Chapter XXXIII: Part I: , Page 1579, date 12 November 1938, signed by the Defendant (2)

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes, I think it would, Your Honor. I may say, in reference to that section—what, perhaps, may be surprising to those accustomed to our system of jurisprudence—that it was one of the most controversial issues we had in the framing of this Charter. We had in mind the authorization of what we call “masters” to go into various localities, perhaps, and take testimony, not knowing what might be necessary. Our practice, however, of sending “masters in equity” to take testimony and make recommendations was not acceptable to the continental system, and we finally compromised on this provision which authorizes the taking of testimony by commissions.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

GENERAL R. A. RUDENKO (Chief Prosecutor for the U.S.S.R.): Your Honors, I have come forward after my colleague, Mr. Jackson, to make my own statement, inasmuch as I think that the petition of the Defense is fundamentally wrong and should not be complied with.

We are submitting our objections for the Tribunal’s consideration. I fully share the viewpoint held by the Chief Prosecutor of the U.S.A., Mr. Jackson, and in addition should like to point out the following; The Defense Counsel, in his petition, raises the question of whether the Prosecution should refer to, or make public, documents containing affidavits of persons residing in Germany. A statement of this sort is completely out of order since, as is known, the defendants committed the greater part of their atrocities in all countries of Europe and it will be readily understood that the witnesses of these atrocities live in different parts of these countries; it is essential that the Prosecution have recourse to the testimony of such persons, whether it be written or oral. Your Honors, we have entered a phase of the Trial in which we have to set forth the atrocities connected with so-called War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity, atrocities which were committed by the defendants over extensive areas. We shall submit as evidence documents originating from the defendants themselves or from persons who suffered at the hands of the war criminals; it would be impossible to summon all these witnesses to the Trial so that they could give their evidence orally. It is absolutely necessary to have affidavits and written testimonies from these witnesses.

As His Honor the President has already remarked, Article 17 provides for the right of summoning witnesses to the Trial. That is correct; but it is impossible to summon all the witnesses who could depose affidavits on the crimes committed by the defendants. I therefore refer to Article 19 of the Charter which reads:

“The Tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence.
It shall adopt and apply to the greatest possible extent
expeditious”—and I emphasize, Your Honor, _expeditious_—“and
non-technical procedure and shall admit any evidence which it
deems to have probative value.”

I would ask the Tribunal to proceed according to this article which definitely admits written affidavits of witnesses as evidence. That is what I wished to say by way of a supplement to the statement of Mr. Jackson.

MR. ROBERTS: May it please the Tribunal, as far as the British Delegation is concerned, they desire to support what the American Chief Prosecutor has said, and we do not feel we can usefully add anything.

THE PRESIDENT: [_To M. Faure of the French Delegation._] Do you wish to add anything?

M. EDGAR FAURE (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the French Republic): Mr. President, I wish simply to inform the Court that the French Prosecution is entirely in accord with the remarks of the American and Soviet Prosecutors.

I think, as the representative of the American Prosecution said, it is impossible to settle the question of evidence in this Trial solely by hearing oral testimony in the courtroom, for under those circumstances it might be opportune to call to the witness stand all the inhabitants of the territories involved, which is obviously impossible. The Defense will have every opportunity of discussing the documents which have been presented by the Prosecution, including the written testimony.

THE PRESIDENT: I do not think that Counsel for Kaltenbrunner was suggesting that every witness must be called but that witnesses who were in Germany and available should be called and that their evidence should not be given by affidavit.

M. FAURE: The Defense has the right of calling them as witnesses if it so desires.

DR. KAUFFMANN: May I add a few more words to this important question? The replies which have just been given illustrate that one of the main principles of the proceedings is that the Trial should proceed speedily. That is also expressed in Article 19 of the Charter, and no one can hope more than we that this principle be followed; but it is nevertheless my opinion that another principle, the highest known to mankind, the principle of truth, should not thereby suffer. If there is a fear that truth will suffer through an over-hasty trial, then formal methods of procedure must take a secondary place. There are human principles which remain unspoken, which need not be spoken.

This spirit of truth is certainly contained in and governs Article 19; and the objections I raised to the testimony of this witness seem to me justified to such a degree that the important principle of speeding up the Trial should give way to the principle of truth. Humanity itself is in question here. We want to establish the truth for our own generation and for that of our children. But if such testimony remains untold for months, then a part of mankind might well despair of all humanity and the German people, in particular, would suffer.

DR. FRIEDRICH BERGOLD (Counsel for the Defendant Bormann): May it please the Tribunal, I should like to bring up one other point, which appears to me important, because it was apparently the real source of this discussion. According to our legal system it is the duty of the Prosecution to produce not only the incriminating evidence but also evidence for the defense of the accused. I can well understand that my colleague, Dr. Kauffmann, protests the Prosecution’s failure to mention a very important point, namely, that the German authorities indicted this inhuman SS leader and his wife and condemned them to death. It is highly probable that the Prosecution knew of this and that these horrible exhibits of perverted human nature, which were presented to us, were found in the files of the German Court.

I believe the whole discussion would not have arisen if the Prosecution had mentioned, as part of the ghastly evidence, the fact that the German authorities themselves passed judgment on this inhuman man and condemned him to death.

We find ourselves in difficulties because, in contrast to our own procedure, the Prosecution for the most part simply presents incriminating evidence but omits to present the exculpating evidence which may form part of any document or part of the testimony of a witness. If the German procedure had been followed in the present case and if the Prosecution had stated that this man was condemned to death, then in the first place, the evidence against the Defendant Kaltenbrunner would not have appeared so weighty and secondly, public opinion would, on the whole, have been left with a different impression. My colleague Kauffmann could then have limited himself to proving at a later stage of the Trial that Kaltenbrunner had, in fact, nothing at all to do with this affair; and the inhuman character of the proceedings and the dreadful impression which it made on us would have been avoided.

THE PRESIDENT: Will you explain the part of the German law to which you were referring, where you say it is the duty of the Prosecution not only to produce evidence for the Prosecution but also to produce evidence for the Defense.

DR. BERGOLD: That is a general principle of German jurisprudence, established in Paragraph 160 of the Reich Code of Penal Procedure. It is one of the basic principles of law in Germany to . . .

THE PRESIDENT: Give me that reference again.

DR. BERGOLD: Paragraph 160. German law incorporates this principle in order to enable an accused person to . . .

THE PRESIDENT: 160 of what?

DR. BERGOLD: Of the Reich Code of Penal Procedure. The same is true of Austria. In the Austrian Code of Penal Procedure there is a similar paragraph with which, however, I am not quite familiar. This principle is established to permit the whole truth of a case to be brought to light, since a defendant in custody is frequently not in a position to produce all the evidence in his favor. Therefore, under German law it is the Prosecution’s duty to present the exculpating as well as the incriminating evidence in a particular case.

DR. KUBUSCHOK: The question arising out of Pfaffenberger’s evidence does not specifically concern the Defendant Von Papen, because that part of the Indictment does not apply to his case. I am therefore speaking only of the principle behind it. I believe that in practice the effect of the different opinions expressed by the Prosecution and the Defense cannot be of very great importance. Justice Jackson agrees with us that every witness whose affidavit is presented can, if available, be called to the stand by the Defense. Thus, in all cases in which the Defense holds that an affidavit is evidence of secondary value and as such insufficient and that direct examination of the witness is necessary—in all such cases there would be duplication of evidence, namely, the reading of the affidavit and then the examination and cross-examination of the witness. This would undoubtedly delay the proceedings of the Trial; and to prevent that the Tribunal would, in all such cases, rule against the reading, of the affidavit. Consequently, it is futile for the Prosecution to present affidavits of witnesses who can be expected to appear in person later in the proceedings.

I do not think that the Prosecution should be worried about this. It is a matter of course that we—and we assume the same is true of the Prosecution—that we, the members of the Defense, want the Trial to be as speedy as possible but also want it to proceed cautiously to establish the full truth. But, it is obvious, if evidence is introduced which is a potential cause of completely unjust findings, that such evidence will have to be clarified in a more complicated and time-consuming way when the witness is called in person.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the objection that has been raised when the Court adjourns.

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: May I have one word?

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, it is unusual to hear counsel who opposes an objection a second time.

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I merely want to give you the answer to the question which you asked me as to the whereabouts of Pfaffenberger. My information is that these affidavits were taken by the American Army at the time it liberated the people in these concentration camps, at the same time the films were taken and the whole evidence that was available gathered. This witness was present at the concentration camp, and at that time his statements were taken. We do not know his present whereabouts, and I see no reasonable likelihood that we will be able to locate him within any short time. We will make an effort.

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.

MR. ROBERTS: May it please the Tribunal, might I endeavor to assist? I think I have now obtained the German order to which the Defense Counsel referred, Paragraph 160. It is, My Lord, of course, in German. Perhaps I might hand it up, and the court translators will no doubt deal with the paragraph.

MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think one bit of additional information should be furnished in view of the statements made here that we have information that we are withholding. Kaltenbrunner has been interrogated. At no time has he made such a claim, so I am advised by our interrogators; and under the Charter our duty is to present the case for the Prosecution. I do not, in any instance, serve two masters.

THE PRESIDENT: Now, I call upon Major Walsh. Major Walsh, did you give a lettering to the document book with which you are dealing?

MAJOR WALSH: Yes. If Your Honor please, it is the letter “T.” May it please the Tribunal, during the last session the Prosecution presented briefly the preliminary steps leading to the ultimate objective of the Nazi Party and the Nazi-controlled State, that is, the extermination of the Jews. Propaganda, decrees, the infamous Nuremberg Laws, boycotts, registration, and “ghettoization” were the initial measures in the program. I shall, with the Court’s permission, continue with a discussion of the methods utilized for the annihilation of the Jewish people.

I would like first to discuss starvation. Policies were designed and adopted to deprive the Jews of the most elemental necessities of life. Again the Defendant Hans Frank, then Governor General of Poland, wrote in his diary that hunger rations were introduced in the Warsaw ghetto; and referring to the new food regulations in August 1942, he callously, and perhaps casually, noted that by these food regulations he virtually condemned more than 1 million Jews to death. I offer in evidence that part of Document 2233(e)-PS, diary of Hans Frank, “Conference Volume,” 24 August 1942, Exhibit USA-283. And I quote:

“That we sentence 1,200,000 Jews to die of hunger should be
noted only marginally. It is a matter of course that should the
Jews not starve to death it would, we hope, result in a speeding
up of the anti-Jewish measures.”

Frank’s diary was not the only guide to the deliberate policy of starvation of the Jews. They were prohibited from pursuing agricultural activities in order to cut them off from access to the source of food. I offer Document 1138-PS in evidence, Exhibit USA-284. I refer the Court to Page 4 of the translation, marked with the Roman numeral V, Paragraphs a and b. The document is entitled “Provisional Directive on the Treatment of Jews . . .” and it was issued by the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland. I read:

“Jews must be cleaned out from the countryside. The Jews are to
be removed from all trades, especially from trade with
agricultural products and other foodstuffs.”

Jews were excluded from the purchase of basic food, such as wheat products, meat, eggs, and milk.

I offer in evidence Document 1347-PS, Exhibit USA-285, and I quote from Paragraph 2 on the first page of the translation before the Court. This is an original decree, dated 18 September 1942, from the Ministry of Agriculture. I quote:

“Jews will no longer receive the following foods, beginning with
the 42d distribution period (19 October 1942): meat, meat
products, eggs, wheat products, (cake, white bread, wheat rolls,
wheat flour, _et cetera_), whole milk, fresh skimmed milk, as
well as such food distributed not on food ration cards issued
uniformly throughout the Reich but on local supply certificates
or by special announcement of the nutrition office on extra
coupons of the food cards. Jewish children and young people over
10 years of age will receive the bread ration of the normal
consumer.”

The sick, the old, and the pregnant mothers were excluded from the special food concessions allotted to non-Jews. Seizure by the State Police of food shipments to Jews from abroad was authorized, and the Jewish ration cards were distinctly marked with “Jew,” in color, across the face of the cards, so that the storekeepers could readily identify and discriminate against Jewish purchasers.

The Czechoslovakian Government published in 1943 an official document entitled “Czechoslovakia Fights Back.” I offer this book in evidence, Document 1689-PS, Exhibit USA-286. To summarize the contents of Page 110, it states that the Jewish food purchases were confined to certain areas and to certain days and hours. As might be expected, the period permitted for the purchases was during the time when food stocks were likely to be exhausted.

By Special Order Number 44 for the Eastern Occupied Territories, dated 4 November 1941, the Jews were limited to rations as low as only one-half of the lowest basic category of other people; and the Ministry of Agriculture was empowered to exclude Jews entirely or partially from obtaining food, thus exposing the Jewish community to death by starvation.

I now offer in evidence Document L-165.

THE PRESIDENT: Did you read anything from 1689-PS?

MAJOR WALSH: Just to summarize, Sir, the contents of Page 110.

THE PRESIDENT: I see. Now you are offering L. . .

MAJOR WALSH: L-165, Your Honor, Exhibit USA-287. I refer the Court to the last half of the first paragraph of the translation. This is a press bulletin issued by the Polish Ministry of Information, dated 15 November 1942. The Polish Ministry concludes that, upon the basis of the nature of the separate rationing and the amount of food available to Jews in the Warsaw and Kraków ghettos, the system was designed to bring about starvation; and from the quotation I read:

“In regard to food supplies they are brought under a completely
separate system, which is obviously aimed at depriving them of
the most elemental necessities of life.”

I would now like to discuss annihilation within the ghettos. Justice Jackson in his opening address to the Tribunal made reference to Document 1061-PS, “The Warsaw Ghetto Is No More,” marked Exhibit USA-275.

This finest example of ornate German craftsmanship, leather bound, profusely illustrated, typed on heavy bond paper, is the almost unbelievable recital of a proud accomplishment by Major General of the Police Stroop, who signed the report with a bold hand. General Stroop in this report first pays tribute to the bravery and heroism of the German forces who participated in the ruthless and merciless action against a helpless, defenseless group of Jews, numbering, to be exact, 56,065, including, of course, the infants and the women. In this document he proceeds to relate the day-by-day account of the ultimate accomplishment of his mission—to destroy and to obliterate the Warsaw ghetto.

According to this report, the ghetto, which was established in Warsaw in November 1940, was inhabited by about 400,000 Jews; and prior to the action for the destruction of this ghetto, some 316,000 had already been deported. The Court will note that this report is approximately 75 pages in length, and the Prosecution believes that the contents are of such striking evidentiary value that no part should be omitted from the permanent records of the Tribunal and that the Tribunal should consider the entire report in judging the guilt of these defendants.

The defendants were furnished with several photostatic copies of the entire document at least 20 days ago and have had ample time, I am sure, to scrutinize it in detail. If the Court, in the exercise of its judgment, determines that the entire report may be accepted _in toto_, the Prosecution believes that the reading of a portion of the summary, together with brief excerpts from the daily teletype reports, will suffice for the oral record. I would like the Court to examine it; and I present it to the Court, together with the duplicate original thereof, and ask that the Court rule that the entire document may be accepted.

THE PRESIDENT: Major Walsh, the Court will take that course, provided that the Prosecution supplies as soon as possible, both to the Soviet and to the French members of the Tribunal, copies in Russian and French of the whole document.

MAJOR WALSH: Yes, Sir; may I consult with . . .

THE PRESIDENT: I do not say present immediately, but present as soon as possible.

MAJOR WALSH: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: You are going to read the passages that you think necessary?

MAJOR WALSH: Yes. From Page 6 of the translation before the Court of Document 1061-PS I would like to read the boastful but nonetheless vivid account of some of this ruthless action within the Warsaw ghetto. I quote, second paragraph, Page 6:

“The resistance put up by the Jews and bandits could be broken
only by the relentless and energetic use of our shock-troops by
day and night. On 23 April 1943 the Reichsführer SS issued
through the Higher SS and Police Leader East at Kraków his order
to complete the combing out of the Warsaw ghetto with the
greatest severity and relentless tenacity. I therefore decided
to destroy the entire Jewish residential area by setting every
block on fire, including the blocks of residential buildings
near the armament works. One building after the other was
systematically evacuated and subsequently destroyed by fire. The
Jews then emerged from their hiding places and dugouts in almost
every case. Not infrequently the Jews stayed in the burning
buildings until, because of the heat and the fear of being
burned alive, they preferred to jump down from the upper stories
after having thrown mattresses and other upholstered articles
into the street from the burning buildings. With their bones
broken they still tried to crawl across the street into blocks
of buildings which had not yet been set on fire or were only
partially in flames. Often the Jews changed their hiding places
during the night by moving into the ruins of burnt-out
buildings, taking refuge there until they were found by our
patrols. Their stay in the sewers also ceased to be pleasant
after the first week. Frequently from the street we could hear
loud voices coming through the sewer shafts. Then the men of the
Waffen-SS, the Police, or the Wehrmacht Engineers courageously
climbed down the shafts to bring out the Jews and not
infrequently they then stumbled over Jews already dead or were
shot at. It was always necessary to use smoke candles to drive
out the Jews. Thus one day we opened 183 sewer entrance holes
and at a fixed time lowered smoke candles into them, with the
result that the bandits fled from what they believed to be gas
into the center of the former ghetto, where they could then be
pulled out of the sewer holes there. A great number of Jews who
could not be counted were exterminated by blowing up sewers and
dugouts.

“The longer the resistance lasted, the tougher the men of the
Waffen-SS, Police, and Wehrmacht became. They fulfilled their
duty indefatigably in faithful comradeship and stood together as
models and examples of soldiers. Their duty hours often lasted
from early morning until late at night. At night search patrols,
with rags wound around their feet, remained at the heels of the
Jews and gave them no respite. Not infrequently they caught and
killed Jews who used the night hours for supplementing their
stores from abandoned dugouts and for contacting neighboring
groups or exchanging news with them.

“Considering that the greater part of the men of the Waffen-SS
had only been trained for 3 to 4 weeks before being assigned to
this action, high credit should be given to the pluck, courage,
and devotion to duty which they showed. It must be stated that
the Wehrmacht Engineers, too, executed the blowing up of
dugouts, sewers, and concrete buildings with indefatigability
and great devotion to duty. Officers and men of the Police, a
large part of whom had already been at the front, again excelled
by their dashing spirit.

“Only through the continuous and untiring work of all involved
did we succeed in catching a total of 56,065 Jews whose
extermination can be proved. To this should be added the number
of Jews who lost their lives in explosions or fires but whose
number could not be ascertained.”

THE PRESIDENT: Major Walsh, in the section that you are just upon now, ought you not to read the opening paragraphs of this document, which set out the amount of the losses of the German troops?

MAJOR WALSH: I will do so, Sir. On Page 1 of the translation, I quote. The title: “The Warsaw Ghetto is no more.”

“For the Führer and their country the following fell in the
battle for the destruction of Jews and bandits in the former
Jewish residential area of Warsaw.”—Fifteen names are
thereafter listed.

“Furthermore, the Polish Police Sergeant Julian Zielenski, born
13 November 1891, 8th Commissariat, fell on 19 April 1943 while
fulfilling his duty. They gave their utmost, their life. We
shall never forget them.

“The following were wounded. . . .”

Then follow the names of 60 Waffen-SS personnel, 11 watchmen from training camps (probably Lithuanians), 12 Security Police officers in SS units, 5 men of the Polish Police, and 2 soldiers of the Wehrmacht Engineers.

Permit me to read some brief excerpts of the daily teletype reports. Page 13 of the translation, from the teletype message of 22 April 1943, I read:

“Our setting the block on fire achieved the result in the course
of the night that those Jews whom we had not been able to find
despite all our search operations left their hideouts under the
roofs, in the cellars, and elsewhere and appeared on the outside
of the building, trying to escape the flames anyhow. Masses of
them—entire families—were already aflame and jumped from the
windows or endeavored to let themselves down by means of sheets
tied together or the like. Steps had been taken so that these
Jews as well as the remaining ones were liquidated at once.”

And from Page 28 of the translation, the last part of the first paragraph, I read:

“When the blocks of buildings mentioned above were destroyed,
120 Jews were caught and numerous Jews were destroyed when they
jumped from the attics to the inner courtyards, trying to escape
the flames. Many more Jews perished in the flames or were
destroyed when the dugouts and sewer entrances were blown up.”

And on Page 30, second half of the second paragraph, I read:

“Not until the blocks of buildings were well aflame and were
about to collapse did a considerable number of Jews emerge,
forced to do so by the flames and the smoke. Time and again the
Jews tried to escape even through burning buildings. Innumerable
Jews whom we saw on the roofs during the conflagration perished
in the flames. Others emerged from the upper stories in the last
possible moment and were only able to escape death from the
flames by jumping down. Today we caught a total of 2,283 Jews of
whom 204 were shot; and innumerable Jews were destroyed in
dugouts and in the flames.”

And from Page 34, the second paragraph, I read, beginning the second line:

“The Jews testify that they emerge at night to get fresh air,
since it is unbearable to stay permanently within the dugouts
owing to the long duration of the operation. On the average the
raiding parties shoot 30 to 50 Jews each night. From these
statements it was to be inferred that a considerable number of
Jews are still underground in the ghetto. Today we blew up a
concrete building which we had not been able to destroy by fire.
In this operation we learned that the blowing up of a building
is a very lengthy process and takes an enormous amount of
explosives. The best and only method for destroying the Jews
therefore still remains the setting of fires.”

And from Page 35, the last part of the second paragraph, I read:

“Some depositions speak of three to four thousand Jews still
remaining in underground holes, sewers, and dugouts. The
undersigned is resolved not to terminate the large-scale
operation until the last Jew has been destroyed.”

And from the teletype message of 15 May 1943 on Page 44, we gather that the operation is in its last stage. I read the end of the first paragraph on Page 44:

“A special unit once more searched the last block of buildings,
which was still intact, in the ghetto and subsequently destroyed
it. In the evening the chapel, mortuary, and all other buildings
in the Jewish cemetery were blown up or destroyed by fire.”

On 24 May 1943 the final figures have been compiled by Major General Stroop. He reports on Page 45, last paragraph:

“Of the total of 56,065 caught, about 7,000 were destroyed in
the former Jewish residential area during large-scale
operations; 6,929 Jews were destroyed by transporting them to T.
II”—which we believe to be Treblinka, Camp Number 2, which will
later be referred to—“the sum total of Jews destroyed is
therefore 13,929. Beyond the number of 56,065 an estimated
number of 5,000 to 6,000 Jews were destroyed by being blown up
or by perishing in the flames.”

The Court has noted within the report 1061-PS a number of photographs; and with the Court’s permission I should like to show a few of these photographs, still pictures, on the screen, unless the Court believes that reference to the original text will be sufficient for the Court’s purpose.

THE PRESIDENT: No; if you want to put them on the screen, you may do so. Perhaps it would be convenient to adjourn now and you can put them on the screen afterwards.

[_A recess was taken._]

[_Still pictures were projected on the screen in the courtroom._]

MAJOR WALSH: This first picture [_pointing to a picture on the screen_] is shown on Page 27 of the photographs in Document 1061-PS. It is entitled “The Destruction of a Block of Buildings.” The Court will recall those portions of the teletype messages that referred to the setting of fires for the purpose of driving out the Jews. This picture, taken from the record, portrays such a scene.

This picture [_pointing to a picture on the screen_] is from Page 21 of the photographs contained in the exhibit, and the caption is “Smoking out of the Jews and Bandits.” Excerpts from the teletype messages read in the record relate to the use of smoke as a means of forcing Jews out of the hiding places.

This picture [_pointing to a picture on the screen_] is from Page 36 of the photographs in the exhibit and it is called “Fighting a Nest of Resistance.” It is obviously a picture of an explosive blast being used to destroy one of the buildings, and the Court may recall the message of 7 May 1943 that related to the blowing up of buildings as a lengthy process requiring an enormous amount of explosive. The same message reported that the best method for destroying the Jews was the setting of fires.

This picture [_pointing to a picture on the screen_] is taken from Page 36 of the photographs. The Court’s attention is invited to the figure of a man in mid-air who appears in the picture about halfway between the center and the upper right-hand corner. He has jumped from one of the upper floors of the burning building. A close examination of this picture by the Court in the original photograph will disclose other figures, in the upper floor windows, who apparently are about to follow him. The teletype message of 22 April reported that entire families jumped from burning buildings and were liquidated at once.

This picture [_pointing to a picture on the screen_] is from Page 39 of the photographs. It is entitled “The Leader of the Large-scale Action.” The Nazi-appointed commander of this action was SS Major General Stroop, who probably is the central figure in this picture. I cannot refrain from commenting at this point on the smiling faces of the group shown there, in the midst of the violence and destruction.

THE PRESIDENT: Are you passing from that document now?

MAJOR WALSH: Yes, Sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Will you tell the Tribunal where the document was found?

MAJOR WALSH: It is a captured document, Sir. I do not have the history, but I shall be very pleased to submit the background and history to the Court at the beginning of the afternoon session.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal, I think, would like to know where it was found and to whom it was submitted.

MAJOR WALSH: I have that. I believe that is contained in the document. The teletype messages, Sir, that are contained in this exhibit were all addressed to the Higher SS and Police Führer, SS Obergruppenführer and General of the Police Krüger or his deputy.

It was not always necessary, or perhaps desirable, first to place the Jews within the ghettos to effect the elimination. In the Baltic States a more direct course of action was followed. I refer to Document L-180, now in evidence, which is Exhibit USA-276. This is a report by SS Brigade Führer Stahlecker to Himmler, dated 15 October 1941, entitled “Action Group A,” found in Himmler’s private files. He reported that 135,567 persons, nearly all Jews, were murdered in accordance with basic orders directing the complete annihilation of the Jews. This voluminous document provides me with the following statement by the same SS Brigade Führer, and from the translation at the bottom of Page 6, the second sentence of the last paragraph, I read:

“To our surprise it was not easy, at first, to set in motion an
extensive pogrom against the Jews. Klimatis, the leader of the
partisan unit mentioned above, who was used for this purpose
primarily, succeeded in starting a pogrom on the basis of advice
given to him by a small advanced detachment acting in Kovno and
in such a way that no German order or German instigation was
noticed from the outside. During the first pogrom in the night
from 25 to 26 June the Lithuanian partisans did away with more
than 1,500 Jews, setting fire to several synagogues or
destroying them by other means and burning down a Jewish
dwelling district consisting of about 60 houses. During the
following nights 2,300 Jews were eliminated in a similar way.”

From the last part of Paragraph 3, Page 7, I read:

“It was possible, though, through similar influences on the
Latvian auxiliary to set in motion a pogrom against the Jews
also in Riga. During this pogrom all synagogues were destroyed
and about 400 Jews were killed.”

Nazi ingenuity reached a new high mark with the construction and operation of the gas van as a means of mass annihilation of the Jews. A description of these vehicles of horror and death and the operation of them is fully set forth in a captured top-secret document, dated 16 May 1942, addressed to SS Obersturmbannführer Rauff, 8 Prinz-Albrecht-Strasse, Berlin, from Dr. Becker, SS Untersturmführer. I offer this document, 501-PS, Exhibit USA-288. I quote:

“The overhauling of vans by groups D and C is finished. While
the vans in the first series can also be put into action if the
weather is not too bad, the vans of the second series (Saurer)
stop completely in rainy weather. If it has rained for instance
for only one-half hour, the van cannot be used because it simply
skids away. It can only be used in absolutely dry weather. It is
a question now of whether the van can be used only when it
stands at the place of execution. First the van has to be
brought to that place, which is possible only in good weather.
The place of execution is usually 10 to 15 kilometers away from
the highway and is difficult of access because of its location;
in damp or wet weather it is not accessible at all. If the
persons to be executed are driven or led to that place, then
they realize immediately what is going on and get restless,
which is to be avoided as far as possible. There is only one way
left: to load them at the collecting point and to drive them to
the spot.

“I ordered the vans of group D to be camouflaged as
house-trailers by putting one set of window shutters on each
side of the small van and two on each side of the larger vans,
such as one often sees on farm houses in the country. The vans
became so well-known that not only the authorities but also the
civilian population called the van ‘death van’ as soon as one of
the vehicles appeared. It is my opinion the van cannot be kept
secret for any length of time, not even camouflaged.”

And then I read the fourth paragraph on this page:

“Because of the rough terrain and the indescribable road and
highway conditions the caulkings and rivets loosen in the course
of time. I was asked if in such cases the vans should not be
brought to Berlin for repairs. Transportation to Berlin would be
much too expensive and would demand too much fuel. In order to
save these expenses I ordered them to have smaller leaks
soldered and, if that should no longer be possible, to notify
Berlin immediately by radio, that License Number . . . is out of
order. Besides that I ordered that during application of gas all
the men were to be kept as far away from the vans as possible,
so that they should not suffer damage to their health by the gas
which eventually would escape. I should like to take this
opportunity to bring the following to your attention: Several
commands have had the unloading, after the application of gas,
done by their own men. I brought to the attention of the
commanders of these special detachments concerned the immense
psychological injury and damage to their health which that work
can have for those men, even if not immediately, at least later
on. The men complained to me about headaches which appeared
after each unloading. Nevertheless they don’t want to change the
orders, because they are afraid prisoners called for that work
could use an opportune moment to flee. To protect the men from
such damage, I request orders be issued accordingly. The
application of gas usually is not undertaken correctly. In order
to come to an end as fast as possible, the driver presses the
accelerator to the fullest extent. By doing that the persons to
be executed suffer death from suffocation and not death by
dozing off as was planned. My directions now have proved that by
correct adjustment of the levers death comes faster and the
prisoners fall asleep peacefully. Distorted faces and
excretions, such as could be seen before, are no longer noticed.

“Today I shall continue my journey to group B, where I can be
reached with further news. Signed, Doctor Becker, SS
Untersturmführer.”

On Page 3 in Document 501-PS we find a letter signed by Hauptsturmführer Trühess on the subject of S-Vans, addressed to the Reich Security Main Office, Room II-D-3-A, Berlin, marked “top secret.” This letter establishes that the vans were used for the annihilation of the Jews. I read this top-secret message; subject, “S-Vans”:

“A transport of Jews, which has to be treated in a special way,
arrives weekly at the office of the commandant of the Security
Police and the Security Service of White Ruthenia.

“The three S-vans which are there are not sufficient for that
purpose. I request assignment of another S-van (5 tons). At the
same time I request the shipment of 20 gas hoses for the three
S-vans on hand (two Diamond, one Saurer), since the ones on hand
are leaky already.”—Signed—“the Commandant of the Security
Police and the Security Service, Ostland.”

It would appear from the documentary evidence that a certain amount of discord existed between the officials of the German Government as to the proper means and methods used in connection with the program of extermination. A secret report dated 18 June 1943, addressed to Defendant Rosenberg, complained that 5,000 Jews killed by the police and SS might have been used for forced labor and chided them for failing to bury the bodies of those liquidated. I offer in evidence this file, Document Number R-135, Exhibit USA-289.

THE PRESIDENT: Is it in these volumes, Major Walsh?

MAJOR WALSH: I think, Sir, that will be found in the assembly of the document book in our case; that has been placed in front of R-124. I quote from the letter referred to, addressed to the Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories, the first paragraph of the translation:

“The fact that Jews receive special treatment requires no
further discussion. However, it appears hardly believable that
this was done in the way described in the report of the General
Commissioner of 1 June 1943. What is Katyn against that? Imagine
only that these occurrences might become known to the other side
and be exploited by them! Most likely such propaganda would have
no effect, only because people who hear and read about it simply
would not be ready to believe it.”

The last part of Paragraph 3 on this page reads:

“To lock men, women, and children into barns and to set fire to
them does not appear to be a suitable method for combatting
bands, even if it is desired to exterminate the population. This
method is not worthy of the German cause and hurts our
reputation severely.”

Günther, the prison warden at Minsk, in a letter dated 31 May 1943, addressed to the General Commissioner for White Ruthenia, subject: “Action against Jews,” was critical by implication. With the Court’s permission I would like to read this entire letter, part of Document R-135, Page 5, subject: “Action Against Jews”:

“On 13 April 1943 the former German dentist Ernst Israel
Tichauer and his wife, Elisa Sara Tichauer, née Rosenthal, were
committed to the court prison by the Security Service . . . .
Since that time all German and Russian Jews who were turned over
to us had their gold bridgework, crowns, and fillings pulled or
broken out. This happens always 1 to 2 hours before the
respective action.

“Since 13 April 1943, 516 German and Russian Jews have been
finished off. On the basis of a definite investigation gold was
taken only in two actions—on 14 April 1943, from 172, and on 27
April 1943, from 164 Jews. About 50 percent of the Jews had gold
teeth, bridgework, or fillings. Hauptscharführer Rübe of the
Security Service was always personally present, and he took the
gold along, too.

“Before 13 April 1943 this was not done. Signed, Günther, Prison
Warden.”

This letter was forwarded to the Defendant Rosenberg as Reich Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories on 1 June 1943. I will read the covering letter, part of Document R-135, Page 4, to the Reich Minister of the Occupied Eastern Territories, Berlin, through the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland, Riga; Subject, “Actions against Jews in the Prison of Minsk”:

“The enclosed official report from the warden of the prison in
Minsk is submitted to the Reich Minister and the Reich
Commissioner for Information.”—Signed—“the General
Commissioner in Minsk.”

THE PRESIDENT: Does “respective action,” as indicated in the letter dated the 31st of May 1943, mean execution?

MAJOR WALSH: Yes, Sir; we so interpret it. The Court will recall that the ridding of the Jews via gas vans ties in very closely with the second letter of the transport of Jews arriving for that purpose.

THE PRESIDENT: Was this document found in Rosenberg’s file?

MAJOR WALSH: I am so informed, Sir. A further complaint is contained in a secret letter addressed to General of the Infantry Thomas, chief of the industrial armament department, dated 2 December 1941. It might be noted with interest that the apprehensive writer of this letter stated that he did not forward the communication through official channels. I offer in evidence captured Document 3257-PS; and I quote from the first paragraph. This is Exhibit USA-290:

“For the personal information of the chief of the industrial
armament department, I am forwarding a total account of the
present situation in the Reichskommissariat Ukraine in which the
difficulties and tensions encountered so far and the problems
which give rise to serious anxiety are stated with unmistakable
clarity.

“Intentionally I have desisted from submitting such a report
through official channels or from making it known to other
departments interested in it because I do not expect any results
that way, but on the contrary am apprehensive that the
difficulties and tensions and also the divergent opinions might
only be increased due to the peculiarity of the situation.”

“Jewish problem”—Paragraph c, Page 1:

“Regulation of the Jewish question in the Ukraine was a
difficult problem because the Jews constituted a large part of
the urban population. We therefore have to deal—just as in the
Government General—with a mass problem of policy concerning the
population. Many cities had a percentage of Jews exceeding 50
percent. Only the rich Jews had fled from the German troops. The
majority of Jews remained under German administration. The
latter found the problem more complicated through the fact that
these Jews represented almost entire trade and even a part of
the manpower in small and medium industries, besides business,
which had in part become superfluous as a direct or indirect
result of the war. The elimination therefore necessarily had
far-reaching economic consequences and even direct consequences
for the armament industry (production for supplying the
troops).”

Paragraph 1 on Page 2:

“The attitude of the Jewish population was anxious—obliging
from the beginning. They tried to avoid everything that might
displease the German administration. That they hated the German
administration and army inwardly goes without saying and cannot
be surprising. However, there is no proof that Jewry as a whole
or even to a greater part was implicated in acts of sabotage
. . . . Surely there were some terrorists or saboteurs among
them, just as among the Ukrainians. But it cannot be said that
the Jews as such represented a danger to the German Armed
Forces. The output produced by Jews who, of course, were
prompted by nothing but the feeling of fear, was satisfactory to
the troops and the German administration.

“The Jewish population remained temporarily unmolested shortly
after the fighting. Only weeks, sometimes months later,
specially detached formations of police executed a planned
shooting of Jews. This action as a rule proceeded from east to
west. It was done entirely in public with the use of the
Ukrainian militia; and unfortunately, in many instances also
with members of the Armed Forces taking part voluntarily. The
way these actions, which included men and old men, women, and
children of all ages, were carried out was horrible. The great
masses executed make this action more gigantic than any similar
measure taken so far in the Soviet Union. So far about 150,000
to 200,000 Jews may have been executed in the part of the
Ukraine belonging to the Reichskommissariat; no consideration
was given to the interests of economy.

“Summarizing, it can be said that the kind of solution of the
Jewish problem applied to the Ukraine, which obviously was based
on the ideological theories as a matter of principle, had the
following results:

“(a) Elimination of a part of partly superfluous eaters in the
cities;

“(b) Elimination of a part of the population which undoubtedly
hated us;

“(c) Elimination of badly needed tradesmen who were in many
instances indispensable even in the interests of the Armed
Forces;

“(d) Consequences as to foreign policy propaganda which are
obvious;

“(e) Bad effects on the troops which in any case get indirect
contact with the execution;

“(f) Brutalizing effect on the formations which carry out the
execution—regular police.”

Lest the Court be persuaded to the belief that these conditions related, existed only in the East, I invite attention to the official Netherlands Government report by the Commissioner for Repatriation as indicative of the treatment of the Jews in the West.

This document is a recital of the German measures taken in the Netherlands against the Dutch Jews. The decrees, the anti-Semitic demonstrations, the burning of synagogues, the purging of Jews from the economic life of their country, the food restrictions against them, forced labor, concentration camp confinement, deportation, and death—all follow the same pattern that was effected throughout Nazi-occupied Europe.

I how refer to Document 1726-PS, Exhibit USA-195, already in evidence. It is not intended to read this document in evidence, but it is deemed important to invite the Court’s attention to that portion of the report relating to the deportation of Dutch Jews shown on Page 5 of the translation. There the Court will note that full Jews being liable to deportation number 140,000. The Court will also note that the total number of deportees was 117,000, representing more than 83 percent of all the Jews in the Netherlands. Of these 115,000 were deported to Poland for slave labor, according to the Netherlands report, and after departure all trace of them was lost. Regardless of victory or defeat to Germany, the Jew was doomed. It was the expressed intent of the Nazi State that, whatever the German fate might be, the Jew would not survive.

I offer in evidence Document L-53, stamped “top secret,” Exhibit USA-291. This message is from the Commandant of the Sipo and SD for the Radom District, addressed to SS Hauptsturmführer Thiel on the subject, “Clearance of Prisons.” I read the body of this message:

“I again stress the fact that the number of inmates of the Sipo
and SD prisons must be kept as low as possible. In the present
situation, particularly, those suspects handed over by the civil
police need only be subjected to a short formal interrogation
provided there are no serious grounds for suspicion. They are
then to be sent by the quickest route to a concentration camp
should no court-martial proceeding be necessary or should there
be no question of discharge. Please keep the number of
discharges very low. Should the situation at the front
necessitate it, early preparations are to be made for the total
clearance of prisons. Should the situation develop suddenly in
such a way that it is impossible to evacuate the prisoners, the
prison inmates are to be eliminated and their bodies disposed of
as far as possible (burning, blowing up the building, _et
cetera_). If necessary, Jews still employed in the armament
industry or on other work are to be dealt with in the same way.

“The liberation of prisoners or Jews by the enemy—be it the WB
or the Red Army—must be avoided under all circumstances, nor
may they fall into their hands alive.”

THE PRESIDENT: What is the WB?

MAJOR WALSH: I have inquired about the WB, Your Honor, from several sources and have not found an understanding or a statement of it. Perhaps before the afternoon session I may be able to enlighten the Court. I have not yet been able to find out.

THE PRESIDENT: Where was the document found?

MAJOR WALSH: It is a captured document, Sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Does it relate to prisoners of war, did you say?

MAJOR WALSH: No, Sir; including therein, of course, prisoners of war as well as all Jews. The history of the document, Sir, I will try to gather for the Court’s information.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Did you tell us what the Sipo were?

MAJOR WALSH: Yes, Sir; I furnished the Court with that; that is the Security Police, Sir.

This presentation, if the Court please, would be incomplete without incorporating herein reference to the concentration camps insofar as they relate to the hundreds of thousands—millions—of Jews who died by mass shooting, gas, poison, starvation, and other means. The subject of concentration camps and all its horrors was shown to this Tribunal not only in the motion picture film but by the most able presentation of Mr. Dodd yesterday; and it is not intended, at this time, to refer to the camps—only insofar as they relate to the part they played in the annihilation of the Jewish people. For example, in the camp at Auschwitz during July 1944 Jews were killed at the rate of 12,000 daily. This information is contained in Document L-161, Exhibit USA-292. The Document L-161 is an official Polish report on Auschwitz Concentration Camp. It is dated 31 May 1945. I have taken a short excerpt from this report on the original marked . . .

THE PRESIDENT: I think you made a mistake, did you not? It is not a Polish report; it is a British report.

MAJOR WALSH: I understand, Sir, it was compiled originally by the Polish Government and perhaps distributed from London.

THE PRESIDENT: I see. Very well.

MAJOR WALSH: I quote:

“During July 1944 Hungarian Jews were being liquidated at the
rate of 12,000 daily; and as the crematoria could not deal with
such numbers, many bodies were thrown into large pits and
covered with quicklime.”

I offer in evidence Document 3311-PS, Exhibit USA-293. This is an official Polish Government Commission report on the investigation of German crimes in Poland. The document describes the concentration camp at Treblinka; and from Page 1, Paragraph 3 and 4, I read as follows:

“In March 1942 the Germans began to erect another camp,
Treblinka B, in the neighborhood of Treblinka A, intended to
become a place of torment for Jews.

“The erection of this camp was closely connected with the German
plans aimed at a complete destruction of the Jewish population
in Poland, which necessitated the creation of a machinery by
means of which the Polish Jews could be killed in large numbers.
Late in April 1942 erection was completed of the first chambers
in which these general massacres were to be performed by means
of steam. Somewhat later the erection of the real death
building, which contains 10 death chambers, was finished. It was
opened for wholesale murders early in autumn 1942.”

And on Page 3 of this report, beginning with the second paragraph, the Polish Commission describes graphically the procedure for the extermination within the camp: