3 Sivan 5721 (18 May 1961)

Presiding Judge: I declare the forty-fourth Session of the trial open.

State Attorney Bar-Or: With the permission of the Court. When I submitted Exhibit T/649, Mr. Moritz Henschel's notes, it turned out that one of the pages of the copy was somewhat difficult to read, and I promised to provide the Court with cleaner copies. I have photographed the document again and now hand three photostatic copies to the Court.

Presiding Judge: Thank you.

State Attorney Bar-Or: And now I shall complete the documentation on the German chapter. I understand that in the meantime Counsel for the Defence has looked at our document No. 455, the affidavit given in Nuremberg by Rudolf Hermann Emil Brandt. I request a decision from the Court to accept this affidavit in accordance with Section 15. The affidavit was given under oath in Nuremberg on 10 December 1946. Brandt was sentenced at the Doctor's Trial, in Case No. 1 of the Subsequent Trials; he was sentenced to death and hanged. He had belonged to the headquarters of the Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler.

In this deposition, he gives details about sterilization experiments carried out in concentration camps. He refers to three earlier depositions given by him on 30 August 1946, which are of no interest to us. In this affidavit, he describes the experiments connected with the name of Adolf Pokorny, experiments which were made with a North-American plant known in German under the name of "Schweigrohr." For some time they believed that it would be possible to grow this plant, apparently a tropical one, in Germany, too, and it seems that they wanted to use it for sterilization on a large scale. Here he describes the experiments and the negotiations connected with this matter. It seems to me that this evidence is highly relevant.

Presiding Judge: Is the Accused mentioned in it?

State Attorney Bar-Or: The Accused is not mentioned here, but there are other things in connection with sterilization where the Accused is mentioned, some of which have already been submitted to the Court. The Court will well remember at least one Session at which methods of sterilization were mentioned. These experiments were, of course, brought to the attention of the Accused, and it is out of the question that sterilizations are discussed as a method in the field of activity of the Accused without also taking into account what went on in Germany in this field from the scientific point of view.

Presiding Judge: Is this not described in the judgment of the Doctors' Trial?

State Attorney Bar-Or: In the Doctors' Trial there is, of course, a full description of all these subjects. The sterilization experiments were, after all, one of the main subjects at the Doctors' Trial. But, of course, you do not have that trial before you, and I have to select from it what I think is relevant for our proceedings.

Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, what is your position?

Dr. Servatius: My position is that this matter is dealt with in the judgment of the doctors, and I am of the opinion that the document is not relevant. But if it will be submitted - I have no objection to it.

Presiding Judge:

Decision No. 34

We allow the submission of the affidavit by Brandt in accordance with our authority under Section 15 of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 1950.

This document will be marked T/816.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I direct the attention of the Court to two passages in the affidavit which particularly concern the matter before us. They are paragraphs 6 and 7. In paragraph 6, Glauberg is mentioned. This is Dr. Glauberg who committed suicide in the end, after the War. And it says here that in Auschwitz concentration camp he performed large-scale experiments on Jewish women and Gypsy women for the purpose of sterilization, and that he used mainly the method of injecting certain solutions which he was trying out.

In paragraph 7, the name of Dr. Schumann is mentioned, a doctor who has apparently not been found to this day, who carried out experiments of sterilization by means of X-rays on men in Auschwitz. The Court will hear viva voce evidence from witnesses about such experiments later in the trial.

And now, with your permission, we shall continue the Austrian file, on which we started yesterday. I proceed to Prosecution document No. 1152. This is a minute, again by Dr. Loewenherz, dated 29 December 1941, about a meeting with Brunner. The main point in this document seems to me to be a prohibition by Brunner, whereby the term "Evakuierungstransporte" (evacuation transports) is no longer to be used and the term "Abwanderungstransporte" (emigration transports) is substituted for it.

Presiding Judge: Where is this to be found?

State Attorney Bar-Or: On page 2, paragraphs 5 and 7.

Presiding Judge: This document will be marked T/817.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I now go on to document No. 1153, a minute about the meeting* {*This was a telephone conversation} in January 1942. Dr. Eppstein of the Reich Association of the Jews in Germany has informed Loewenherz by telephone that Sturmbannfuehrer Guenther has approved the sending out of a circular letter concerning the wool collection, whereby all fur articles, all footwear and woollen garments, insofar as they are not absolutely needed for personal use, have to be handed over. Offences against the obligation to hand over these articles are punishable, or rather, severest punishment is threatened for it.

Presiding Judge: This document will be marked T/818.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass on to document No. 1154, a minute by Dr. Loewenherz on a meeting with Brunner in Vienna on 1 April 1942. Brunner informs Loewenherz that persons who are Jews, or who are regarded as Jews, in accordance with Paragraph 5, Article 1, of the Reich Citizenship Law must be made to wear the Jewish Star. Here the obligation to affix the Jewish Star to the outside of the entrance door of (Jewish) homes comes into force for Austria, too.** {**According to the document: Persons who are obliged to wear the Jewish Star must now also mark their dwellings with the Jewish Star.}

Presiding Judge: This document will be marked T/819.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass on to Prosecution document No. 1155, a letter from Dr. Loewenherz to the Gestapo in Vienna, dated 4 April 1942. He repeats the instructions received from the Reich Governor in Vienna concerning the obligation to wear the Jewish Star. In the second passage, he expressly mentions the exemptions from these instructions. In the end - and to this I should like to draw your attention - he says that orders have been given "to refrain from publication; notice has to be given to the Jewish population through posting in the Jewish offices and institutions, and through word of mouth."*** {***The document actually refers to a prohibition to use municipal tramlines.} By the way, I made a mistake - this letter is signed by Dr. Murmelstein and not by Loewenherz.

Presiding Judge: This document will be marked T/820.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Document No. 1156 is a minute about a meeting in the office of the Accused, dated 1 June 1942. He says that he appeared before the Accused together with Murmelstein, Eppstein, Menschel, Kozower, Kreindler and Lilienthal, and that Messrs. Weidmann and Friedmann from Prague were also present at Section IVB4. Then he relates what we already heard from Moritz Henschel's notes, about the attack on the exhibition "The Soviet Paradise" in Berlin.

In paragraph 2 he says that, at the interview with Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, he reported about conditions in Vienna, and about the estimated number of Jews over 65 years of age who were designated to be taken to Theresienstadt for permanent residence; and that Eichmann informed Loewenherz on the same occasion that the total evacuation of all Jews from the Old Reich, from Austria, and from the Protectorate was to be expected, and that Jews under 65 would emigrate to the East, while those over that age would be taken for permanent residence to Theresienstadt.

In the middle of page 2 we find that "For the purpose of financing the upkeep of the Jewish population settled in Theresienstadt, funds have to be mobilized from the three organizations (the Reich Association of the Jews in Berlin, and the Jewish Religious Communities of Vienna and of Prague)."

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/821.

State Attorney Bar-Or: From this document, it clearly appears, so it seems to me, that there were two meetings on that day. The first one, which is also mentioned by Henschel, under the chairmanship of Mueller, and there the killing of the 250 hostages was made known; and afterwards the meeting with Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann about internal matters.

Presiding Judge: This is apparent from the title.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I wanted to emphasize it.

I should like to revert to T/154, a report by Loewenherz, which has already been submitted. I do not intend to read additional passages from it, but I wish to point out that the Court will, in fact, find in it what is contained in the records of the Community about the chapter with which we are dealing at the moment. Here the Court will find, in summary form, the course of events up to the closing of the Community's offices in Vienna.

I shall therefore proceed to document No. 1157, a minute by Loewenherz of 22 June 1942. Again a meeting with Brunner. I should like to read paragraphs 6 and 7. Hauptsturmfuehrer Brunner repeats his instructions that demand to hand over dogs, birds, etc. must not be published in the Information Bulletin. And now paragraph 7: "Letters from the Red Cross in Geneva about the place of residence of Jews must not be answered, in view of the fact that the German Red Cross is very busy with forwarding the mail of prisoners of war. Private enquiries from abroad concerning the whereabouts of Jewish emigrants are not to be answered."

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/822.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I go on to document No. 1158, a minute by Loewenherz about a meeting with Brunner on 24 July 1942. In paragraph 2 it says that "with respect to the refunding of the amounts advanced by the Jewish Community for the emigration transports, SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann has decided that repayment will be made only at the end; as hitherto, the Community has to enter separately all expenses connected with the emigration, and to present a bill for every five transports to the Central Office for Jewish Emigration."

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/823.

State Attorney Bar-Or: No. 1159 is a minute by Dr. Loewenherz about a meeting he had with Brunner on 5 November 1942. And here Brunner informs him that, as of 31 October 1942, the Jewish Religious Community is to be regarded as dissolved. It is transformed into an institution to be called "Council of Elders of the Jews in Vienna," and the draft regulations of the Community are to be changed accordingly.

This follows organically after the dissolution of the Community and, of course, after the settling of the Community's accounts in the way we know already from these records.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/824.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Now on to document No. 1160, a minute by Dr. Loewenherz about a meeting with Brunner, dated 2 December 1942. Here we find, in paragraph 5, instructions for the transfer of the assets of the Jewish Religious Community of Vienna to the Emigration Fund for Bohemia and Moravia. We shall come across this special fund again when we deal with matters of the Protectorate; the Fund was, in fact, intended not only for the Protectorate. Here it is clear, at any rate, that the assets were to be transferred to Prague.

I move on to paragraph 14. Here Loewenherz is asked, in fact is instructed by Brunner, to write to the Jewish Religious Community in Budapest, in order to find out how many Jews have immigrated into Hungary since 1 January 1941, and to ask the Community for the names and dates of birth of these immigrants. The reason to be given: These data are needed, in order to bring the tax register and the card index up to date.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/825.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I go on to our document No. 927, a letter from the Accused to von Thadden at the Foreign Ministry, dated 23 August 1943, about the stateless Jew Karl Israel Klinger. I draw the attention of the Court only to the last sentences on page 2, where the Accused says: "Since Karl Israel Klinger has been informed by his uncle Rudolf Israel Klinger about different occurrences in the various offices, there is an imminent danger that he will pass on what he knows to foreign authorities, and that in this way he will seriously endanger state security. For this reason I ask that extradition procedures be initiated against the above-mentioned without delay."

Eichman, in fact, asks the Foreign Ministry to have this Jew extradited to the Reich.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/826.

State Attorney Bar-Or: In our document No. 928, we shall find von Thadden's reply on this matter. It is his letter of 3 September 1943, and he simply informs the Accused that the existing rules of extradition between the Reich and Hungary do not apply to persons who are said to have committed offences of the kind he describes, and he asks Eichmann to give him additional information which would justify the request for extradition to the Hungarians.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/827.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I have thus completed the chapter on Austria, and I go on to the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. The Court has before it the volume of weekly reports of the Jewish Community of Prague, and I should like to draw your attention to some additional ones among them.

Presiding Judge: What have we already received?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I have submitted weekly reports about the period up to Nisko.

Presiding Judge: How were they marked?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I believe that each weekly report was marked separately. Here I have No. T/163 which refers to the weekly report of 16 February 1940. I think they were all numbered T/163. I believe that the Court numbered the volume from which I submitted...

Presiding Judge: We have marked two volumes: T/162 and T/163.

State Attorney Bar-Or: So here I submit additional volumes from the archives of the Community of Prague which cover the period of the War itself, and from these I should like to submit some weekly reports to the extent that they concern our subject. Three volumes altogether.

Presiding Judge: We shall mark them T/828, T/829 and T/830.

State Attorney Bar-Or: First our document No. 1331, taken from these volumes, which is the report for the week ending 16 February 1940. It is page 89 in the original, which begins on page 77. I read from page 89: "In the week under review, an order by the Reich Protector was published about the exclusion of the Jews from the economy of the Protectorate."

Presiding Judge: What is the heading of what you have just read?

[ Previous | Index | Next ]

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