Document 81 deals with a condition after the armistice but which appears only as a continuation of that which has occurred in the East and confirms that under the occupation of the Soviet Army that condition continued to exist, that is to say, the recruitment of the population for work, not within the sense of the Convention of the Hague for the repair of roads but also for the purpose of work in industry and activities outside of the framework of the Convention of the Hague.
I do not believe that I should be refused these matters of proof, to use these matters of proof.
Documents 90 and 91, it has already been spoken about their content. They are two folders with a collection of affidavits. The attempt is made to bring counterproof against an investigation made by a government with which we were confronted.
We have received reports by the Soviets which are a combination of individual cases put together like a Mosaic. There are mass conditions which can only be understood in this sense.
I have already explained that I have not a government available which could make a report of that kind, and I am suggesting that at first I shall bring a collection of affidavits concerning these conditions, and I do not intend to submit every one of these affidavits. My motion is that the Court should appoint one judge who should study that folder and report about it, make a report about it to the Tribunal. That is the thing which later, in dealing with political organizations, they will have to be confronted with. That is the problem, how these mass conditions can be presented to the Tribunal.
If I bring a single witness, one individual witness, one could say "Well, one witness cannot cover the entire ground," On the other hand, I cannot come here with a hundred or more witnesses. So this would be a medium solution, a solution that one person should study the material and then give a report. That is the content of these two folders.
THE PRESIDENT: How many affidavits have you in mind or have you obtained?
DR. SERVATIUS:So far it is still very small, what I have received. It appears that those who know something are very concerned and very reticent, because they are afraid they will be prosecuted. But I hope to be able be make a selection of sensible statements, and I believe that there will be about 20 or 30 affidavits. Of course I would limit it to that, because I am not interested in occupying the Court with unnecessary work.
At the present state of my collection I even have to be afraid that I will have to withdraw my motion, because I have to admit myself that so far up to now the amount of material is very small; but I wish that the possibility would be left open for me and when it comes to it I should like to present it to the Court again.
THE PRESIDENT:Yes. Is that all you want to say?
DR. SERVATIUS:There is still Document Number 93, the illustrated booklet, "Europe Works in Germany."
THE PRESIDENT:Did the Prosecution object?
DR. SERVATIUS:No, the Prosecution didn't object. I only would like to show some pictures and projections. It is the problem to demonstrate under what conditions these people arrived from the East and what they looked like later, such as it can be shown in a pamphlet.
THE PRESIDENT:Yes, thank you.
MR. ROBERTS:There was one other point which I ought to mention. Perhaps Dr. Servatius would be good enough to listen.
My Lord, Dr. Servatius has applied in writing to the Tribunal, by letter dated the 5th of March 1946, for all medical reports of Dr. Jaeger, who was a chief camp doctor at Krebs-Essen. Secondly, all monthly reports of a man called Groene, who was a colleague of Dr. Jaeger. Thirdly, all minutes of monthly conferences which the chief camp leader held with his subordinate camp leaders at Krebs.
My Lord, the position is this: That the French put in -- oh, I think our American colleagues put in an affidavit of Dr. Jaeger, and Dr. Jaeger himself has been granted as a witness for Sauckel, and so he will be seen in the witness box.
My Lord, the Prosecution have no objection to Dr. Jaeger being asked, I suppose, to bring his reports with him if they are available. We haven't got them, and I don't think we know where they are, but the witness is being called.
DR. SERVATIUS:The bulk of these documents I have received already, and I assume that I will also receive the rest. I believe the material which I have now is sufficient for my purpose so that it is not necessary to bother the Prosecution any more.
THE PRESIDENT:You mean we need make no order?
DR. SERVATIUS:It is not necessary.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal will adjourn now.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 18 April 1946 at 1000 hours.)
Official transcript of the International Military Tribunal, in the matter of:
The United States of America, the French Republic, The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, against Hermann Wilhelm Goering, at all, Defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 18 April 1946, 1000-1245, Lord Justice Lawrence, presiding.
THE PRESIDENT:Dr. Seidl.
DR.SEIDL (Counsel for defendant Hans Frank): Mr. President, on the 9th of April of this year I have made the application deviating from the rule made by the Tribunal that I may first of all present the documents, then call the witnesses, and then at the end to call on the defendant as a witness. I do not yet know whether the Tribunal is already in possession of the document books, and I, myself, have ascertained that Volume 1 of the document book was translated by the 8th of April; Volumes 2 and 3 by the 11th of April; and Volumes 4 and 5 a few days later. At any rate, I have not yet received any document books myself for the reason that the department responsible for the binding of the books has not yet received permission to bind the books.
THE PRESIDENT:Well, I thought I asked about this, not yesterday, but the day before--yesterday, yes, and you said you were perfectly ready to go on.
DR. SEIDL:I had been told that the books had been translated and I assumed it to be a matter of course that these books had also been bound. Yesterday I had discovered that this is not the case. At any rate, there is no guilt on my part in this matter.
THE PRESIDENT:I was not suggesting that there was any guilt on your part.
MR. DODD:In the first place, we did not have much to go over with Dr. Seidl. The agreement was reached with him the night before last about six o'clock or a little afterwards. Hereafter the Materials were put into the process of preparation and there are five hundred pages. They have just not been completed, and it is not so that the people did not receive authority to go ahead. They have not been able to complete their work and there will be some delay.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, you can go on with your witnesses.
You have the defendant himself to call and several other witnesses.
DR. SEIDL:Very well.
THE PRESIDENT:And the documents will no doubt be ready by then. We are rising at half past four, and by the time that the Tribunal reassembles, by Tuesday morning, no doubt all the documents will be ready. As be your application, The Tribunal has considered the application and sees no reason to depart from their ordinary rule that the defendant should be called first; that is to say, if you intend be call the defendant.
DR. SEIDL:Oh yes, I have the intention of examining the defendant; but in the interests of accelerating the matter I had suggested that the other witnesses should be heard first, so that the examination of the actual defendant could be as short as possible. It may be possible that he can then answer a number of questions merely by saying yes or no. Another reason why I consider this procedure as best suitable is because a proper examination of the defendant is only possible if I have the document books at hand at the same time. That necessity does not apply to the remaining witnesses. I should, therefore like to ask the Tribunal to give me permission so that I can first of all near the witnesses who are already in the witness' room.
THE PRESIDENT:The documents are all or nearly all, I imagine, in German and can be put to the defendant in the course of his examination, and the Tribunal think; as they have already said, that calling the defendant first is in the interests of expedition and they, therefore feel they must adhere to their rule.
DR. SEIDL:Very well. In that case, with the permission of the Tribunal, I call the defendant Dr. Hans Frank to the witness stand.
HANSFRANK, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
BY THE PRESIDENT:
QWill you give your full name?
A Hans Frank.
QWill 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:Will you sit down please.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. SEIDL:
QWitness, when and where were you born?
AI was born on the 23rd of May, 1900, at Karlsruhe in Baden.
QPlease will you briefly state what education you have had?
AIn 1919 I finished my studies in secondary school, and in 1926 I passed the state examination for lawyers, which completed my scientific training.
QAnd what were the activities you carried out after that?
AI had several legal jobs. I worked as a lawyer. I was a member of the instructional staff of a technical high school and, in the main, I worked as the legal advisor for Adolph Hitler and the National Socialist German Workers Party.
QSince when have you been a member of the NSDAP?
AI joined the German Labor Party, which was the predecessor of the National Socialist German Workers Party since 1919. I joined the newly formed NSDAP not at all. In 1923, however, I joined the movement in Munich as a member of the SA and, eventually, I entered the NSDAP finally in 1927.
Q Were you ever a member of the SS?
AI have never been in the SS.
QThat means you have never had a rank of an SS Obergruppenfuehrer or General of the SS.
AI never had the rank of an SS Obergruppenfuehrer or General.
QNot even honorary.
ANo, not even honorary,
QYou were a member of the SA. What was the last position you held therein?
AI was Obergruppenfuehrer in the SA at the end, and this was on honorary position.
QWhich offices did you hold in the NSDAP during the various phases, and which functions did you carry out?
AIn 1929 I became the head of the Legal Department of the Reich Leadership office of the NSDAP. In that capacity in 1931 I was also made Reichsleiter of the NSDAP by Adolf Hitler. I held this position until I was called away in 1942. These are the principal offices I have held in the Party.
QIn the main, until the seizure of power you have concerned yourself with legal questions within the Party, haven't you.
AI dealt with questions relating to law and the practice of law in the interest of Adolf Hitler and the NSDAP and its members during the difficult years of struggle, in the interest of the victory of the movement,
QWhat were your principal views regarding the idea of the legal state?
AThat idea, as far as I was concerned, was contained in Point 13 of the Party program, which was talking about the German common law to be created. In the interest of accelerating the proceedings, I do not wish to make a detailed statement regarding my thoughts. The main point was that I was making efforts to create a model for the legal system in Germany, and by that I can the independent judge.
It was my train of thought that even if there were a particularly strong development of the Leadership State, even as far as dictatorship, there would be danger for the community and the legal safety of the individual, and that this would be rather smaller if there were a judge who would be independent from the leaders of the state and would act amongst the nation.
The question of the legal state, therefore, is identical, to my mind, with the question of the existence of independent legislation. My principal struggles and discussions with Himmler, Hitler, and Bormann during all these years were more and more directed to this particular sphere. Only When the independent judge in the National Socialist Reich had finally been overcome was my work and my efforts a hopeless case.
QYou were also a member of the German Reichstag, the German parliament.
ASince 1930 I was a member, yes.
QWhich positions did you hold after 1933?
ATo start with, I became Bavarian Minister of State for Justice, and after the independent ministries of justice in the several states were dissolved I became minister without portfolio.
In 1933 I became the president of the Academy of German Law, which I had been founding. I was the Reich Leader of the National Socialist Union of Lawyers, which was later on given the title of the Legal Caretakers, and in 1933 and 1934 I was Reich Commissioner for Justice. In 1939 I became Governor General of the Government General in Cracow.
QWhat were the tasks of the Academy of German Law which you were a founder of?
AThese tasks are contained in the Reich Law regarding the Academy. The main task, the central task, of that Academy was to carry out Point 13 of the Party program, German common law, and in such a way that it would tally with the legal culture in the German Reich.
QDid the Academy of German Law have decisive functions, or was it limited to an advisory capacity?
AThe Academy of German Law was the central focusing point of all the leading legal minds in Germany, both theoretical and practical. Right from the beginning I paid no attention to the question whether the members were Party members or not. 90 per cent of its members were not members of the Party. Their task was the preparation of laws, and they were carrying out the activities of an advisory committee in a well organized parliament.
It had been my thought that in accordance with the moving into the background of the German parliament, the advisory committees in the German legal world should take their place in the Academy instead of the legal advisory committees in the Reichstag.
In principle, the Academy only participated in laws of an economic or social nature, since in ever increasing measure the participation in all other spheres became more and more impossible, due to the development of the autocratic system.
Q If I understand you correctly, then the functions of the State with regard to the legal world were therefore in the hands of the Ministry for Justice and that wasn't you.
ANo, I was not Minister of Justice in the Reich. The Reichminster of Justice, Dr. G uertner, was, however, not active in the entire legislative world. He was responsible only for those laws which came immediately under his ministry. Legislation in the Reich, in accordance with the authorizin law, was in the hands of the Fuehre and Reichschancellor and the entire Reich G overnment. Consequently, my name appears in the Reich Law Gazette at the bottom of only one law, and that is the law regardin the reintroduction of general rearmament, but I am proud to find my name at the end of that law.
QYou have stated earlier that during 1933 and 1934 you were Bavarian Minister of Justice.
AYes.
QIn that capacity, did you have an opportunity to act in connection with concentration camps or to state your views, and under what circumstances did that happen?
AI did in connection with the camp at Dachau, in connection with the report which came from the Advocate General's Department in Munich to me on the occasion of the killing of the Munich solicitor Dr. Strauss. The Adjutant General's Department complained to me because I had given them orders to investigate this murders and they stated that they had been refused admission to the concentration camp at Dachau by the SS.
Subsequently, I approached the Reich Town G overnor, General von Epp, and asked him to attend the meeting, during which I produced the files regarding this killing and pointed out the impossibility of such an action on the part of the SS, and stated that up to that moment representatives from the German Public Prosecutor's Office had had an opportunity to investigate any killing in connection with which suspicion arose, and that a departure, at least until then, had not become known to me. After that, I continued by protesting against this method to the Reich Minister of Justice, Dr. G uertner, who was the supreme head of the legal system in Germany, and I pointed out that this meant the beginning of a development which was threatening the legal system in G ermany in the most serious manner possible.
By request of Heinrich Himmler, Adolf Hitler intervened personally in this matter, and he used his power to terminate any legal proceedings. This particular case was, therefore, discontinued, and I declared that I would resign as Minister of Justice, but I was refused permission to do so.
QWhen did you become Governor General of the Occupied Polish Territories and where did this nomination reach you?
AOn the 24th of August 1939, I was called up as an officer of the reserve to join my regiment in Potsdam. At the time, when I was in the middle of training my company, it was on the 17th of September, or it may have been the 16th, when I was making my last preparations to march off to the front, that a telephone call came through from the special train of the Fuehrer, ordering me to go to the Fuehrer at once.
The following day I traveled to Upper Silesia where that special train was stationed at that time.
At that time, in a very short conference which lasted less than ten minutes, he gave me the order, as he expressed himself at the time, to take over the functions of the Civilian Governor for Occupied Polish Territories.
At that time the entire conquered Polish territories were under the administrative command of a military commander, General von Rundstedt. Towards the end of September, I was attached to von Rundstedt's staff as the Chief of the Administrative Section, and it was to be my job to deal with administrative tasks within the military set-up, but in a narrower sense it was discovered after a very brief period that this method could not be carried out, and so, with effect from the 26th of October, the Polish territories were sub-divided into one part which came to the German Reich and another part which then became the Government General, and I was appointed Governor General.
QWe have now discussed the various positions which you held during the various periods. I am now asking you: Did you, in my of the positions you held in the Party or the State, participate decisively in the political events of the last 20 years?
AIn this sphere, which was close to me, I have done everything that you can possibly be expected to do, being a man who believes in the greatness of his nation and being a man who believes in the National Socialist movement. So I did everything to bring about a victory of Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist movement.
I have never participated in political decisions on any high level because I was not one of the immediate assistants of Adolf Hitler. I was therefore never consulted by Adolf Hitler on general political questions, nor did I take part at my time in conferences about such problems, be it alone for the reason that during all the years from 1933 until 1945 I was only received six times by Adolf Hitler personally to report to him about my sphere of activities.
QWhat share did you have in legislation in the Reich?
AI have already told you, and I need not refer to it again.
QDid you, as a Minister in the Reich or in anyother State or Party employment, want this war, or did you desire a war which would mean violation of agreements which had been made?
AOne cannot want a war as such. A war is something terrible. We have lived through it; we did not want a war. We wanted Germany to be. great, and we wanted Germany to be free and healthy. It was my dream and the dream of every one of us to bring about a revision of the Versailles Treaty by peaceful means, which had been proposed in that very treaty. But since in this world of pacts between nations only that man who is strong has anything to say, Germany had to become strong first before we could negotiate.
That was how I saw the development, the strengthening of the Reich, reinstitution of its sovereignty everywhere, and connected to that the possibility of liberation from the unbearable shackles which had been imposed upon our people. I was happy, therefore, that Adolf Hitler, in a rise unparalleled in the history of mankind, a wonderful rise, succeeded by the end of 1933 in achieving those very aims. I was equally unhappy when in 1939 I had to note that in an over increasing manner Adolf Hitler appeared to be departing from that method to replace it by others.
THE PRESIDENT:This seems to have been covered by what the defendant Goering told us, by what the defendant Ribbentrop told us.
DR. SEIDL:The witness hasalready completed his statement on this point. BY DR. SEIDL:
QWitness, what was your share in the events in Poland after 1939?
AI will bear responsibility, and when, on the 30th of April 1945, Adolf Hitler ended his life, I made a resolution that I would state that responsibility of mine to the world as clearly as I possibly could.
The forty-three volumes of my diary, which report on all those events and the share I had in them, have not been destroyed by me, but, of my own free will, I have handed them voluntarily to the officers of the American Army who arrested me.
QWitness, do you feel guilty of having commited violations of international law or having commited crimes against humanity?
THE PRESIDENT:That is a question that the Tribunal has go to decide.
DR. SEIDL:Then I shall drop the question. BY DR. SEIDL:
QWitness, what do you have to state regarding the accusations which are contained in the Indictment against you?
AI have only got to say, as far as these accusations are concerned, that I am asking this Tribunal to decide upon the degree of my guilt at the end of my case. I myself, speaking from the very depths of my sentiments and from the experience of five months of this trial, want to say that now that I have gained the last insight into all that which has been commited in the way of dreadful atrocities. I feel a terrible guilt with in me.
QWhat ends did you have when you commenced to act as Governor General?
AI was not informed about any thing. I have heard about special action commandoes of the SS during this trial. And, closely connected with my nomination, special authorities were given to Himmler at once. My jurisdiction was limited, if not taken away from me, and economy, social policy, food policy, and so on, were all matters which were being dealt with by departments in the Reich. Therefore, I could only consider it my task to take care, amongst this sea of flames of this war, that some sort of an order should be created which would make it possible for man to live.
The work I did there, therefore, cannot be judged by the phenomena of the moment, but must be judged in its entirety, and we shall have to come to that later.
My aim was to guarantee justice without violating the interests of our warfare.
QWitness, did the police, and particularly the Security Police and SD, come under your juridiction in the Government General?
AThe higher SS and Police Leaders were principally subordinated to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himler. The SS did not come under my command, and any orders or instructions which I might have given would not have been obeyed. Witness Buehler will have to cover this question in detail.
The total structure was such that the Higher SS and Police Leaders could, formally speaking, come under my orders, but in fact, and in accordance with his activities, he was an organ of the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler.
This state of affairs, even as early as November of 1939, was the cause of my first offer to resign, which I made to Adolf Hitler. It was a state of affairs which was making things more difficult as time went by. In spite of all my attempts to gain control in this sphere of influence, the deterioration continued more and more. To have an administration without a police executive is an impossibility, and this transpired more and more.
The officials of the police, so far as discipline, organization, pay, and orders were concerned, came exclusively under the German police system in the Reich, and there was no connection of any kind with the administration in the Government General. The officials of the SS and police did not regard the Government General as the home of their duty, and therefore the police area was not called "Police Area, Government General." The Higher SS and Police Leaders did not call themselves SS and Police Leaders in the Government General, but Higher SS and Police Leaders East.
However, I don't propose to go into detail at this point.
QWitness, did the concentration camps in the Government General came under you, and did you have anything to do with their administration?
AConcentration camps were entirely a matter for the police and had nothing to do with the administration, Numbers of the civilian administration were officially prohibited from entering the camps.
QHave you yourself ever been in a concentration camp?
AIn 1935 I participated in a visit to the concentration camp at Dachau, which had been organized for the Gauleiters at that time. That was the only time that I have entered such a camp.
QWitness, in 1942, by a decree of the Fuehrer, a State Secretary for the Security System in the Government General was created. The date is May, 1942. How did the creation of that secretariat come about?
AIt was one of the many attempts to solve the problem of the police in the Government General. I was very happy at that time because I thought now we had found the way. I am certain it would have worked if Himmler and Krueger had ad hered to the principle of this decree, which was cooperation and not working against each other.
But it transpired, after a very short period, that this re-
Apr18-M-RT-4-3 newed attempt too was merely a camouflage and that the old conditions continued to prevail.
QOn the 3rd of June, 1942, and on the basis of this Fuehrer decree, there came another decree regarding the transfer of the business to the Secretary of State for the Security System. Is that true?
AI assume so. I cannot remember the details of that document, of course.
QIn that case I shall ask the witness Bilfinger about this point.
ABut I would like to say one thing in connection with that question. You are always speaking about the SS, and you are considering the SS and the police as one large complex. It would be an untruth if I did not correct that conception. The SS and the Waffen-SS and the Police have contained so many clean and soldierly men, whom I have met as the years went by, that the problem of the SS must be considered in connection with the judgment on the criminal activities which they have carried out.--and it can be as clearly separated here as it could be in any social question. The SS, as such, was no more criminal than would be any other mass which appears during certain political events. What was dreadful was that the highest chief and a number of others, who had been given considerable authority, were misusing the typically faithful attitude of the German soldier.
QWitness, anothe question. In the decree concerning the creation of the State Secretariat for Security, It is ordered that this Secretary Of State-- which in this case is the Higher SS and Police Leaders--before making principal decisions, has to call on you for your agreement. Did that take place?
ANo; I was never called upon in that connection, and this was the cause for me to realize the impossibility of this attempt, after so short a time,
QDid the Higher SS and Police Leader, and SS Obergruppenfuehrer Krueger particularly, obey orders which you yourself had given him?
APlease, would you repeat the question? It didn't come through too well. And please, Dr. Seidl, you are speaking a little too loud.
QDid the Higher SS and Police Leader, who was the Secretary of State for Security, obey orders which you gave him in your capacity as Governor General?
A In no single case. On the strength of this now decree I have repeatedly given orders.
These orders were supposedly communicated to Heinrich Himmler, and since his agreement now became necessary these orders were never obeyed. Some special cases can be quoted by the Secretary of State Buehler when he is here as a Witness.
QDid the Reichsfuehrer SS and chief of the German police, Himmler, before he carried out security police measures in the Government General, ever ask your agreement?
AIn no single case.
QThe Prosecution have submitted a document, L-47. It has the USA Exhibit No. 506. It is a letter from the commander of the security police and SD of the District of Radom, addressed to the outside service department at Gomachow. This document contains the following statement:
"The Higher SS and Police Leader East, on the 28th of June 1944, has given the following order:
"The security situation in the Government General has deteriorated so much during the recent months that the most severe measures and the most radical means must now be employed against such attackers and saboteurs. Reichsfuehrer SS, with agreement of the Governor General, has made his reply and stated that in every case where attacks or attempted attacks against Germans have taken place, not only the perpetrators should be shot when caught, but that over and above this all men of their plan should also be executed, and that females above the age of sixteen should be transferred to the concentration camp."
AAs I have told, agreement regarding such orders from Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler was never called for in any single case. Your question has already been answered. In this case, too, it was not asked for.
QWitness, were you at least, before the carrying; out of such orders from the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler or the police leaders, previously informed?
AThe reason given why this wasn't done was always the same. I was told that these people were living in the Government General but that they were also living in those territories which had been handed over to the Reich.
The combatting of the Polish resistance movement would have to come under unified control from some central source.
This central source, of course, was Heinrich Himmler.
QWitness, what jurisdiction did you have in the general sphere of administration?
AI think it would accelerate this trial if the witness Buehler could be asked about those questions. If the Tribunal so desires it, I would of course answer this question now. In the main I was concerned with the setting up of the usual administrative departments, such as the culture, finance, and science departments.
QWas there a representative from the Polish and Ukrainian people in the Government General?
AYes. The Polish and Ukrainian population were dealt with according to regions. The representatives from the various districts were centralized at the head in the so-called assistance committees. There was a Polish and a Ukrainian assistance committee. At the head of the Polish assistance committee for a number of years was Count Roneker, and at the head of the Ukrainian assistance committee was Professor Kubiowicz. I made it compulsory to all my departments that whenever general questions arose they should be touched upon with those assistance committees, and that was in fact carried out. I myself have had continuous dealings with them all the way through. Complaints were brought to me and there was a free change of views. My complaints and memoranda which I sent to the Fuehrer, for instance, were mostly based on the reports I had from these assistance committees.
A second form of participation on the part of the population in the administration of the Government General existed along the lowest level of administration, which in the entire Government General was left in the hands of the native population. Ten to twenty villages had as their head a so-called "Voyd". This Polish word Voyd is the same as the German word "Vogt" -- V-o-g-t. He was the, so to speak, lowest administrative unit.
The third form of participation from among the population as far as administration was concerned was the fact that in the Government General, and including postal and railway service, 280,000 Poles and Ukrainians continued in the service of the state of the Government General as civil servants.
QWhat were the figures compared between the Polish and German civil servants?
AThe figures varied. Among the German civil servants the number was very small. There were sometimes in the whole Government General, which is 150,000 square kilometers--that means it was half as large as Italy-40,000 German civil servants on the outside. That meant one German civil servant to an average of at least six non-German civil servants and employees.
QWhich territories did you administer as Government General?
AThe Poland which had been jointly conquered by the German and Soviet Russian forces was divided, first of all, between the Soviet Union and the German Reich. Of the 380,000 square kilometers--which is an approximate figure--of the Polish State, the Soviet Union received approximate] 200,000 square kilometers and the German Reich approximately 170,000 to 180,000 square kilometers. Please don't tie me down to figures too exactly; but that is roughtly what the situation was.
That part of Poland which was taken over into Soviet Russian territory was immediately treated as an integral part of the Soviet Union. The border demarcations in the east of the Government General were the ordinary Reich frontier demarcations of 1939. That part which came to Germany was divided thus; 90,000 square kilometers into the Government General and the remainder was included in the German Reich.
THE PRESIDENT:I don't think there is any charge against the Defendant on the ground that the civil administration was bad. The charge is that crimes were committed, and the details of the administration between the Government General and the department in the Reich are not really in question.
DR. SEIDL:The only reason, Mr. President, why I put that question was so as to show you the difficulties with which the administration had to cope right from the beginning, and which meant that an economic one was divided into two.
