"As to the separation of Maxhuette or rather Maxhuette's becoming independent within our group, I can inform you of a conversation I had a few weeks ago with Herr Gauleiter Giesler in Munich in this connection. Gauleiter Giesler declared to me that he would warmly welcome the carrying out of this transaction in the general interest. He considers it most important that Maxhuette, as a Bavarian enterprise, be brought into direct connection with the personal partnership and the parent Company. Gauleiter Giesler has declared himself ready to support the carryingout of the transaction in every respect in case any difficulties should arise. As a matter of fact, we really did not need the assistance of Herr Giesler; in view of the fact that the most influential personalities of the Reich Finance Administration and the Reich Ministry of Economics have declared the execution of the plan worthy of unconditional support, and have offered, whereever possible, to assist us in the completion of the transaction." Then on page 43 of the English document book, page 8 of the German original, Flick refers to the position of Luebeck in the corporate structure. He says:
"On the other hand, Maxhuette has no economic interest in the participation in Hochofenwerk Luebeck A.G. It is much more to the interest of Maxhuette that it disposes of its participation in A.G. for Montaninteressen to Mittelstahl, in exchange for the shares of Harpen still held by Mittelstahl, in order thereby to consolidate theentire Konzern ownership of Harpen shares within Maxhuette, an ownership which thus comes to 70% "In connection with the reorganization of the Konzern, I still want to say a few words about the Luebeck participation.
As a Konzern we own 75% of Luebeck. Half of this participation is held by the hard-coal group Essener Steinkohle (ESt), while the other half is held by Mittelstahl/AKW. We have discussed the advisability of uniting the Luebeck participations of the Konzern at some certain point, but have held it in abeyance for the following reasons: ......." which I think it is unnecessary to go into at this point. I should now like to offer inevidence,Document NI-3676, which appears on Page 50 of the English Document Book, which will become Prosecution Exhibit No. 34.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal receives the offered document in evidence and the Secretary General will note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document consists of a photostat of the chart of the corporate structure of the Flick Konzern as of the end of the war. It is a chart which has been certified by the Defendant Weiss and by Mr. Theoder Kurre, one of the accounting experts of the headquarters of the Flick Konzern, as being essentially a correct picture of the situation as of May 1945. It will be observed that this chart corresponds to the chart which appears in the Courtroom at the present time. If this chart is compared with the 2 charts which were previously introduced into evidence as Exhibits No. 31 and No. 32, it will be observed that the process of diffusion of the various companies, so that they all stem directly from the Friedrich Flick Kommanditgesellschaft, has been carried still further so that virtually all of the principle companies are held directly by the Friedrich Flick Kommanditgesellschaft, whith the sole exception that in some instances there is an intermediate holding company which has no other function.
But the setup as of the end of the war finds all the principle operating companies independent of each other in so far as stock ownership is concerned and all are integrated into the Konzern headquarters of the FKG through virtually direct stock participation.
The next document which I should like to offer in evidence is NI-5450 which appears on page 51 of the English document book, which willbecome Prosecution Exhibit No. 35.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal receives this document in evidence and the Secretary General will note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document, which it will be unnecessary to read in detail, is an outline of the various individual Flick plants showing the particular properties connected with them and the products which the manufactured. For example, Item No. 3, as set forth in this document, refers to Mittelseutsche Stahlwerks, which by this time is in the form of a GmbH. Under Mittelseutsche Stahlwerke is a list of the individual plants at Groeditz, Lauchhammer, Riesa, and brown coal mines and brickette factories near Lauchhammer; also refers to an iron ore field at Elbingerode.
The plants listed under Maximilianshuette, which is the next item in this survey, include the works at Haidhof, Rosenberg, Unterwellenborn and Frenberg, together with 5 iron are mines.
I think it will be helpful when the court wishes to refer to this document, to have before it the basic information booklet marked "C" to which I referred earlier, and which includes a map of Germany showing the locaion of the various Flick enterprises and the various brown and hard coal fields.
For exemple, it will be found that various properties of the Ahnaltische Kohlenwerke which appears at Item 18 of the outline of the various Flick properties, were centralized in Central and South Central Germany, almost due south of Berlin in most instances, and due east of Berlin with respect to the Niederlausitzer Brown. Coal Fields. And while the map shows only the principal establishments, it will be seen from the outline of these various plants which appears in Document NI- 5450, that under each, particularly under the Anhaltische Kohlenwerke, there are over two dozen separate establishments, as well as brown coal mines.
I should like now to introduce in evidence Document NI-5414This will be Prosecution Exhibit 36.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal receives this in evidence, as offered, and directs the Secretary-General to note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document consists merely a single page, listing the principal Flick companies and showing the abbreviations which were customarily used in the concern, refer ing to these various companies. There is a memorandum which bears the signature of the Defendant Kaletsch at the end. The document shows distribuation of copies of it to Burkart, Weiss and some half dozen other of the officials of the concern in Berlin.
The Tribunal may have occasion in the future to refer back yo this document, since it shows the initials of the Defendants Burkart and Weiss, as well of these other officials.
The next document the Prosecution desires to introduce in evidence is Document NI-5451 which appears at page 56 of the Document Book, and will become Prosecution Exhibit 37.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal receibes that as Prosecution No 56, and directs that the Secretary-General notes its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document is a memorandum dated May 12, 1944 which agains describes the principles activities of the various units of the Flick concern.
A large document is NI-5452, which we should like to introduce in evidence as Prosecution Exhibit 38. This appears at page 60 of the English document book.
THE PRESIDENT:The Tribunal receives this document as Prosecution Exhibit No. 38 and the Secretary-General will note its receipt in the record.
DR.KRANZBUEHLER (for the Defendant Burkart): Mr. President, I wish to object to the submission of this document. This document appears to be a list by the chief of the "A" dating back to 1933. It deals with propagation of economic mobilization.
I do not see in what connection this document can be relevant to the Prosecution which is here being made. I am of the opinion that mobilization, as such armament as such, did not represent a crime, at least not under international law. I therefore object to the submission of this document, because I consider it irrelevant.
MR. LYON:Apparently there was a misunderstanding on the part of Dr. Kranzbuehler. I think he had in mind the document book, which appears later on in the index to the document book, Document C-32 is the one I believe he had in mind, which appears at page 66 of the English document book. I think under the circumstances it would be better to defer discussion of the admissibility of that document until we reach that point in the representation.
DR. KRANZBUEHLER:Through a misunderstanding I objected to the document before it was submitted. I would like to postpone my objection until C-32 is submitted by the Prosecution
THE PRESIDENT:Certainly, Dr. Kranzbuehler.
And Mr. Ervin, do tou think this would be a good place to stop here? The Tribunal will be ready to recess, but perhaps you have a better place than this.
MR. ERVIN: THis document otgether with the four others, shows the signifiance of the Flick concern in the production of armaments. It is not necessary that this be finished this afternoon. We could very well defer it until tomorrow morning. It appears that Dr. Kranzbuhler will have objections to one fo the documents, so that perhaps it will be just as well commence in the morning with these.
THE PRESIDENT:Very well.
MR. ERVIN:Before the recess I should like to inquire wether the Document NI-5452 has been received in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT:It has.
MR. ERVIN:That would become Prosecution Exhibit No. 38. Then I think we might commence with this document when the Court reopens.
THE PRESIDENT:Very well, the Tribunal will now recess until tomorrow morning at 9.30.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 22 April 1947 at 0930 hours.)
-------------------------------End of the days take in the Courtroom.
Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Friedrich Flick, et al, defendants, sitting at Nuernberg, Germany, on 22 April 1947, 0930, Justice Sears presiding.
THEMARSHAL; The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal IV. Military Tribunal IV is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT:Are the defendants all present?
THE MARSHAL:May it please Your Honor, all the defendants are present in court with the exception of the defendant Steinbrinck.
THE PRESIDENT:Dr. Flaechsner, what about the defendant Steinbrinck's appearance?
DR. FLAECHSNER:Counsel for the defendant Steinbrinck.
THE PRESIDENT:What about the future?
DR. FLAECHSNER:Steinbrinck is ill. He has had a heart attack.
THE PRESIDENT:Will you repeat the last answer?
DR. FLAECHSNER:Steinbrinck is ill. He has had a heart attack.
THE PRESIDENT:That I understand. Is it a temporary matter or is it a matter of some permanence?
DR. FLAECHSNER:It is hoped that he will be well again soon.
THE PRESIDENT:What is the position of the prosecution?
MR. LYON:The evidence which has been presented in the last day and the evidence which will be presented in the next three or four days will not have a direct relation to the defendant Steinbrinck. It will be a further description of the operation of the Flick concern, which Steinbrinck left at the end of 1939.
It was then the intention of the prosecution to present evidence with respect to misuse of labor in Flick plants. This presentation also will consume, I should say, four or five days. So I can see the defendant will not be prejudiced by his absence during the remainder of the week.
THE PRESIDENT:Dr. Flaechsner, do you want to say anything with respect to that statement of the prosecution? I think we may safely go Court 4 - Case 5 on without any injury to the interests of Mr. Steinbrinck.
We are ready to proceed.
MR. LYON:May it please the Tribunal, I believe at the conclusion of the session yesterday there had just been introduced into the record Document Number NI-5452, which was received as Prosecution Exhibit Number 38. This document consists of a two-page outline headed "Memorandum for Dr. Tillmanns". This was prepared on June 20, 1944, and it outlines the principal types of armament production in the various Flick plants. It was prepared by a man named "Franck" who was one of the employees of the Berlin office of the concern. This is the first of several documents which the Prosecution wishes to introduce at this time which describe the extent of activity of the various Flick factories in the production of armament.
This will of course be more than background material with respect to the significance and place of the Flick concern in German industry. This evidence will become material when we reach Count I which deals with misuse of labor. One part of the charge under that count is the charge that prisoners of war were illegally used for armament production. Document NI-5452, as I say, lists the principal armament activities of the principal Flick plants. It will be observed at the Mittelstahl plant at Riesa, which appears as item one, there are listed projectile winches, submarine pressure bodies, and torpedo ejecting tubes.
At the plant at Groeditz, which is a branch of Mittelstahl, shells, cannon barrels, and completed cannons were manufactured.
At the plants at Brandenburg, Hennigsdorf, and Spandau, which were branches of the Friedrich Flick Kommanditgesellschaft, armor plates, parts for plants, shells, gun barrels, and gun breeches were manufactured.
Item 3 lists a number of armament products which were manufactured at the Maxhuette plants including again shells, shell fuses, and other gun parts.
It will be observed on page 2 of the memorandum similar armament products were manufactured at the Rombach and Doehlen plants, at the Court 4 - Case 5 Linke-Hoffmann plant, and at Fabrik Busch.
At the Linke-Hoffmann plant and Busch plants a considerable part of the activity was taken up with the manufacture of armored vehicles of various sorts, trucks, trains and the like, and parts for tanks and tank bodies.
At the ATG plant principal production was airplanes. At the conclusion of this memorandum it appears that the number of employees including prisoners of war within the concern is at present more than 130,000.
I might say that the principal points of information contained in the document to which I have just referred as well as the previous document which was Prosecution Exhibit Number 37 have been summarized in "Basic Information Number C" which was presented to the Court on opening day.
On page 20 of that Basic Information the armament production in various plants was listed and the plants appear in alphabetical order for the convenience of the Court.
I should now like to introduce another document, dealing with the same general subject, which is Document NI-3496, which should become Prosecution Exhibit Number 39. This appears in the English document book at page 63.
THE PRESIDENT:The document now offered is received in evidence as Prosecution Exhibit Number 39 and the Secretary General will note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document, dated July 9, 1942, is a memorandum which was found in the records of the Flick Konzern. It bears no signature or initials but it sets forth what is headed "Achievements the Flick Group" as of the date when the memorandum was written. The achievements which are listed there are primarily achievements having to do with the preparation for war and the production of armaments. The first item listed is Crude Steel. The memorandum points out that of the total increase in crude steel production between 1929 and 1941 in the whole German Reich, 52% of the increase was attributable to the increase of the Flick Group. The memorandum goes on to state as follows:
"The Flick Group, which in 1929 was in fifth place among German concerns, has in the meantime advanced from fifth to second place by its increased production which continued even during the war. The Krupp firm had formerly the second largest steel production. The above figures always exclude the Reichswerke Hermann Goering."
Item 2 is headed "Special War Products". The memorandum goes on to say:
"Before 1935, the Group did not manufacture any shells, any cannon or cannon barrels. The manufacture of cannon barrels was limited to two firms. Today, as far as shell production goes, the Group is second to the Vereinigte Stahlwerke which is the largest enterprise by far..... In delivery of gun barrels, the firm seems to be one of the largest within Germany proper. In addition, our cannon factory will be used to a very large extent for the manufacture of army anti-aircraft guns."
Item 3 is headed "Manufacture of Tanks." The memorandum states:
"In 1938 the Group began manufacturing bodies and turrets for tanks. In this production, the Flick Group stands today at the head of all German concerns. In this connection, it has been ascertained by government sources that the works of the Flick Group are producing about 30 % more tanks than the second highest producer within Germany. On the basis of these achievements, the Flick Group was bestowed with the designation of 'Model Armaments Enterprise' upon recommendation of the Munitions Ministry. During this year, the designation was given in all of Germany to 19 enterprises. In this figure only 3 firms of the whole steel industry were included.
Item 4 is headed "Airplane Construction." The memorandum states:
"Already at the end of 1933, the Flick Group began to convert one of its machine factories (Allgemeine Transportgesellschaft in Leipzig)...."
(which is usually referred to as ATG)
....."to the manufacture of airplanes. It has performed continually to the complete satisfaction of the Air Ministry and may also be said to stand in a good position concerning production costs... By the end of the year, production will be increased by additional 20%. The total number employed in this plane factory is now 8500 men."
Item 5 is headed "Railway car construction."
"The rail car factory of Linke-Hofmann in Breslau, belonging to the Flick Group, began be expand its car production capacity before the war. While in 1937 the capacity ran at 350 normal freight cars a month, it has risen today to about 800."
At this point I might recall to the Court that in the previous document, NI-5452, the memorandum of June 20,1944, it was stated that among the products of Linke-Hofmann were tank bodies, armored trains, freight cars, and other special orders.
I should now like to offer in evidence, Document No. NI-5232, which appears in the English Document Book at page 65, which would become Prosecution Exhibit No. 40.
THE PRESIDENT:The document now offered is received in evidence and the Secretary General will see that that is noted in the record. Its number if Prosecution Exhibit No. 40.
MR. LYON:This document is a copy of a short letter dated October 1, 1943. It is addressed to Dr. Gritzbach , who was Chief of Staff of Hermann Goering in the Four Year Plan. Although there is no signature on the letter it is apparent that it must have been written by the defendant Flick. The letter states as follows:
"Referring to our recent discussion I take the liberty to attach to this letter four applications for the bestowal of the Kriegsverdienstkreuz I. Class to Messrs. Kaletsch, Lang, Burkart, and Weiss. The gentlemen menioned are my most intimate collaborators in the management of the whole concern, the importance of which is known to you personally.
"In consideration of the particular services rendered by the whole concern within the frame of the German armament industry, I should like to ask you to support the applications."
We come now to a document which Dr. Kranzbuehler has hinted he may have objections to. Perhaps I should first describe what the document is and then give him an opportunity to state his objections. This document is a number of records of the Oberkommando der Marine, usually referred to as OKM, or the German High Command of the Navy.
The document was introduced before the International Military Tribunal and received into evidence on 27 November 1945, at page 448 of the mimeographed transcript. The document was given the number C-32 and was received in evidence as United States Exhibit No. 50. This document also sheds light on armament production and one of the items which is contained in this document is a reference to armament production by the Groeditz Plant of Mitteldeutsche Stahlwerke.
The document in general is headed "Survey List Compiled After the Conference with the Chief of 'A' Section on 9 September 1933" as it appears on page 66 of the English document Book. It appears that this is a compilation of all violations of the Versailles Treaty which were known by the OKM to have been engaged in by it as of September 1933. It will be observed that in the lefthand column in each case there is a description of the particular measure that is referred to; in the middle column are further details on the particular measure; and in the righthand column, headed "Remarks" are justificarions which could be used for propaganda purposes if the violation should be discovered. For example, in Item 2, which refers to "Continuous storing of guns from the North Sea area for Baltic artillery batteries," the justification is stated as "necessity for overhauling. Cheaper repairs." Item 13, for example, is headed "Exceeding the number of machine guns, etc. permitted." The justification, which appears in the righthand column, at page 68 of the English Document Book, is simply, and I quote: "Can be made light os." Item 26, which appears at page 70 of the English Document Book, reads as follows:
"Arranging for the Mitteldeutsche Stahlwerke A.G., Lauchhammerwerk Groeditz to undertake the manufacture of Flack shells. Holding ready part-material, mechanism, tools for the work so that the time required for starting work may be shortened."
The only matter listed under the heading "Details" opposite this item is, and I quote:
"Also not permissible."
I think it is unnecessary to read further from this document, which will become Prosecution Exhibit No. 41.
DR.KRANZBUEHLER: (Counsel for Defendant Burkart) Mr. President, I believe I do not need to repeat my objections against this exhibit which were made yesterday. What the Prosecutor has just said, in my opinion, confirms the view that this document has nothing whatever to do with this trial. It is a document dating back to 1933. Therefore, this document can in no way be connected with the use of prisoners of war in the armament industry. The prosecutor, however, has just stated that he was submitting such document concerning the armament production of the Flick Konzern, giving the reason that he wanted to stress the armament production of the firm with the making use of prisoners of war for this purpose. They have not claimed that there is any other connection with the prosecution of this trial. This document does not originate from the circles of the Flick Konzern but from the High Command of the Navy and there is not the slightest evidence that the Mittelstahl Society ever knew anything at all about this survey being made. It is Top Military Secret and we do not know whether that was ever carried out. I would like to refer once again to the International Military Tribunal and the decision made about biolations of the Versailles Treaty.
There a list was made of the violations of this Treaty which the Prosecution wanted to describe as crimes.
This count of these violations deals with armament. The Tribunal, on the contrary, decided that only the first five counts represented violations of the Treaty. Not, therefore, Count 6, which is armament. I therefore maintain the objection I made to this document yesterday.
THE PRESIDENT:The judges of this Tribunal have considered this matter preliminarily and we have determined to receive this document in evidence. That does not, however, preclude you, Dr. Kranzbuehler, from contending that it is irrelevent, nor does it commit the Court -- the Tribunal -- to a decision that it is relevent.
We are in the early stages of this trial and we must allow these claimed-to-be background documents to come before us, so that we may have the whole picture when we come to the decision of relevance. Consequently, while we receive this document, that does not mean that we shall give it any weight when we consider it in the general picture.
MR. LYON:I might say in this connection that the Prosecution intends to furnish further evidence that will tie this particular document into the chain of proof, particularly under Count 4 of the Indictment.
THE PRESIDENT:What is the number of this document?
MR. LYON:It will become Prosecution Exhibit 41. Its original document number was C-32. It appears in the English document book at page 66.
THE PRESIDENT:We receive this document, as I have stated to Dr. Kranzbuehler, and we will instruct the Secretary-General to note its reception in evidence, and mark it Prosecution Exhibit 41.
MR. LYON:The next document which the Prosecution desires to introduce into evidence is Document NI-5546, which appears at page 72 of the English document book, and which would become Exhibit 42.
This document is a letter from the Defendant Flick to Major General Henrici, Chief of Industrial Armament Division of the High Command of the Army, or the OKH. The letter describes in general the armament actibities of the Unterwellenborn factories by the Maxhuette Company as of 1943. Flick begins by saying:
"May I assume that your letter of 30 October has in the meantime been explained to your satisfaction by the discussion between Director Griesbach, the technical manager of both ammunition factories Unterwellenborn, and your Capt. Reimann on 2nd November."
In the second paragraph:
"Moreover, you know how much I have always furthered and supported ammunition production in my group with all my strength; it also goes without saying that I call the attention of my associates again and again to the urgency of ammunition production, you will therefore always find the fullest understanding of myself and my associates for all your wishes concerning the ammunition sector and I should like to assure you that we shall do our best to get the highest possible output from our ammunition plants.
"Originally I intended to organize a special commission for ammunition in my Konzern, out of all the plants, and to put my oldest son in charge of this Konzern committee, since he has gained great experience in ammunition production through his work in Unterwellenborn. Unfortunately, however, it proved -- for the moment at least -- impossible to burden him with additional tasks since his present job -- he is, as you know, leader of the plant in Rombach -- still requires considerably of his energy and time."
I would like to refer back briefly in this connection to Document NI-5452, which appears in the English book at page 61. There it will be found that Rombach was engaged in the production of ammunition -
THE PRESIDENT:What was the number of that exhibit to which you call attention?
MR. LYON:Exhibit 38, which appears in the English document book at page 61.
THE PRESIDENT:The document you have offered is received as Prosecution Exhibit 42 and the Secretary-General will note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:The last document in this present series -
THE PRESIDENT:The pages in my copy of these documents is not in order at this point. I don't know whether that occurs in all the copies or not.
MR. LYON:I am sorry that sometimes does occur. I will do what I can to see that you are given a corrected copy.
THE PRESIDENT:I don't think that is necessary. The pages in my book run: 72, 74 and 73.
MR. LYON:I see.
The next exhibit that we desire to introduce is NI-5547, which appears in the English document book at page 74, which would become Prosecution Exhibit 43.
THE PRESIDENT:The document now offered will be received as Prosecution Exhibit 43, and the Secretary-General will note its receipt in the record.
MR. LYON:This document, dated 27 January 1944, is another letter from the Defendant Flick to Major General Henrici. This deals with the same subject, that is, increase of ammunition production. This time the reference is particularly to the Freitaler Stahlindustrie. The letter states:
"With reference to our repeated conferences I am glad to be able to inform you that our mutual endeavors, for the increase of ammunition production in the plants attached to me, have proved considerably successful during the last months. You might be interested to hear that the ammunition plants attached to my group have reached an output of approximately 1,056,000 bullets and handgrenades.
Of this number a total of 829,00 pieces (including 180,000 bullets of the Freitaler Stahl-Industries) were finished. You may rest assured that I shall also in the future exert my influence in order to increase even further the output of munitions and thus to comply with your demands."
I might say that the Freitaler Stahlindustrie is one of the plants of the Saechsische Gusstahlwerke, located at Doehlen.
Now, if it please the Tribunal, Mr. Gantt of the Prosecution will continue the presentation.
MR. GANTT:The next series of documents concerns Siegener Eisenindustrie, the top company of the Flick Concern. I may summarize its development so that the following documents may be easier understood. The Kommanditgesellschaft developed from the Siegener Eisenindustrie A.G. , or, abbreviated, S.E.I. You will remember that Flick originated from Siegener, and it appears on the map, which has an appendix C. You see the letters D, and 3. For the convenience of the court we have numbered the map on the bottom with numbers and on the left-hand side with letters.
Dr. Dix apparently desires to speak.
DR. DIX:To avoid misunderstanding, I would just like to point out that in the copy of the German document available to us there is a misleading heading, and I think it is in the interests of everybody that this should be corrected. This document which the representative of the Prosecution is now submitting to the Tribunal -that is Exhibit 43 -- is a critique made by a German notary concerning the founding of this company. But in the heading it is described as an excerpt from the proceedings of the Chamber Court in Berlin of 28th of June, 1937, It must be a mistake. It is not the proceedings of the Court which are reproduced in this document. My view of this error is that the heading is only intended to mean this document contains the record which was made by one Notary Public in the Chamber Court. In other words, by one notary located in Berlin. As I said, I think it is to the interest of all of us that this error should be rectified.