Move the mouse pointer over a red word in the main text, to view the glossary entry for this word.

Summations of the I.G. Farben Lawyers in the Appellate Court

Alfred Seidl, Otto Wedesweiler, Dr. Samson, and Otto Kranzbühler spoke in turn on behalf of I.G. Farben. Seidl gave a lecture on the history of the Buna plant at Auschwitz and emphasized that I.G. Farben had not been responsible for the housing and treatment of the prisoners; instead, he alleged, the firm had tried to ease the lot of the inmates, for example, by dispensing the “Buna soup.” After that, Otto Wedesweiler posed the question of whether the state, as the cause of the sufferings, accordingly might be responsible for compensation of the former prisoners. Dr. Samson further stated that I.G. Farben bore no responsibility for any damage to Wollheim’s health, and that he therefore could assert no claims against I.G. Farben i.L. Otto Kranzbühler, in his summation, subsequently repeated the argument offered several times during the proceedings: that I.G. Farben had been compelled to employ the prisoners, as rejection of this workforce for the construction project would have been prosecuted.

(SP; transl. KL)


Rumpf, Joachim R.: “Der Fall Wollheim gegen die I.G. Farbenindustrie AG in Liquidation.” Unpublished dissertation, Leibniz University, Hanover, 2007.