Forces and not in the Waffen-SS.