A. How am I to understand this question?
Q. Just as I have meant it. I asked you if habitual prisoners were also in the camp, whether there were also other social elements there.
A. When I came to Neuengamma in 1942 the camp was composed of so-called "Greens" who were the criminals, and further political prisoners, and then from the Jehovah's Witnesses, and finally at the end, or at the period of time, there were Jews. However, later on they were transported out of Neuengamma.
Q. You have said that habitual criminals were also in the camp. Is it correct that there were people who, because they had been punished many times before by criminal authorities, were interned for safe keeping?
A. No, that was a special chapter, as far as I can remember. They were people who were kept there for reasons of security. They had "S" Triangles. However, I only came into the camp laser on. Originally, as far as I can remember, only criminals had been sent there by the chief Germin criminal authorities, and they were only brought into the camp when they had already been punished previously several tames.
Q. When was the construction of the Klinker Works first begun?
A. I can only say that the Klinker Works -- at a period of then when, in March, 1942, I came into the camp - was just about to be constructed. That is to say, the outside of the building was standing already oat the machines were only installed later on. I can not give you any reason for the begin ling of the construction because I only came into the camp in March 1942.
Q. In connection with the establishment of these Klinker Works--and then there were buildings established; they were later where the production took place?
A. Will you please repeat the question once more?
Q. I shall repeat the question. In connection with the establishment of these works, there were also buildings established where, later on, the production took place?
A. Yes.
Q. You testified that these Klinker Works were the most modern buildings of this kind. What did you mean by that?
A. I meant that inside the Klinker Works, where the manufacturing processes were taking place, the whole work was being operated by machines. That is to say, presses were established there and a small electric working bench was constructed inside the hall. And, thus, the stones were brought into the stove, and all of the machines were rather new. So that the conclusion was that it was not very hard for me to reach.
Q. Were German civilian workers also employed in these plants?
A. Yes, we also had some German civilian workers there.
Q. And did you work there under the same conditions?
A. They did not have to work there under the same conditions because they were only foremen for certain fields, and there were only organs who had to assign the work.
Q. You have testified that the Klinker works' prisoners of the camp of Neuengamma were assigned?
A. Yes.
Q. Who in the concentration camp Neuengamma had to deal with the assignments--that is, within the camp administration, and who was the illegal camp administration in that camp? I can tell you that exactly, witness. In another trial, and also in this trial, a witness will be heard who certainly will not be unknown to you, and who was used to this expression "illegal camp administration."
That is the witness Dr. Eugen Kogon. He said that in every concentration camp, as far as he knew, the prisoners within the camp had the administration in their own hands.
A. I do not understand you......Yes, I understand you now. In Neuengamma, at that period of time when I came there, the situation was approximately as follows. What was understood to be good positions in the camp--as far as the Klinker Works were concerned--were positions occupied by the so-called habitual criminals. And inside the camp a second part was established: that was in the sense that the camp leader or the camp eldest at my time was a* *** political prisoner. And the person was in charge of the assignment of inmate labor was a criminal prisoner.
How things developed later on at Neungamma I can not tell you for the reason that later on I was transferred to Oranienburg. At Oranienburg I discovered another situation prevailing then under the illegal camp administration. That was mostly done by the political prisoners.
THE PRESIDENT: We are about to recess, and I was to announce that tomorrow we will recess at twelve thirty and will convene again at one-thirty on Thursday. I announce this so you can make the best use of your time. That is, from this time tomorrow until one thirty on Thursday you will be free. We will recess now until onethirty today.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess until 1330 this afternoon.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 15 April '47.)
THE MARSHAL: Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
DR. SEIDL (Attorney for the defendant, Oswald Pohl.) Your Honor, today before the recess I made a proposal that this witness' statement be stricken out of the record. I shall now withdraw my request and I am doing this for the following reason: namely, that it can be seen from the statements made by the prosecution that he did not know this regulation up to this moment and that therefore he had no possibility whatsoever to brief the witness according to this regulation and to avoid that they be present in this court room before their examination and also talk with other witnesses. However, I shall withhold my right in case this should be necessary to refer to this insofar as this refers to any relevancy of the testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: That is quite right. You would have a perfect right to ask this witness whether he had talked to other witnesses or had heard their testimony or any other fact which might affect their credibility.
HERR HENRY KRUSE - resumed CROSS-EXAMINATION BY DR. SEIDL (Attorney for Defendant Pohl):
Q Witness, this morning you testified that you yourself had not seen the Defendant Pohl in the Klinker Works; however, that a certain man by the name of Bickel had mentioned to you when Pohl was in the Klinker Works. I shall ask you now, when did Bickel tell you that and what sort of statements did he make to you with reference to the time that this occurred, namely, when this Defendant Pohl was in the Klinker Works.
A I can not give you the exact date today after four years have already elapsed since then.
I can only tell you that my co-inmate at the time told me that. Bickel just told me that Pohl had been there and I couldn't say anything else after from that.
Q. The factories of Dest were in connection with the concentration camp, you said?
A Yes.
Q These factories within -- were these factories within the camp or were they outside?
A In Neuengamme, for protective purposes, they were inside the actual camp. However, they were surrounded by a chain of guards.
Q If those inmates in these factories were to be tried because of misdemeanor did the punishment take place by the commanders of the camp?
A No, through the camp administration.
Q What did the Political Department have to do with these things?
A Namely, this can be seen from the connection that in the morning when there was a roll call, it said that this and that inmate will be transferred to the Political Department, regardless of the fact if the inmate had actually been through an investigation or he had given any explanations of anything. He was just told to go to the Political Department. He was then transferred to it.
Q witness, the Political Department, if I am right, was a branch of the Secret Police?
A I am afraid to have to tell you, Counsel, that I did not know the inner connections between the Political Department and the camp administration.
Q. You further have testified that there was the possibility of receiving money from your dependents?
A. Yes.
Q. Did that possibility also exist at Sachsenhausen?
A. Yes, I received money regularly, both in Neuengamme and in Sachsenhausen.
Q. Was there a possibility at Sachsenhausen of receiving parcels from your relatives, parcels with food and clothing?
A. Yes. If I'm not wrong, the possibility was created in 1942, I believe toward the middle or near the end of the year. May I add this, that the first packages or parcels which were received by the inmates were not distributed to the inmates themselves but generally speaking were delivered in the SS writing room, under the supervision of an SS officer, and then they were distributed to their comrades. That applied to the first few days I spent there. However, later on, if someone had the means of receiving parcels from his family, he did receive various things from them. Later on it was the following way. Foodstuff was distributed at the end so that packages were opened in the presence of the inmates and handed out to them. That was done in case letters should be in the packages, or alcohol, firearms, or something else of that sort. Those things the inmates were forbidden to have and were, in other words, items that were not handed over to the inmates.
Q. If I understand your testimony correctly, then one could deduct from that the fact that since 1942 or 1943 and later the situation in those camps had changed for the better?
A. Yes, generally speaking, yes. I couldn't tell you what they were like in Neuengamme. They were very difficult for me. I didn't know how it was in Oranienburg either for the general inmates, and I couldn't tell you that because I did not have an exposed position there, but that's the way it was, generally speaking.
Q. You mentioned the Capos repeatedly. The Capos were also inmates?
A. Yes, sir, the Capos were also inmates.
Q. They did have certain privileges compared with other inmates, didn't they, and they also had supervisory power?
A. I want to put it even a little bit stronger. Not only did they have certain privileges which resulted in the fact that a general inmate could receive forty cigarettes a month whereas a Capo could get five hundred, that is, if they had all that. In most cases they did not have that. That is why the corruption resulted. But aside from that from the year 1942 they had the power to administer strokes, to punish the people. At least that applied to the concentration camp of Neuengamme.
Q. In every camp there was also a block eldest?
A. Every block, as far as block discipline, distribution of food, and so forth were concerned, had a block eldest who was in charge of those things. This block eldest was also an inmate.
Q. One can deduct from that that the camp administration, as far as the prison camps of the SS and the camp commanders are concerned, showed that external order was kept?
A. Yes, let's say they had sort of a self-administration.
Q. You mean the inmates did?
A. Yes, the inmates had sort of a self-administration, as you mentioned yourself. They themselves took care of the order in their barracks. Apart from that they had to reply with these directives which were issued them by these block eldests.
THE PRESIDENT: We don't get what the word is. A block "elder", was that the word? The interpreter may tell me.
INTERPRETER: Block eldest, sir. That was the man who was actually in charge of the barracks. He was the eldest; he was nominated by the inmates themselves.
THE PRESIDENT: The eldest man, eldest, or leader?
INTERPRETER: Yes, that's right.
Q. Would you tell this Tribunal what the block eldest's tasks were and who was under his charge?
A. At the time when I spent considerable time in Neuengamme, the block eldest had conversations with the block leaders, then the lower camp administration, and then he had the following practice.
He had to see to it that the inmates had their billets. Furthermore, he was in charge of distributing the mail within the block. He also had to bear the responsibility of safety within the inside ring camp administration. For instance, if one of the inmates was used to do heavy work, he had something to say about it. It would be rather difficult for me to state everything here.
Q. How many people was he in charge of?
A. That depended on various circumstances. In the beginning, early in the time when I was there, there were approximately 200 to 250 inmates in the block. Later on when the great transports came, there were 400 to 500 inmates in one block.
Q. These block eldests, as they were inmates themselves, had certain privileges?
A. Well, up to 1942 they did have some sort of privileges, but they had power only insofar as this applied to their powers within the camp and also within their own block.
Q. You also used the term "external camp administration or leadership". What you probably meant by that - and you mentioned it before was the so-called self-administration of the inmates?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, when did you enter the legal department of the Amt W-1?
A. I believe it was in January 1944.
Q. How did this transfer actually take place?
A. It happened in the following manner. My friend and co-inmate Dr. Engler was with me in the same block. Dr. Engler had been transferred as a lawyer for the inmates to the legal expert of the legal department, Dr. Maroschek. Dr. Maroschek was looking for a clerk at the time. He asked Dr. Engler about it. So in this connection, when Dr. Maroschek was released and Dr. Schneider took over, Dr. Schneider asked for me in Amt W-3.
Q. In Amt W-1 were there any more inmates employed there?
A. Yes, when I was there, there were two or perhaps four inmates. As far as I know, only two inmates were employed.
Q. I take it that you had certain privileges in that position?
A. Well, yes, we had privileges, but only insofar as we were not subjected to the camp discipline about work. For instance, if two or three inmates would go to the Verwaltungs Office there, we just stepped out together and went in the room.
Q. The same were the circumstances and conditions in the direct office there?
A. Yes, just about. There was just a change of field of tasks, that's all.
A. You furthermore stated something that happened or referred to the Bohemia. I take it that most of your statements were based on hearsay and also on the knowledge of the trials, of which you cannot say with certainty that they were complete?
A. As far as the Bohemia question is concerned, as to how I had knowledge of it, I can say now that I actually did base my opinion on the files which I went through with **at certain interest.
Q. You did not know, however, whether these trials were complete or not?
A. Well, that was quite a voluminous file, the Bohemia files, that is. You know, these Leitz files were full of those documents and pages.
Q. When you answered the question which referred to the Reinhardt Action, you stated that you knew that from another inmate.
A. No, I did not say that. I simply said that I believe that I learned the name sometime, somehow. Whether that came from another inmate or perhaps even from Mr. Fischer or whether I just listened to a conversation between Fischer and Bolter I did now know, and I could not tell you that today.
Q. From your own observations you could not tell me anything about the action Reinhardt? Your knowledge is based only on hearsay?
A. If you want to ask me about the Reinhardt Action in single questions, that is the way I shall formulate my answer, yes.
Q. Then does that also apply to the testimony that refers to the Osti?
A. The questions of the Osti or the knowledge of it occurred here. I knew about those things. But I spent quite a few hours studying this problem and writing letters about it.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions. Your Honor.
DR. MUELLER: Dr. Mueller for the defendant Georg Loerner.
EXAMINATION BY DR. MUELLER:
Q. Witness, how long were you in the Office W-1?
A. I was in it for approximately one year.
Q In other words, from January 1944 --
A. --- to January 1945.
Q. You said this morning approximately the following. When you were in the Amt W-1, the correspondence of the DWB appeared there very often.
A. Not only did I see letters of the DWB and the W Amt but also of other offices. If I may reconstruct the whole thing, those were yellow envelopes with the title of German economy factories, plants.
Q Now would you answer my question following with a short manner. Did you see the letters "DWB", or did you ever read the name of Loerner as a signature?
A I cannot recall the name Loerner, very well and I really could not say that the name of Loerner sounds familiar to me.
DR. MULLER-THORGEN: No further questions, Your Honor.
DR, HOFFMAN: Dr. Huffman for the Defendant Scheide.
BY DR. HOFFMAN:
Q Witness, what where you paid for your work. What were your wages?
A The inmates received no wages whatsoever, and the inmates up to the year 1944 did not receive wages, nor did he receive a premium. I could not tell you the eact date, however, it must have been in the course of 1944, or so when working premius were issued which amounted to between fifty phennings to two marks fifty per week.
Q Could you buy anything with that money?
A These two marks and one-half were paid to us as wages bonus, or premius, which we could use in the canteen for the inmates. We could sent for rod beets, or saurkraut, or salad, and sometimes a little bit amount for cigarettes.
Q Now many cigarettes could you buy for one coupon, or for one premium coupon?
A You can not formulate your question that way, counsel, because most of the inmates received fifty phennings per week, thus he had in the future a buy of between to forty cigarettes per month in other words, if he had so much money in his account.
Q I see. How many cigarettes could you buy per month if you put all the premius and bonuses together?
A Of course, I can not remember very well, but one cigarette used to count five phennings, so that in most cases we could buy up to forty cigarettes. We could not receive more then that, because there was not so many cigarettes anyway, or there was issued forty cigarettes per month, and I have to say further these were not german cigarettes, for the most part they were russian or Yougoslavia cigarettes.
Q However, you could buy twenty cigarettes per month?
A Yes, we could buy twenty cigarettes per month. In other words the canteen was visited in the block one a week, and then he would receive about five cigarettes on an average, while those other people could buy through direct sale, of a person, or through direct friendship a little bit more DR. HOFFMAN: Thank you. No further questions of the witness, Your Honor DR. FROESCHMANN: Dr. Froeschmann for the defendant Mummenthey BY DR. FROESCHMANN:Q witness, the defense counsel for the defendant Pohl asked you a large number of questions, and which also concerned my client.
I believe I can ask you shorter questions, and you can answer in a shorter manner. However, I wish to ask the following questions in addition to the ones asked before. As a clerk in Amt-W-1 you had the possibility to see the correspondence of the Amt?
A Yes.
Q What kind of correspondence was it?
A On this correspondence I already stated this morning, while answering the questions of the Prosecution, most of the correspondence was written on neutral apper. There was also correspondence of the Amts-W-1 which was of the various economic staff-W, for instance the organization of the WVHA in Berlin.
Q Did you ever see correspondence which bore the signature of the defendant Mummenthey?
A One Dr. Schneider dictated " Chief Amt-W-1" more than plain "w-1", that the German " chief" was not used because I was told that Pohl was the chief. The mail just came in in " W-1" and was submitted to Mr. Mummenthey's office for signatures.
Q Did Mummenthey sign any correspondence in your presence?
A No, I could not say for the simple reason that the office of Mummenthey was not in the barracks itself, but namely in the barracks with the officers of the main administration also.
Q The barracks in which was Mummenthey's office was out near the street, or was it off the street in which these inmates could go in the morning and the afternoon?
A No, they were not off the street. Of course, I could not tell you that exactly up to meters. There was amote control house about fifty meters off of his office, that is where the directions, etc had to be controlled, and Mummenthey's house was between that mote control house and the administration barracks.
Q Do you know or were you ever in the office of Mummenthey?
A I myself never was there in his office. However, I have seen the nameplate on there, because I have had to go to various other offices of the "Dest" in my activity as wage bookkeeper.
Q Do you know the room of the defendant Mummenthey--That was on the street, it is as if it was off the street. I, mean in the other direction?
A If I am not wrong, I believe that was the room that was in the lower left part, that is, to be exact, if one go off from the barracks house and went over to the administration office, that is where it started approximately, if I may rectify that, it was in the direction of the street.
Q. I was told by the defendant Mummenthey, or, rather, I was shown a sketch in which that room is not on the street, but in the opposite direction. Now is that possible?
A. If this had really been the fact, then Mr. Mummenthey at least could have seen that way from another window.
Q. I don't talk about that, witness. I want to know if you actually knew anything of the location of the office of the defendant there?
A. Defense counsel, I know it is very difficult for me today to tell you exactly that his room is at that little corner, or that little corner farther on, because I did not have too many things to do at that office myself. I believe I am not in a position to say for sure. If for instance, Dr. Engler, who was there after mek could give you a more detailed examination because of his activity he must have been in Mr. Mummenthey's office several times.
Q. I may state then, that you yourself today have no knowledge of Mr. Mummenthey's office?
A. Well, no, I could not be too accurate about it.
Q. From the correspondence which you had in your hands, can you recall this day the letter in which the "Dest" was inquiring about the condition of the concentration camp?
A. No, I cannot recall that.
Q. Do you know that at sometime or at some place in one of these letters, the "Dest" or somebody was making certain remarks during that duration which want on to say that inmates were being treated in an inhumane manner?
A. No, I can not say that.
Q. Now I have one more question. This morning you mentioned the name of Bickel.
A. Yes.
Q. When did you see Bickel for the last time and speak to him?
A. I believe that from my recollection since I was released from Nevengamme I never saw hire again. I can only remember then as I received an easier type of work from Bickel after a long time there.
Q. You also don't seem to know anything about the fact that Bickel himself was released from the concentration camp?
A. Yes, I do know something about it.
Q. Do you know on whose proposal he was released?
A. You mean the release? No, I mean he came out when the camp was dissolved that is, Bickel.
Q. Isn't it correct that nickel was released from the concentration camp on the basis of influence by the camp administration, or by the defendant Mummenthey?
A. Well, I can't tell you that in detail, defense counsel, because I did not see Bickel ever since then. However, I take it that I thought he was released with the rest of the transport, because I did not see him, as I told you before.
DR. FROESCHMANN: No further questions from the witness.
DR. HEIM: Dr. Heim for the defendant Dr. Hohberg.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Witness, when did you join the Amt-W-1?
A. I said repeatedly in January 1944, defense counsel.
Q. You said that in the course of your activity in the Amt-W-1, that you had read the name "Dr. Hohberg?
A. Yes, I read it and I heard it and particularly in the revision department.
Q. Did you hear the name of Dr. Hohberg, did you hear it or did you read it?
A. I both heard it and read it.
Q. Did you see the name of Dr. Hohberg in any incoming or outgoing correspondence?
A. So far as I can remember I thought it was outgoing correspondence.
Q. Outgoing?
A. Yes, the name of Dr. Hohberg was mentioned repeatedly in these letters, however, I could not say in what connection.
Q. Did you ever see Dr. Hohberg?
A. No, I don't know Dr. Hohberg personally anyway.
Q. Do you know if at the time when you were with Amt-W-1 Dr. Hohberg was in Amt-W-1, I mean, either in the nature of signatures, or for any other activity?
A. No, I cannot give you any information on that, either.
Q. We are coming back to this correspondence now. Was that letter addressed to Dr. Hohberg, do you know whether it left Amt-W-1?
A. That letter to Dr. Hohberg, I want you to formulate it this way, it contained no name, it just Said "Chief Staff B".
Q. What would you say that if you were corrected in your statement, that even in the course of the questioning by the prosecution, that Dr. Hohberg in 1943 had turned his back to the WVHA and in 1944 you also said that you had again read Dr. Hohberg's name in a letter?
A. Yes, I should state in my statement so far as by citing the fact that it could have been possible that the name given could have been back in the files, because we had all the files of the WVHA. and we had to take them out of the air raid shelters, and putting them back into the air raid shelters in the evening, and in the mean time, of course, we had access through those files all the time, and that it could be quite possible in either the first or second case I no longer can give my recollection.
Q. You said, on my third question, as to whether you had seen the name Dr. Hohberg on incoming or outgoing correspondence, that you had seen the name on outgoing correspondence. That means that it was a document or a letter which was leaving your Amt and not, as you said just now, a document which had been in the files for a long time.
A. Defense Counsel, may I repeat that it is quite possible that the legal department told "on special request by Dr. Hohberg" and referred to that letter.
Q. Can you tell me what function Dr. Hohberg allegedly had.
A. No, I did not knew that. All I know is--and all I believe is-that Dr. Hohberg was Chief of Staff W.
Q. You just said in connection with that that Dr. Hohberg had given orders with reference to the Legal Department.
A. I said explicitly that it could have been possible that those were directives given to the Legal Department before. I said "could have been".
Q. I tell you here now, witness, that the Prosecution so far has not said that Dr. Hohberg was active in some connection with Staff W for the Legal Department.
A. Defense Counsel, I am of the opinion that I heard the name of Dr. Hohberg in connection with an active activity. You asked me, "Do you remember names from your time in the SS-WVHA?" and I thereupon answered, "I believe I heard the names of Dr. Hohberg and Dr. Volk," without saying exactly where I heard them.
Q. You just told me that you do not remember Dr. Hohberg's name from your activities here. How can you tell me now that you can remember that name so very well after three years?
A. Defense Counsel, once upon a time I had a good memory, and I still have it, and I believe I am in a position to say that certain names which are connected with my activity at the time are still in my memory, and for that reason, in order just to give you a small example, I could cite various other examples without giving you concrete evidence to that effect, but when you ask me about the actions so-and -so, or if you would ask me, then I would tell you all that I remember about those things, all I could remember.
Q. If I have understood your testimony so far correctly, then you wish to tell me that you do not know what functions Dr. Hohberg had while he was in the SS-WVHA?
A. Yes. I can answer your question in the affirmative, insofar as my testimony was based upon assumptions that he was Chief of the WVHA--and I stress the point, "on the assumption".
Q. On what do you wish to base all that -- on what facts?
A. while I was with Amt W III I also read letters in which the name Dr. Hohberg appeared. In Amt III there were also a collection of files. I mean that there were file holders, in which there was the whole business activity, even dating quite a while back, and as I told you before, in what concrete case the name Hohberg appeared I could not tell you now. I know, however, that I heard the name of Dr. Hohberg in connection with those yellow envelopes.
Q. Now, witness, can you tell me whether these letters which you just mentioned-- that is, the letters which you are supposed to have seen in Amt W III-- were signed by Dr. Hohberg or said Hohberg in the text?
A. I can not answer this question today. However, I believe I am able to tell you that I have seen both his signature and his name in the text, at least so far as this applies to the old documents.
Q. In what connection, what text these letters had, you can not remember?
A. No, I can not remember that, since my office activity in Amt W III had only something to do with letters and I worked there for only a short time. I know, however, that certain questions were dealt with there. For instance, in Neuengamme a branch of the German Food Factory was to be set up, and Untersturmfuehrer Meissner went to Hamburg several times. How these letters are to be Drought into connection with Dr. Hohberg's name I can not tell you today.
Q. Now, let's touch upon another field of tasks. If I understood you correctly, you were with the Revision Department for two and a half months?
A. I said yes.
Q. Who were the collaborators of the Revision Department?
A. The collaborators of the Revision Department were Untersturmfuehrer Boelter, Unterscharfuehrer Hensel, or Henseler, and then there were ladies by the names of Fraulein Bartsch, Frau Nitsche, and then SS Unterscharfuehrer Fischer, who called himself an economics expert.
Q. Were there any other gentlemen in there whom you can not recall at the moment?
A. As far as I know, I do not believe there were any others. I can not recall any other names.
Q. Do you know if Staff W H 5 gave orders or could give orders to the Revision Department of the DEST?
A. I believe I am able to remember now that the reports of the Revision Department went to Staff W, as far as certain things were concerned, I can not tell you single instances, and therefore I can not state exactly what it was all about. All I can tell you is that I have written to Staff W repeatedly.
Q. Did the examiners of Staff W have anything to do with the revisers of the DEST?
A. No, I can not tell you that because I was in the Revision Department for a very short time.
Q. During your short activity in the Revision Department, you know, perhaps, what the confirmations are for the examiners. Do you know that Dr. Hohberg in his capacity as Economic Examiner did not want to sign to the DEST?
A. No, I don't know that.
Q. Do you know from what moment on Staff W of the WVHA or the DWB created a concern revision department for the first time?
A. I can now answer that question either, Defense Counsel.
Q. Do you know if at any time there was a change in that respect?
A. I do not know that either.
Q. Do you know who, at the time you were with Amt W I, was in charge of the economic examination of the DEST?
A. Well, as far as the Osti ring was concerned, I can not tell you anything about it. Before Untersturmfuehrer Boelter; in other words, as far as certain calculations were concerned.
Q. Do you know if employees of the German Osti company worked there?
Q. I do not know that, Defense Counsel.
Q. I have a last question to you. How can you tell us that there was a connection between the Osti and the Reinhardt Fund?
A. I did not say that there was any kind of connection. Two questions were asked me. The first question was, "Did you ever hear anything about the Reinhardt Fund?" The second question was, "Do you know the Osti?"
Q. I shall ask you another question now, witness. Was there any connection between the Osti and the Reinhardt Fund?
A. I could not possibly know that.
DR. HEIM: Thank you. No further questions to the witness.
BY DR. BELZER (for the defendant Sommer):
Q. Witness, this morning you made certain statements, remarking, however, that these observations were not based upon your own observations but only upon statements made by third persons. I am talking now of the conditions in the watch repair shop in Sachsenhausen. Do you think that on the basis of your information, it is possible that in this watch repair shop other inmates besides Jews were also used?
A. I think I am able to answer the question in the following manner, but on the basis of the information which I received at the time. It was said that this was going to be the Jewish barracks.
Q. I wanted to come to that question. Is it possible that your misinterpreted, or rather, received statements and misinterpreted them with reference to this watch repair shop and with reference to the Jews, and that you are referring to this watch repair shop by mistake?