 |
Q. After 1933, did anything change in the basic attitude of Farben in
regard to secrecy matters?
A. No, nothing changed fundamentally. The
intensification of regulations about secrecy matters by the state by way of
regulations and decrees was added, and that caused us some worry now and then.
Dr. von Knieriem already mentioned that the law about economic treason was to
be made effective retroactively under certain circumstances. In view of the
size of our firm, we had to institute measures to protect our employees,
because we could not expect that our plant managers everywhere, and persons in
the plant and combines, would have studied all these measures; and even if they
had done so they would not be able to interpret them correctly. So after 1933,
we saw ourselves forced to treat secret matters centrally and to intensify this
central treatment, and for that purpose in the beginning of 1936 we established
in Berlin, in connection with Vermittlungsstelle-W, the so-called Department A,
which was first under the jurisdiction of Mr. Merbeck, and later under his
successor, Mr. Faubel. As a matter of fact, this did not change much because
Mr. Merbeck retained an office in Leverkusen even as Mr. Faubel did later, and
they were only a few days a month in Berlin in order to dictate a few circular
letters for the plant there.
Q. When the Department A of
Vermittlungsstelle-W was established, did you have anything to do with it?
A. My participation in the creation of Department A,
Vermittlungsstelle-W, consisted in making the countersignature to a letter. At
that time Professor Selck was the so-called Main Plant Manager of Farben, and
when Department A of Vermittlungsstelle-W was to be instituted, Professor Selck
sent circular letters to all the plants and sales departments. Several circular
letters were sent out to each Sparte and for Sparte II; I countersigned, gave
the second signature.
Q. Did you concern yourself in the further course
of events with the activity of Department A?
A. No, never.
Q.
Did you have the duty of supervision of Department A?
A. No.
Q.
Was it under your personal jurisdiction; did you have authority to give
directives?
A. No, I did not bother with it at all. |
| |
| * * * * * * * * * * |
| |
| Q. Dr. ter Meer, when describing your career and when you were
questioned by Dr. Berndt [cocounsel for Defendant ter Meer] you already
reported that for 3 years you were predominantly active in the United States,
and that also later you trav- […eled] |
1323 |
. 
