Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-11/tgmwc-11-103.10
Last-Modified: 2000/01/07

Q. Just go on to the next sentence of your statement:

  "In this connection we must consider how the executives,
  whose inadequacy is the subject of strong complaints by
  the plenipotentiary for labour, can be strengthened on
  the one hand by the exercise of influence on the foreign
  governments and on the other hand the expansion of our
  executive forces and the inclusion of a larger percentage
  of the Wehrmacht, the police or of other German
  establishments."

That is how you opened that conference, you know.

A. That is quite correct. These were the problems that had
to be discussed.

Q. To produce more forced labour and discover by what
terrorising by the police and by what pressure by Ribbentrop
the results could be achieved? That was the object of the
conference, was it not?

A. No, our object was not to consider how we might terrorise
people but how we could carry out official decrees with the
necessary executive power to back them up. Surely no
terrorist measures are implied in saying that something must
be done in a matter. I could describe a case in France, for
instance. The workers recruited by Sauckel in France were
brought to the railroad station by French executives for
transportation as prescribed by the French compulsory labour
decree. Everything was arranged ...

Q. Just answer my questions, will you? You are going on to a
different matter.

A. I did not suggest terrorist measures. Some compulsion
must be exercised by every State authority; but compulsion
is by no means terrorism or a crime or violation.

Q. I just draw your attention to the contribution of General
Warlimont in this discussion, where he said that:

  "The troops put into operation against the partisans will
  take over, in addition, the task of raising man-power in
  the partisan areas. Everyone who cannot account
  satisfactorily for his presence in these areas is to be
  seized."

                                                  [Page 177]

And you said:

   "On further inquiry by the Reich Minister, Dr. Lammers"
   - this is on Page 10 of the English record - "as to
   whether members of the population fit for employment
   could not be withdrawn along with the troops, Colonel
   Sahs (Plenipotentiary General for Italy) stated that
   Field Marshal Kesselring had already decreed that the
   population of an area extending to a depth of 30
   kilometres behind the front was to be captured."

The whole emphasis of that conference was on the use of
force, was it not, and the collaboration of the executive
agencies of the State to procure the necessary forced labour
for the Reich?

A. A certain degree of coercion was to be applied
undoubtedly.

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: There are only two more matters, my Lord,
which I feel that it is my duty to put to the witness.

Q. On the question of the massacre of the Jewish people, you
said in your evidence before the adjournment that you,
yourself, had saved 200,000 Jews. Do you remember saying
that to the Tribunal?

A. Yes.

Q. You saved them from extermination, you meant, I take it?

A. No, I merely saved them from evacuation and nothing else.
I found out afterwards, of course - now - that in actual
fact I really did save them from death. You have ...

Q. You know you have testified - just a moment - you have
testified to the Tribunal as to a conference which took
place early in 1943 where you were invited by the
Reichssicherheitshauptamt to send a representative to the
conference dealing with the Jewish problem. Do you remember
saying that to the Tribunal?

A. Yes, the matter was discussed. It was a conference of
experts.

Q. That was the famous conference which Eichmann presided
over, do you remember?

A. That I do not know. I did not attend it myself; I merely
sent a subordinate.

Q. The invitation to attend the conference, that came from
Kaltenbrunner, did it not?
A. The invitation came from the R.S.H.A.
Q. Not from Kaltenbrunner personally?
A. I do not know.
Q. And you sent a representative to the conference, did you
not?

A. Someone had to go as my representative; and he had
specific orders simply to listen and not to make any
comments during the conference, because I reserved for
myself the right to report on this to the Fuehrer.

Q. Was your representative at this conference instructed by
you to take no attitude? Was that what you said to the
Tribunal?

A. He was given express orders not to make any comments. My
State Secretary, who gave him the instructions, can confirm
this. He could not do so in any case, since no decisions
were reached. But he was not to make any comments on his own
initiative because I intended to discuss this question,
which was at that time described as "the final solution of
the Jewish problem," with the Fuehrer. For this reason, I
deliberately gave the order "No comments!"

Q. You sent Gottfried Bohle as your representative to that
conference, did you not?

A. I did not send him; my State Secretary sent him, and he
was not even a competent expert, but was accidentally ...

Q. Just answer my questions briefly, won't you? Gottfried
Bohle made a report to you, did he not?

A. I received a short written report, not a verbal report.

Q. And did that report indicate to you that Eichmann was
planning extermination?

                                                  [Page 178]

A. No, there was nothing about that; and we did not know
about it. At least, I cannot remember that there was
anything in it that would have caused me to take any
immediate action.

Q. Yesterday you told the Tribunal that concentration camps
were not mentioned in the Reich budget. Do you remember
saying that?

A. That what was not mentioned?

Q. Yesterday -

A. I do not know. I did not find or read anything about it.

Q. Yesterday you told the Tribunal that nothing was
mentioned in the Reich budget about concentration camps.

A. I did not find anything and I did not read anything on
that subject. I do not know anything about it. Such matters
did not interest me much anyway.
Q. You are saying now that you do not know whether there
were any references to concentration camps in the budget or
not?

A. I could not say for certain. I do not remember any
specific mention of the concentration camps in the budget.

Q. Does it surprise you to know that in the 1939 budget for
the armed S.S. and concentration camps in the Ministry of
the Interior budget there was a sum of 104,000,000 marks and
21,000,000 marks set out as expenses for those objects? Did
you know that?

A. I did not study every item of the budget drawn up by the
Minister of the Interior. I did not read any budgets at all.
I was interested only in my own budgets in the Reich
Chancellery; I did not read those of other offices. I had no
reason to do so.

Q. Did you know that there were over 300 concentration camps
in Nazi Germany?

A. No, I did not know that.

Q. Of how many did you, as head of the Reich Chancellery,
know?

A. I only knew about a few.

Q. Only a few.

A. Three at the most.

Q. Are you solemnly, on oath -

A. But I did know that others existed.

Q. Are you solemnly, on oath, saying to the Tribunal that
you, in the very centre of the web of Nazism, didn't know of
the existence of more than three concentration camps?

A. Yes, I do mean to say so. I was not in the very centre of
Nazism; I was the head administrative official who did
administrative work for the Fuehrer. I did not concern
myself with concentration camps. I knew of some
concentration camps, that is of two or three; and it was
clear to me that others must exist. I cannot say more under
oath.

Q. I put it to you that you knew quite well of this regime
of terror but continued to serve in it until the last. Is
that not so?

A. What regime of terror? The concentration camp system
existed. I knew that; everyone knew that.

Q. But that didn't trouble your conscience, I take it.

A. That they existed?
I submitted my proposals with regard to the concentration
camps to the Fuehrer; and he excluded me from the entire
question as early as 1934 - after I had made suggestions to
him about concentration camps - and turned the whole matter
over to Himmler, and I had to transmit to him all complaints
about concentration camps. I had nothing whatever to do with
concentration camps except when I received complaints; and
these I regarded as being addressed to the Fuehrer. I
pursued them as far as possible; and was able to help at
least some of them.

Q. You, of course, were an S.S. Obergruppenfuehrer. Perhaps
you didn't recognise terror when you heard and saw it.

                                                  [Page 179]
A. I was S.S. Obergruppenfuehrer, which was an honorary
rank, just as I said before of Seyss-Inquart. I performed no
official duties in the S.S.; I had no command, no official
status or anything.Q. And you profited considerably - you
and your Nazi colleagues - from this regime, did you not?
You, as the Comptroller of the Reich Chancellery funds, can
probably assist us in that matter.

A. What did I have - considerable what?

Q. Funds, money, Reichsmarks.

A. Yes, I had an income, naturally.

Q. And you were responsible for directing -

A. Not as an S.S. Fuehrer.

Q. As Reich Chancellor you were responsible for distributing
the largess of the Nazis among yourselves, were you not?

A. I was in charge of the Fuehrer's funds; and on his
instructions I made the necessary payments out of those
funds. I could not spend money as I pleased.

Q. You, as Reich Chancellor, delivered a million Reichsmarks
to Dr. Ley, did you not?

A. That was a payment that the Fuehrer specifically approved
for Dr. Ley. I did not do that on my own initiative.

Q. And Ribbentrop was another recipient of a million, was he
not?

A. He received a million in instalments, first one half and
then the other.

Q. And Keitel was another millionaire, was he not? He
received a million, did he not?

A. He received a sum of money and an estate, because the
Fuehrer renewed the practice of the old Prussian kings of
granting land and money to his generals.

Q. And you yourself received six hundred thousand marks, did
you not?

A. I received six hundred thousand marks on my sixty-fifth
birthday. I received this sum because I had never received
anything in my previous positions, since I had never asked
for it - also because I had twice been bombed out and had no
house or property of my own. The Fuehrer wished me to buy a
small house.

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: That is all.

If your Lordship will allow me to clarify the exhibit
numbers of the documents I have put in: Document 3863-PS is
Exhibit GB 220; 2220-PS is USA 175; 686-PS is USA 305; 865-
PS is USA 143; 1032-PS is GB 321; 871-PS is GB 322; D-753 is
GB 323; 3601-PS is GB 324; 997-PS is RF 122;1296-PS is GB
325; 1292-PS is USA 225; 3819-PS is GB 306.

THE PRESIDENT: Major Elwyn Jones, have you put in the budget
which shows the figures that you gave us?

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: It is on Page 1394 of the 1939 budget.
For the purposes of the record, it will be Exhibit GB 326.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: The prosecution will have an extract made
from this vast volume, my Lord, for the purposes of the
court document.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

Colonel Pokrovsky, the Tribunal thought that there was only
going to be one cross-examination of the witnesses who were
not defendants.

COLONEL POKROVSKY: The Soviet Delegation wished to question
the witness Lammers. It was suggested that the interrogation
be split up into two parts, some of the questions to be
asked by the British Delegation and the others by the Soviet
Delegation.

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: If your Lordship pleases -

THE PRESIDENT: Was this the one case that was mentioned?

MAJOR ELWYN JONES: This is the exceptional case, my Lord,
and the agreement was made before the new ruling as to cross-
examination was introduced. My colleague, Colonel Pokrovsky,
and I did agree to share the work, and there are very

                                                  [Page 180]

few matters which Colonel Pokrovsky has indicated which he
desires to put, and that was in agreement between the
prosecution.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well.

BY COLONEL POKROVSKY:

Q. On 6th November, 1945, you were interrogated by a
representative of the Soviet Prosecution. Do you remember
this interrogation?

A. Yes, I do remember an interrogation by a representative
of the Soviet prosecution.

Q. You testified at the time that Hitler -

A. Yes. I testified.

Q. You don't know what I am talking about, so don't hurry.

Now, you testified that Hitler authorised you to render help
to Rosenberg. You remember that, do you not?

A. Yes, Rosenberg was to take over the political work in
connection with Eastern problems.

Q. What was your help to Rosenberg?

A. To begin with, it only meant that I had an interview with
him, at which he discussed his plans for a possible
administration to be established. The Fuehrer had given him
instructions to consider how, in the case of war with
Russia, the country might be occupied and administered. For
this Herr Rosenberg ...

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor