Dr. Servatius: The last letter in this exhibit is a
communication from Sievers to Department IVA, for the
attention of Eichmann, dated 21 June 1943, stating that the
investigations have been completed and that the prisoners
must be brought to Natzweiler.
Witness, would you indicate whether you received any such
communication, whether Director Sievers visited you, and how
you were involved in the matter?
Accused: There is definitely no doubt that I received
such communications, although I may have forgotten them
today, but these letters are such that I must have received
one or the other. But – and this is the main point in the
whole affair – according to the organization plan, neither
was I responsible for sterilization – it was not my province
to determine what happened to the inmates of concentration
camps, nor was I competent or authorized to order any
transfers from one concentration camp to another. Since I
was not competent to deal with these matters, because of
this – and there is no doubt about this – in this instance,
as in many others with which I was not competent to deal, I
passed the matter on to Mueller in my meetings with him. I
do not know what Mueller then did with it. I at least was
not involved, and if I had had anything to do with it, it
would have been reasonable to assume that, given all the
letters which were exchanged, there would at least have been
some written reaction on my part.
I have also studied the document, the files of 21 June 1943,
in which Sievers refers to a personal discussion with me.
But at the same time this communication went to the Head
Office for Reich Security IVB4, for the attention of
Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, Prinz Albrechtstrasse 8. Now
this would not have been anything out of the ordinary, and
what is unusual is simply that Sievers, who was definitely a
frequent visitor at the Kurfuerstenstrasse office, puts an
address here at which he would never be able to find me. It
would have been a lot more obvious and logical for Sievers
to have put 116 Kurfuerstenstrasse. In any case, that would
have been what I would have done in bureaucratic terms. I
also do not know, and could not find out when I looked at
the document, whether the reference is Sievers’ own, or
whether some other official dictated the communication on
behalf of Sievers. It would definitely be most interesting
to find out which was the case – for this reason I was
unable to check. I said that I…there is a paragraph here,
Finally, I should like to speak on the point of “Treatment
of persons detained in concentration camps for the purpose
Dr. Servatius: Witness, would you first please indicate
whether Director Sievers came to see you.
Accused: I thought I had made it clear that I can no
longer answer that question with confidence. However, if he
did come to see me, I would not have given him any
information other than that I have just indicated, that is
to say that I was not competent to deal with these matters.
As proof of my lack of competence with regard to transfers,
I would refer to exhibit T/1280, document No. 175, page 2,
where it says: “Prisoner movement: transfer to other camps,
particularly at Stage III, must not be requested from the
Head Office for Reich Security or the Reich Criminal Police
Headquarters. In principle, orders for transfers can only
be given from here.” This is signed by the Chief of
Department D, that is the Inspectorate of Concentration Camp
I have found another passage in this documentation, which
seems to me to shed some light on the matter – the two
communications from Himmler’s personal staff, dated 1
November and 6 November 1942, respectively. Apparently
nothing at all happened as far as the whole affair was
concerned, for the next six months. Because in the State
Prosecution’s document No. 913 – unfortunately I do not know
what the T number is –
Dr. Servatius: T/1367.
Accused: …on page 4, right at the bottom – the text is
in English – it says – it is Sievers’ diary – 28 April 1943,
Head Office for Reich Security IVB4, SS Sturmbannfuehrer
Guenther: “Examinations now possible.” So it seems to me
that was some six or seven months later. And this confirms
what I said, that, as for all affairs for which I felt
myself not to be competent according to the organization
chart, I passed them on to the Chief of Department IV. To
whom he entrusted them for future handling, I had no idea,
and I think that this document – Sievers’ diary – confirms
what I have said about this matter, just as the previous
documents about sterilization proved that Guenther, without
doubt, received a secret assignment from the Department
Chief of IV. And if in Nuremberg, Sievers, in document No.
912, exhibit T/1370, on page 5776, states that he spoke to
me, and as to the question why Gluecks etc., who was, after
all, the person in charge…then I must state as against
that, that in 1945 Sievers did not mention Guenther’s name
at Nuremberg, the name he gives in his own diary, and that
on the basis of the discussion which must have been with
Guenther, the examinations were not possible. So I can only
assume that in Nuremberg, Sievers simply said something on
the spur of the moment, as often happened. That is what I
have to say about this matter.
I would like to add that it is my nature to state things
that I dealt with and not to shirk what is necessary. And
in this extremely sensitive matter I have deliberately
restricted myself to the documents available here.
Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, have you now come to the end
of a chapter?
Dr. Servatius: No, Your Honour. I have a few more
questions to ask in connection with the skeleton affair;
there are several more exhibits.
Presiding Judge: Very well. However, the Court will recess.
Presiding Judge: You may proceed, Dr. Servatius.
Dr. Servatius: I turn now to document No. 792; it has no T
number as yet. I would ask for the document to be accepted
as evidence. This is a communication from Himmler to
Director Sievers, dated 7 July 1942, and concerns the
apparatus and the same matter, the question of the skulls.
It is a formal order.
Presiding Judge: I shall mark this exhibit N/18.
Dr. Servatius: It is a formal order from Himmler to
Sievers, the Director of the Ancestral Heritage. Under the
aegis of the Ancestral Heritage, an Institute for Applied
Research in Military Science is to be set up. Such applied
research appears to have mainly been in the field of medical
experiments. Point 2 says: “Professor Hirt’s research
should be given all possible support.”
Point 5 reads: “In respect of the costs which can already be
made available from Waffen-SS resources, contact the Chief
of the Economic-Administrative Head Office.”
The next exhibit is T/1362, document No. 791. The document
is undated. Contents: Information about the duties of the
Ancestral Heritage and implementation of its aims. I submit
the document, in order to show that the Ancestral Heritage
is an independent body, separate from the Head Office for
The next exhibit is T/1370, document No. 912. This is an
excerpt from the examination of Director Sievers by his
defence attorney, in the Nuremberg Doctor’s Trial. I am
referring to the page number which always appears at the
bottom of the page.
On page 5771 it states that Himmler gave orders for the
skull collection to be established, and on page 5783 the
important point concerns the passage where the witness talks
about responsibility with regard to the Dachau camp. The
passage reads: It “shows that for prisoners the individual
section heads had to contact Himmler themselves for each
individual case.” It continues: “And I think that sufficient
documents have been submitted here to prove that the
question of test persons was a matter decided on exclusively
by Himmler, and it was always a matter for which the Head
Office for Reich Security or Gluecks was responsible.”
Gluecks is the Inspector of Concentration Camps.
At the top of page 5787, the witness states that he informed
the Head Office for Reich Security that the work was
discontinued following the outbreak of an epidemic.
Witness, does this mean that you were involved in the
Accused: No, because I did not concern myself with the
details at the time, and I am, therefore, certainly not in a
position to react today.
Presiding Judge: And can the Accused not state which section
in the Head Office for Reich Security was able to deal with
Accused: Your Honour, to the extent of my knowledge, and
according to my ability to answer truthfully, as far as I
know there was no Section in the Head Office for Reich
Security which was responsible for that, in the nature of
things. Today, I myself have to draw conclusions on the
basis of the documents which, it is true, show that the
Inspector for Concentration Camp Affairs was, until the
beginning of 1942, subordinate to the Head of the Security
Police and the Security Service. And from the various files
of the period, I am also aware that the relationship between
the Chief of Department IV and Brigade Commander Gluecks was
officially very close. And I can well imagine that
Himmler’s special wishes and orders were dealt with directly
by the Chief of Department IV, together with Gluecks, and,
as I can see here, that Mueller then gave secret assignments
to a member of the staff of the Head Office for Reich
Security whom he found suitable.
Dr. Servatius: On page 5776, it says:
“Question from the defence: The next document is No.
116, a communication from Brandt to Eichmann. Why was
such a communication to Eichmann, who was a Specialist
Officer in the Head Office for Reich Security,
necessary, if Gluecks was already aware of this order?
After all, Gluecks was the person who was in charge of
all concentration camps.” “Sievers’ answer: ‘Gluecks
sent me to Eichmann, whom I had not known at all until
then. Eichmann had been notified by telephone by
Gluecks. However, he said that he also needed a
document from Himmler or his personal staff. And then
this communication was written.’
“The next question from the defence: ‘And what did you
yourself talk about with Eichmann?’
“Sievers’ answer: ‘I gave Eichmann the report and
Hirt’s information, and I told him that Hirt’s
colleagues wanted to carry out anthropological
examinations and that, in accordance with Himmler’s
instructions, he, Eichmann, was to arrange for the
necessary conditions to be available in Auschwitz.'”
Witness, can you make a statement about this testimony given
Accused: Yes, Sir. I have said that today I cannot
remember definitely whether Sievers came to see me or not.
But, in order to make absolutely sure that I avoid even the
impression of trying to wriggle out of something, I will say
that, if Sievers had come to see me, I would have passed the
entire matter on to Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, my chief, with
the comment that, in accordance with the relevant
instructions and ordinances, I was in no way competent to
deal with the matter. In other words, if he really had
conveyed to me what he says in his deposition at Nuremberg,
I would have passed this on in turn, and I would have passed
it on to my chief with the comment that, in accordance with
the service orders, it was not Department IV, and more
particularly Section IVB4, but the Inspectorate for
Concentration Camp Affairs which was competent and
responsible for the matter.
I would add further to my statement as follows: If I had
dealt in any fashion with this matter as a result of
Sievers’ visit, it would definitely not have taken six
months to determine that the examinations could be started.
This fact in itself is sufficient to prove that I had
nothing to do with the matter.
Dr. Servatius: I shall pass over the exhibit listed,
T/1280, document No. 175, and come to T/1367, document No.
Judge Raveh: Dr. Servatius, if you are now coming to a new
chapter, I would like to ask you something. In connection
with the question which arose in a previous session, I found
in document No. 1180, exhibit T/37(234), that, at the end of
1943, Himmler was Minister for the Interior of the Reich.
The Presiding Judge: observed to me that the Accused has
also, in one of his comments, mentioned that Himmler was for
some time Reich Minister of the Interior. I would like to
ask you in one of our future sessions to check exactly when
Himmler was Reich Minister of the Interior, as this could be
relevant to the proceedings.
Attorney General: Yes, of course, there are publications on
Dr. Servatius: I shall endeavour to do so. The next
exhibit is T/1367, document No. 913; this is an excerpt from
Sievers’ diary. At the bottom of page 4, there is an entry
dated 28 April 1943, at 10.45 hours. As far as I can make
out the text, it reads: “At the Reichssicherheitshauptamt
IVB4, SS Sturmbannfuehrer Guenther, 1. Examinations now
possible at the Auschwitz Concentration Camp.” And then it
says, “Discussion of procedure.” The second item is
illegible in my text. The Accused has already commented on
The next exhibit is T/1358, document No. 914. This is a
telegram from Sievers’ to Brandt on Himmler’s personal
staff, dated 5 September 1944. The introduction to the
communication, the first sentence, shows who issued the
order. It reads, “As per the proposal of 9 February 1942
and the relevant assent of 23 February 1942,
Sturmbannfuehrer Professor Hirt has established the skeleton
collection which had not existed until then.”
Presiding Judge: I gather that this is T/1368 and not 1358.
Dr. Servatius: I am sorry, I accept the correction.
I now turn to a section on “Evacuation.” First we have
exhibit T/734, document No. 119. This is a report of a
Duesseldorf police inspector, dated 9 March 1942, on a
discussion in Section IVB4, Berlin, with comments by
Presiding Judge: Are you following the sequence of your
lists now, Dr. Servatius?
Dr. Servatius: I am following the order according to my
list. According to this report, Eichmann stated that a
further 55,000 Jews would be evacuated from the Old Reich,
Austria, Bohemia and Moravia, including 20,000 from Prague
and 18,000 from Vienna.
It says that Eichmann referred to the directives with regard
to persons whom it was permitted to evacuate, and he also
drew attention to the fact that people had been wrongly
evacuated, and that the Jewish Elder from Riga had
intervened accordingly with the higher authorities. The
matter went as high as Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, who
insisted that the directives should be respected.
In the penultimate paragraph it says, and I quote:
“In order to avoid individual Stapo stations being
exposed to the temptation to deport inconvenient
elderly Jews, Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann stated
that, for the sake of reassurance, it should be said
that those Jews who remained in the Old Reich would, in
all probability, be deported during the summer or
autumn of this year to Theresienstadt, which was
designated as an `Old People’s Ghetto.’ This town was
now being evacuated, and some fifteen to twenty
thousand Jews could provisionally be transferred there
immediately from the Protectorate. This is in order to
`save face with the outside world’.”
Witness, would you comment on this statement.