MR. DODD: Does the name Melmer mean anything to you?
THOMS: Melmer was the name of the SS man who subsequently brought these
valuables to the Reichsbank. Under this code word all deliveries of the
SS were later entered in the books of the bank.
MR. DODD: Did you ever mention the name or the word “Melmer” to Puhl,
and did he ever mention it to you?
THOMS: The name “Melmer” was not mentioned by Vice President Puhl to me,
but was mentioned by me to Vice President Puhl as I had to inform him
about the start of the entire transaction and particularly about the
carrying out of the transaction regarding the conversion of the
valuables. In accordance with the suggestion of the office of the
Reichsführer-SS, the money equivalent was transferred to the Reich
Ministry of Finance into an account which was given the name “Max
Heiliger.” I duly informed Vice President Puhl briefly about these
facts.
MR. DODD: Did you ever tell Puhl the nature of the material that you
were receiving in the SS shipments?
THOMS: After some months Vice President Puhl asked me how the “Melmer”
affair was getting along. I explained to him that, contrary to the
expectation that there would really be very few deliveries, deliveries
were increasing and that apart from gold and silver coins they contained
particularly a great deal of jewelry, gold rings, wedding rings, gold
and silver fragments, dental gold, and all sorts of gold and silver
articles.
MR. DODD: What did he say when you told him there were jewels and silver
and dental gold and other articles?
THOMS: May I first of all add a few things. I drew his attention
especially to the fact that on one occasion something like 12 kilograms
of pearls had been collected and that I had never before seen such an
unusual amount in all my life.
MR. DODD; Wait a minute! What was it?
THOMS: They were pearls and pearl necklaces.
MR. DODD: Did you also tell him you were receiving a quantity of
eyeglass rims?
THOMS: I cannot swear to that at the moment, but I described the general
character of these deliveries to him. Therefore, I think, I probably
used “spectacles,” and similar words; but I would not like to state it
on my oath.
MR. DODD: Was Puhl ever in the vaults when this material was being
looked through?
THOMS: On several occasions he visited the strong-rooms of the bank to
inspect the gold stored there and particularly to inform himself about
the type of stores. The deliveries of the “Melmer” transactions were
kept in a special part of one of the main safes, so that on those
occasions Herr Puhl must also have seen the boxes and sacks full of
those deliveries. Nearby in the corridor of the vault the articles of
the “Melmer” deliveries were being dealt with.
I am firmly convinced that when he walked through the strong-rooms, Herr
Puhl must have seen these objects, as they were lying quite openly on
the table and everyone who visited the strong-room could see them.
MR. DODD: There were about 25 or 30 people that sorted this stuff out,
were there not, before it was shipped away for melting and for sale in
the pawnshops?
THOMS: I would say that there were not 25 to 30 people who sorted these
things—in the course of a day perhaps 25 to 30 people would visit the
strong-rooms to carry out some official business there. For this
particular business some four or five officials were occupied in sorting
out the things, getting them ready.
MR. DODD: And everyone under your supervision was sworn to secrecy? They
didn’t talk about this business; they were forbidden to do so, were they
not?
THOMS: There were strict instructions in the bank that secret matters
must not be discussed, not even with a colleague of one’s own
department, if that colleague did not himself also work at the same job.
So that...
MR. DODD: Well, this was a super-secret matter, wasn’t it? It wasn’t the
ordinary secrecy that attended. Wasn’t there a special secrecy
surrounding these deliveries?
THOMS: Quite right. It was quite an exceptional affair and it had to be
kept especially secret. I would say that it went beyond the limits of
top secrecy. For even I had been strictly forbidden to talk to anybody
about it; and I said at the time when I left Vice President Puhl, after
the first conversation, that I would however inform the leading
officials in the Treasury, because after all my superiors must be
informed about this business.
MR. DODD: Was there a report made about these “Melmer” deposits to the
Directorate?
THOMS: No. The matter was treated as a verbal agreement. It was after
all an exceptional case and only one account was kept of the deliveries
made, which was called the “Melmer account.” This account was
transmitted by the head cashier’s office to the foreign exchange
department which, in turn, had to take further steps with the
Directorate of the Reichsbank.
MR. DODD: Well, the Directorate had to approve the handling of this type
of thing, did it not? You weren’t allowed to handle materials like this
without the approval of the bank Directorate?
THOMS: In matters concerning gold particularly instructions had to be
given and approved respectively by the Board of Directors. I could
therefore never act independently. Generally the instructions were given
to the Treasury in writing and they were signed by at least two
officials and one member of the Board of Directors. So that it was quite
unique that in this case instructions were given in a verbal form.
MR. DODD: By the way, Herr Thoms, you have seen the film this noontime?
We have shown you a film, haven’t we?
THOMS: Yes.
MR. DODD: After seeing that film, are you able to say whether or not
that represents a fair representation of the appearance of some of the
shipments that were received by the Reichsbank from the SS?
THOMS: I may say that this film and the pictures which I have seen in it
were typical of the “Melmer” deliveries. Perhaps I should qualify that
by saying that the quantities shown in this film were in excess of the
quantity of dental gold and particularly jewelry which came with the
first deliveries. Only later did these amounts increase, so that the
quantities which we have seen in this film had actually not yet been
seen by the Reichsbank because they were contained in boxes or trunks
which until then had remained locked. But generally the material which I
have seen in that film is typical of the “Melmer” deliveries.
MR. DODD: All right, sir. Now, approximately—I don’t expect a
completely accurate answer, but approximately how many shipments did you
receive of this stuff from the SS?
THOMS: As nearly as I can remember at the moment, there must have been
more than 70 deliveries, possibly 76 or 77. I can’t tell you exactly at
the moment, but that must be about the right figure.
MR. DODD: Very well, I have no further questions.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, what is your occupation?
THOMS: A councillor of the Reichsbank.
DR. SAUTER: Where do you live?
THOMS: Berlin-Steglitz. Then I—after my home was bombed I lived at
Potsdam, Neu-Fahrland.
DR. SAUTER: Did you volunteer for the examination of the Prosecution or
how did you happen to be interrogated...
THOMS: I was...
DR. SAUTER: Please, will you wait until I have finished my question so
that the interpreters can keep up with us? Will you please make a pause
between question and answer.
THOMS: I was ordered here.
DR. SAUTER: By whom?
THOMS: Probably by the Prosecution.
DR. SAUTER: Are you a free man?
THOMS: Yes, I am free.
DR. SAUTER: Did you receive the summons in writing?
THOMS: No. I was asked orally yesterday in Frankfurt to come to
Nuremberg.
DR. SAUTER: Frankfurt? Are you living in Frankfurt at the moment?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Herr Thoms, where were you living on 8 May? That is a week
ago today?
THOMS: On 8 May of this year?
DR. SAUTER: You are Herr Thoms, aren’t you?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, on 8 May, a week ago today.
THOMS: In Frankfurt.
DR. SAUTER: You were interrogated there, weren’t you?
THOMS: That is quite right. I was interrogated at Frankfurt.
DR. SAUTER: That is the affidavit which the Prosecutor has just put to
you?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: How did you come to make the affidavit? Did you volunteer as
a witness, or how did this happen?
THOMS: I want to point out to you that already a year ago when I was
working at Frankfurt, I voluntarily gave the American offices the
details of the transactions which were known to me in the matter of the
gold of the Reichsbank.
DR. SAUTER: I see. So last year you already offered yourself as a
witness?
THOMS: I wouldn’t say as a witness in this matter. I merely placed
myself at their disposal for the clarification of Reichsbank affairs for
American purposes.
DR. SAUTER: Yes. Did you ever discuss this matter with the President of
the Reichsbank, Funk?
THOMS: No. During my term of service, I never had an opportunity of
talking to Minister Funk.
DR. SAUTER: Have you any positive knowledge, perhaps from some other
source, as to whether President of the Reichsbank Funk had exact
knowledge of these things, or is that also unknown to you?
THOMS: I cannot say anything about that either, because these matters
happened on a higher level, which I could not judge.
DR. SAUTER: Then I would be interested in hearing something about this
deposit, or whatever you call it, which was under the name “Melmer”?
THOMS: I want to point out that this was not a deposit, but that these
were deliveries which were delivered under the name “Melmer.” Insofar as
the transactions were those which the Reichsbank had to deal with, the
Reichsbank took over these articles directly, and insofar as it was a
question of matters not pertaining to the bank, the Reichsbank to a
certain extent was the trustee for the conversion of these things.
DR. SAUTER: More slowly, more slowly. Why was this matter, whether we
call it a deposit or anything else, not dealt with under the name “SS,”
why was it given the name “Melmer”? Did you ask anybody about that,
Witness?
THOMS: I have already mentioned at the beginning of the examination that
this was a particularly secret affair in connection with which the name
of the depositor was not to appear. In this case, therefore, it was Vice
President Puhl who had to decide the way this affair was to be dealt
with; and he desired and ordered this.
DR. SAUTER: Did only officials of the Reichsbank come to the strong-room
where these things were kept, or did other persons also have access to
it, for instance, people who had a safe in the strong-room?
THOMS: The Reichsbank did not have any private depositors, that is to
say, we did not have any locked deposits which belonged to customers of
the Reichsbank—at least not in those vaults. Deposits from private
customers were in another vault so that there was no contact between the
deposits of the bank and the deposits of the customers.
DR. SAUTER: But quite a number of officials went down there. You have
already said that.
There is one thing I am not clear about: On the one hand, you have told
us that these articles were lying about openly on tables so that
everybody could see them; and on the other hand, you said previously
towards the end of your statement that these things were kept in locked
boxes and trunks. How does that tally?
THOMS: I have stated that these things were delivered in closed boxes
and trunks, and stored in them. When from time to time the deliveries
were inventoried, the delivery which was to be dealt with naturally had
to be opened and the contents counted, examined, and re-weighed. That,
of course, could only be done by spreading out the contents, counting
them, checking the weight, and then locking them in new containers.
DR. SAUTER: Did you perhaps on your own initiative tell Herr Puhl—after
all, you were a bank councillor, therefore also a senior official—that
you had misgivings about the whole business? Please think over the
question and give your answer very carefully, because you are under
oath.
THOMS: First of all, I have to say that I belonged to the group of
officials of middle rank, but that is just in passing. Then, of
course—or let me put it this way—when an official has worked for
thirty years or longer for a concern and if throughout the long years of
his career he has always had the feeling that the directors were
irreproachable, then, I believe, he could have no misgivings if in a
special case he is instructed to keep silent about a certain
transaction. He would not object to carrying out this order. I have
already said that the term “booty” was not unknown to us officials in
the Reichsbank, because there was the order that all booty goods which
came in from the Army were to be delivered directly to the Treasury,
that is the Treasury of the Reich Government; and we in the Bank
thought, of course, that the booty from the SS troops was to go through
the Reichsbank. An official of the Reichsbank cannot very well oppose
such an order. If the Directors of the Bank give him instructions, then
he has to carry them out, because of the oath which he has sworn.
DR. SAUTER: So that, Witness, if I understand you correctly, you are
telling us that at the beginning, at any rate, you considered that the
matter was in order, and there was nothing wrong with it?
THOMS: At the beginning? As a matter of fact, I considered it correct
that it should be carried right through.
DR. SAUTER: Did you ever have any doubts that this might be, let us say,
criminal?
THOMS: Certainly I would have had doubts if I had had the knowledge and
experience then which I have today.
DR. SAUTER: That is the same with everyone.
THOMS: Yes, quite right. As far as that is concerned, I had to suppress
any doubts; I would not admit any doubts, because the affair was not
known only to me, it was known to the Reichsbank Directorate and in the
administration office of the Main Treasury. The valuables in the
strong-room were checked every night by a deputy director of the Main
Treasury, so that I was responsible only for the technical carrying out
of this business; and the responsibility for the correctness of this
transaction was not within my competence.
DR. SAUTER: I do not know about the responsibility but, Witness, I asked
you, did you ever have any doubts, and at what precise moment did you
consider the whole affair criminal? Did you consider it criminal?
THOMS: We assumed that these were goods which the SS—after they had
partly burned down towns in the East, particularly in the battle for
Warsaw—we thought that afterwards they captured this booty in the
houses and then delivered this booty to our Bank.
DR. SAUTER: As booty?
THOMS: Yes. If a military department delivers booty goods it does not
follow that an official who is entrusted with the handling of these
things would have to consider these deliveries as being criminal.
DR. SAUTER: When taking over these articles, did you think, or did Vice
President Puhl tell you, or at least hint to you, that these gold
articles might have been taken from victims in the concentration camps?
THOMS: No.
DR. SAUTER: You did not think of that, did you?
THOMS: No.
DR. SAUTER: Not at all?
THOMS: Once we saw the name “Auschwitz,” and another time the name
“Lublin,” on some slips of paper which we found. I said that in
connection with Lublin we found this inscription on some packets of bank
notes which came in to be dealt with and which were then returned to the
Polish Bank to be cashed. Strangely enough, the same packets came back
later after they had been dealt with by the bank. Consequently, here the
explanation was that these could not be deliveries from a concentration
camp, since they had come to us through official bank channels. As
regards the camp at Auschwitz—well, I cannot say today with what sort
of deliveries these slips of paper were found, but it is possible that
they were slips attached to some notes, and perhaps they may have been
deliveries of foreign bank notes, from the concentration camps. But then
there were arrangements according to which prisoners of war, or
prisoners, could exchange their notes for other money in the camp, so
that such deliveries could have been made through legal channels.
DR. SAUTER: If I understand you correctly, Witness, then, the meaning of
what you have just told us is that you still considered the matter legal
or lawful even when in 1943 you saw the inscription “Auschwitz” and
“Lublin” on some items. Even then you considered the matter legal,
didn’t you?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: Well, then, why did you in your affidavit of 8 May 1946—it
is true it is not a sworn affidavit—tell the story somewhat
differently? Perhaps I can read the sentence to you...
THOMS: Please, do.
DR. SAUTER: ...and you can then tell me if I misunderstood you or
whether the official took it down incorrectly. It says there, after
first of all saying that you considered the matter to be legal:
“One of the first indications of the origin of these articles was when
it was noticed that a packet of bills, presumably bonds...”
THOMS: No, they were bank notes.
DR. SAUTER: “...were stamped ‘Lublin.’”
THOMS: This occurred early in 1943.
DR. SAUTER: “Another indication was the fact that some articles bore the
stamp ‘Auschwitz.’ We all knew these places were the sites of
concentration camps. In connection with the tenth delivery in November
1942”—that is, previously—“gold teeth appeared, and the quantity of
gold teeth grew to an unusual extent.”
So much for the quotation from your unsworn statement of 8 May 1946.
Now, will you please tell us: Does that mean the same as you said a
little earlier, or does it mean something different in your opinion?
THOMS: That in my opinion tallies with my statement. We could not assume
that deliveries which came through the concentration camp had to be
absolutely illegal. We only observed that gradually these deliveries
became larger. A delivery of notes from a concentration camp need not be
illegal because of this. It might have been an official calling-in,
especially as we did not know the regulations applicable to
concentration camps. It would be perfectly possible that these people
had the right to sell the articles in their possession or give them in
payment.
DR. SAUTER: The dollars which you have also seen in that film would
hardly be sold by anybody.
THOMS: May I point out to you that I was not of the opinion that these
bank notes necessarily came from concentration camps. I merely said that
the word “Lublin” was on some of the packets of bank notes. That might
have pointed to their having come from a concentration camp; but it did
not necessarily mean that these particular notes came from that
concentration camp, and the same applies to “Auschwitz.” The name
“Auschwitz” cropped up. There may have been a certain suspicion, but we
had not any proof, and we did not feel that we were in any way called
upon to object to these deliveries of the SS.
DR. SAUTER: Consequently, Witness, apparently because you put this
construction on it, you did not use the occasion to make a report to
Vice President Puhl or the Directorate, or to voice any doubts; you did
not have any cause for that?
THOMS: I called Vice President Puhl’s attention to the composition of
these deliveries as early as a few months after the arrival of the first
delivery. Therefore, the general character of these deliveries was known
to Herr Puhl. He knew the contents of the deliveries.
DR. SAUTER: But you told us earlier that the character of these
deliveries did not seem peculiar to you. You considered that it was
booty. And now you want to say that you called Vice President Puhl’s
attention to it and that he must have noticed something peculiar.
THOMS: I did not say that. I did not say that Herr Puhl must have
noticed something peculiar. I merely said that, if any objections were
to be raised, then they would have to come from Herr Puhl, since he was
as well aware of the character of these deliveries as I was. And, if
there was any suspicion, then Herr Puhl’s suspicion would probably have
been aroused more strongly than mine.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you told us earlier that special secrecy was
ordered in this connection, but at the same time you mentioned that
quite apart from this SS affair, there were also other business matters
which apparently had to be handled with special secrecy. Is that true?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: You need not give us any names, but I would only like to
know what the other affairs were?
THOMS: These are matters which had to do with the conduct of the war.
There were transactions in gold, and perhaps also in foreign currency,
_et cetera_.
DR. SAUTER: They were not criminal affairs, therefore?
THOMS: No, not criminal.
DR. SAUTER: Then, Witness...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, the Tribunal thinks that this is getting too
far away from the point really to ask him about other deliveries.
DR. SAUTER: Yes, but the question is already answered, Mr. President.
Witness, because of this secrecy in connection with the SS deliveries
which reached the Reichsbank, I should be interested in knowing, insofar
as they were realized by the Reichsbank, whether any accounts were
rendered, as I assume to be the case from the documents before us?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: By your Main Treasury?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: To whom were these accounts sent?
THOMS: They were sent to the Reichsführer-SS office direct; that is to
say, they were collected by Melmer directly from the bank.
DR. SAUTER: Did they not go to any other office?
THOMS: And then they were officially passed on to the Foreign Currency
Department.
DR. SAUTER: To the Foreign Currency Department, that is, to a State
Department?
THOMS: No, that is a department of the Reichsbank which in turn is the
link with the Directorate.
DR. SAUTER: Were not these accounts also transmitted, or did they not
go, to the Reich Ministry of Finance?
THOMS: The liaison man, Melmer, always received two accounts, that is,
in duplicate. Whether the Reichsführer’s office sent one copy to the
Reich Ministry of Finance, I do not know.
DR. SAUTER: Were these accounts really treated confidentially, that is,
kept secret?
THOMS: Yes.
DR. SAUTER: For instance, the accounts with the Municipal Pawn Broker’s
Office?
THOMS: In the account with the Municipal Pawn Broker’s Office the
depositor was not named.
DR. SAUTER: What happened to these gold teeth?
THOMS: They were melted down by the Prussian State Mint. The gold was
then refined and the fine gold was returned to the Reichsbank.
DR. SAUTER: Witness, you said earlier that at the beginning of 1943
certain articles had arrived stamped “Auschwitz.” I think you said at
the beginning of 1943.
THOMS: Yes, but I cannot tell you the exact date now.
DR. SAUTER: You said “We all knew that there was a concentration camp
there.” Did you really know that as early as the beginning of 1943,
Witness?
THOMS: Naturally, now I can...
DR. SAUTER: Yes, now of course, we all know it. I am talking about the
time at which this happened.
THOMS: I cannot say that for certain. I made that statement on the
strength—I beg your pardon, that is, probably—these deliveries were
probably not handled until as late as 1945 or 1944 in the late autumn.
It is possible that something about Auschwitz had already leaked out.
DR. SAUTER: Now, you said under Number 14 of your statement that one of
the first clues to the source of these articles—apparently meaning the
concentration camps—was the fact that a parcel of paper was stamped
“Lublin.” This was early in 1943. And another indication was the fact
that some items bore the stamp “Auschwitz.” “We all knew”—I’ve already
emphasized this before for a very good reason—“we all knew that these
places were the sites of concentration camps.” That’s your statement,
and I now repeat the question. Of course we all know it now; but did
you, Herr Reichsbank Councillor, know at the beginning of 1943 that
there was this huge concentration camp at Auschwitz?
THOMS: No. To that positive type of question I must say no, I did not
know it, but...
THE PRESIDENT: He did not say anything about a huge concentration camp
at Auschwitz.
DR. SAUTER: No, that was a rhetorical exaggeration of mine. I said that
we knew from the Trial that there was a huge concentration camp there.
THE PRESIDENT: Did he know it? Did he know that there was a huge
concentration camp in 1943? He has not said so.
THOMS: I can answer “no” to your question, but this is the point: I
assume that this slip marked “Auschwitz” came from a delivery which was
probably made in 1943, but was not dealt with until much later; and I
made that statement when I was already in Frankfurt, so that the name
“Auschwitz” was familiar to me. I admit that there may be an
exaggeration insofar as I did retrospectively tell myself that that was
a concentration camp, you see. But I know that at the time, somehow, our
attention was drawn to the name “Auschwitz,” and I think we even asked a
question about the connection; but we received no answer and we never
asked again.
DR. SAUTER: Well then, Witness, I have one last question. The
Prosecution has shown us the Document 3947-PS. I repeat, 3947-PS.
Apparently this is the draft of a memorandum which some department in
the Reichsbank seems to have prepared for the Directorate of the
Reichsbank. It is dated 31 March 1944, and it contains the sentence on
Page 2 which I shall read to you because it refers to Defendant Funk and
to Defendant Göring. This is the sentence:
“The Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich, the Delegate for
the Four Year Plan, hereby informs the German Reichsbank, in a
letter of 19 March 1944, copy of which is
enclosed,”—incidentally, the copy is not here, at least I have
not got it—“that the considerable amounts of gold and silver
objects, jewels, and so forth, at the Main Trustee Office East
should be delivered to the Reichsbank according to the order
issued by Reich Minister Funk”—the defendant—“and Graf
Schwerin-Krosigk, Reich Finance Minister. The conversion of
these objects should be accomplished in the same way as the
‘Melmer’ deliveries.”
That is the end of my quotation.
Defendant Funk tells me, however, that he knew nothing about such
instructions, and that such an agreement or such a letter was entirely
unknown to him and that he did not know anything at all about the
“Melmer” deliveries.
MR. DODD: I must object to the form of the question. I have objected
before that it is a long story anticipating the answer to the question
put to the witness. I think it is an unfair way to examine.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, you know, do you not, that you are not
entitled to give evidence yourself? You are not entitled to say what
Funk told you, unless he has given the evidence.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, this is not one of our witnesses. This is a
witness who has volunteered for the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Sauter, it is not a question of whose witness he is.
You were stating what Funk told you, and you were not referring to
anything that Funk had said in evidence, and you are not entitled to do
that.
DR. SAUTER: As you were Reichsbankrat I should be interested to know
whether you knew anything about these orders which are mentioned in the
letter of 31 March 1944 from an office of the Reichsbank, and whether
the Defendant Funk was concerned with this?
THOMS: I think I can remember that instructions actually did exist which
stated that gold from the Main Trustee Office East should be delivered
to the Reichsbank. I am not absolutely certain whether this sentence is
from a note written by the Deputy Director of the Main Treasury, Herr
Kropp, to the Directorate of the Reichsbank at the time. I am fairly
certain that originally such instructions were actually given, but I
want to point out that the Main Treasury through the Precious Metal
Department was against accepting these valuables because technically
they were not in a position permanently to assume responsibility for
such considerable deliveries of miscellaneous articles. This instruction
was cancelled later on through Herr Kropp’s intervention. The deliveries
from the Main Trustee Office East to the Reichsbank, especially to the
Main Treasury, were not undertaken. I believe, however, I am right in
saying that originally instructions of the type which you have just
described did exist.
DR. SAUTER: Did you see that instruction yourself?
THOMS: I think that in the files of the Precious Metals Department,
which are in the hands of the American Government, there will be carbon
copies of these instructions.
DR. SAUTER: Was that instruction signed by the Defendant Funk?
THOMS: That I cannot say.
DR. SAUTER: Or by some other office?
THOMS: I really cannot tell you at the moment, but I cannot assume that
it is the case because if the text reads, “from the Finance Minister and
Herr Funk,” then some other department must have signed.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have no further questions.
MR. DODD: May I ask one or two questions on re-direct examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. DODD: Herr Thoms, there wasn’t any exaggeration about the fact that
you did find a slip of paper with the word “Auschwitz” written on it
among one of these shipments, was there?
THOMS: No. I found the note.
MR. DODD: Now, I suppose you found lots of things among these shipments
with names written on them. There must have been something that made you
remember “Auschwitz,” isn’t that so?
THOMS: Yes.
MR. DODD: Well, what was it?
THOMS: I must assume—I mean that I know from my recollection that there
was some connection with a concentration camp, but I cannot say. I am of
the opinion that it must have happened later. It is really...
MR. DODD: Well, I don’t care to press it. I just wanted to make
perfectly clear to the Tribunal that you told us that you did remember
“Auschwitz” and it had such a meaning for you that you remembered it as
late as after the surrender of Germany. That is so, isn’t it?
THOMS: Yes.
MR. DODD: I have no further questions.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): You said there were about 77 deliveries, is
that right?
THOMS: Yes, there were over 70.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): How large were the deliveries? Were they in
trucks?
THOMS: They varied in size. Generally they arrived in ordinary cars, but
sometimes they arrived in trucks. It depended. When there were bank
notes, for instance, the bulk was smaller and the weight was less. If it
was silver or silver articles, then the weight was greater and a small
lorry would bring it.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): There were several lorries, or trucks, in
each delivery, usually?
THOMS: No, the deliveries were not so large as that. There was at the
most one truck.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And one other question: Do I understand you
to say that these articles were transferred to new containers?
THOMS: Yes, they were put into ordinary bags by the Reichsbank. The bags
were labeled “Reichsbank.”
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Bags marked with the Reichsbank’s name on the
bag?
THOMS: Yes, on which the word “Reichsbank” was written.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
[_The witness Puhl took the stand._]
THE PRESIDENT: Now, Dr. Seidl, do you want to ask the witness Puhl a few
questions?
Witness, you remember that you are still on oath?
PUHL: Yes, Sir.
DR. SEIDL: Witness, in connection with Document 3947-PS, USA-850, I have
several questions to put to you.
You heard earlier when the witness Thoms was examined that this letter
contains a paragraph which refers to Reich Marshal Göring and which is
connected with the Main Trustee Office East. Is it true that this Main
Trustee Office was an office which had been established by a Reich law
and that its right to confiscate had also been specifically outlined by
Reich law?
PUHL: I cannot answer the second part of your question without looking
it up since I am not a legally trained man. The Main Trustee Office East
was an officially established office—whether by a law or by a decree,
is something I cannot tell you at the moment.
DR. SEIDL: To your knowledge, did the Main Trustee Office East have any
connection with the SS Economic Administration headquarters, that is to
say, with the office of Pohl?
PUHL: I have never observed that.
DR. SEIDL: Is it obviously out of the question, at least when you read
the letter, that the Main Trustee Office East and its deliveries could
in any way be connected with the “Melmer” action?
PUHL: That very probably is so, yes.
DR. SEIDL: You mean there was no connection?
PUHL: That there was no connection.
DR. SEIDL: You mentioned this morning that among the business
transactions which the Reichsbank handled very unwillingly were those
with the Customs Investigation and the Currency Control Offices. The
last part of this paragraph which refers to the Defendant Göring
contains a sentence which refers to the conversion of objects of a
similar type which were taken from the occupied western territories. Is
it true that, particularly in the occupied western territories, both the
Currency Control Offices and the Customs Investigation Offices obtained
rich booty?
PUHL: The total of the valuables which were brought in by both these
offices is unknown to me. I rather doubt that it was extraordinarily
big. However, they were fairly large sums, mostly, of course, in foreign
currency.
DR. SEIDL: I have no further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, do you want to ask him anything?
MR. DODD: After having heard Herr Thoms’ testimony, do you wish to
change any of your testimony that you gave this morning?
PUHL: No.
MR. DODD: And your affidavit that you gave under oath, do you wish to
have it remain as it is?
PUHL: Yes.
MR. DODD: That is all I have.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you know who Kropp, who signed under the word
“Hauptkasse” in the letter of 31 March 1944, Document 3947-PS, is?
PUHL: Herr Kropp was an official of our Treasury Department. He had a
comparatively responsible position.
THE PRESIDENT: Of which department?
PUHL: The Treasury Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. The witness can retire.
[_The witness left the stand._]
Dr. Siemers.
DR. SIEMERS: Admiral Raeder, will you come up to the witness stand?
[_The Defendant Raeder took the stand._]
May I remind you that I put the basic question whether the construction
of the Navy was to serve aggressive or defensive purposes.
The witness wishes to answer that question by referring to parts of the
speech he made in 1928. It is Exhibit Number Raeder-6, Document Book 1,
Page 5, and the speech itself begins on Page 17.
Please go ahead.
RAEDER: First of all, I want to say that Minister Severing, whom I had
asked for as one of my witnesses, brought this speech along of his own
free will, as he still remembers the year 1928.
DR. SIEMERS: Mr. President, this is to be found on Page 16 of the
document book. It is Raeder’s letter to Minister Severing, dated 8
October 1928. Severing gave me this speech when he came to Nuremberg to
appear as a witness.
RAEDER: I shall quote from Page 17, the fifth line from the bottom, to
shorten the sentence somewhat for the interpreters:
“The Armed Forces—I am speaking of course primarily for the
Navy, but I know that today it is the same with the Army,
because since 1919 its inner solidarity and training has been
perfected with the greatest devotion and loyalty to duty—in
their present structure, whether officer or soldier, in their
present form of development and their inner attitude, are a firm
and reliable support, I might even say, because of their
inherent military might and in view of conditions within the
Reich, the firmest and most reliable support of our German
fatherland, the German Reich, the German Republic, and its
Constitution; and the Armed Forces are proud to be that.”