These unnecessarily inflated figures were checked up by the man in charge of my statistics, together with my production man. They were compared and decreased as much as possible.
Q Just a moment. Will you please indicate some names? who worked in the statistics sector, and who was the man in charge of production questions?
A The statistical nan in the planning office was in the planning office, and at the moment I an afraid I can't give you the name, me probably changed quite often. It was not an important position in our department; he never reported to me directly, he was under the chief of the planning office.
The other man who was in charge of production was engineer Harertel, who has been here as a witness, and he was a very good export. He said at once the demands put out by industry are much too high. If they ask for five hundred, they can only really account for about eighty, for he saw how many aircraft could be produced by how many workers every where. He had practical figures to compare those things with. The department that worked on statistics, as far as I know, reported once a month, the figures to be compared with the figures with Spoor's armament office. There we found only the highest demands of the industry which came to Speer via the armament inspection, and my man said, we don't need that. From those figures, to call an example, which might have came from all sectors, let us say it was twenty thousand. Then he said we can answer for and support only seven thousand four hundred and thirty-one. Then the armament inspectorate struck not the surplus demands of the industry, for every body was only too pleased if he could put up lessor demands, because even the necessary lesser demands were not easy of fulfillment; that is to say, practically speaking, were never fulfilled at all. That is what the GL had to do officially with that whole question. Unofficially, it was a matter of course that each one of us who went to a factory would there talk to the workers, and saw whether help was necessary any where, which we could not give directly ourselves, but which we could apply for. Even in my period at the German Lufthansa I liked to talk to workers. Apart from that, a man like myself could only learn from these specialists. It was always a joy to me to talk to simple and sensible men with clear minds, who had no intention to get anything for themselves, who had no ambitions as far as I was concerned, who, as was usual with the Germans, would give their opinion of everything in a clear and frank manner. Uhnt I knew of politics, which wasn't much, I really learned from these talks with workers. Before 1933 half of my workers wore communists, that is to say, a large number of there later on became National Socialists before 1933, and the others were social democrats, trade unionists, etc.; and I heard quite different opinions than in my own circles.
Therefore, I always talked to these men during the war, and I also discussed politics with them, and that automatically went for me to the foreign workers. I speak a little French; I could make myself understood with these people, and I had an interpreter along when I talked to Russian workers, but these were present everywhere I went. That was the unofficial way in which I contacted the workers, and when I had conferences at the GL I always told these people that it was my wish for them to talk to the workers, and show an interest in them whenever they went in to a factory. As men in higher position, we could not overlook a wish which, or in case of difficulty, in which a man who worked in a factory might find himself, and that is the way I really think quite a number of questions were settled. I made claim, for instance, myself that throughout my activities, any way shortly after the beginning of the war, that is to say, on 9th November, there were about sixty production managers of factories; they are men of trust, elected by workers; these men came to me and I found out they wanted to ask me to get their rations increased. At that time the whole nutrition was based upon lower rations; these people in our high industries were not entitled to the supplementary rations for heavy workers, and these people explained to me that now that there is or was a war, and they were forced to work in different factories from peace time, for that reason their housing was much further away from their places of work, and in the morning and at night they had to travel longer; and, therefore, their food was insufficient. That gave me the idea to apply for a new supplementary ration and as we became very set in this question, it became possible to achieve that supplementary ration which was now for the benefit of all workers. And I have now gotten hold of documentary evidence that supplementary rations were also given to foreign workers; that was a supplementary ration for foreign workers working long hours. As this documentary evidence shows, it is an affidavit actually, that food of German and foreign workers was the same. But I also wanted to say that it is quite possible that there are cases where this principle was not observed. but that was against the will of the German government if it happened.
Q Witness, that means that neither the labor office nor the armament inspectorate were under your supervision, as the GL.
1884a
A. Yes, that is quite correct.
Q But Speer has testified that until the very end you did not renounce the command of the air industry. What could you say to this effect?
A If Speer should mean that my personnel official, in the way I described before, talked with his, Speer's armament office, once a month, then it is quite correct; but my officials might have used those occasions, and how far he worked with my name on those occasions I do not know. I hope he did so in order to get his point through. I was never present. I never heard how these negotiations went on. Should Speer mean, however, that my work in that field was the same as he in his field, then he makes a mistake, for I did not have that organization nor did I have the task. My field was only comparatively small and very specialized compared to Speer's field.
Q Witness, -
A I might add perhaps, that Speer did not know my organization; of course he never discussed it. He knew, of course, that I had a technical office; he knew that I had a planning office, and he also know that I had an economic department for the contracts of industry. After all, he fought a battle to take the whole economic department into his sphere, and when I said he couldn't possibly do it, he waited until the whole armament industry came under his charge, as we two always settled everything in a friendly manner after that up to the last moment. Even if there wore a certain amount of conflicting interests which sometimes were quite considerable, particularly between our subordinate officers, there were quite severe battles between those subordinate officers at times, but we always poured oil on the troubled waters, Mr. Speer and I.
Q Witness, but couldn't it be, that a fine working of the Central Planning Board, you presented the labor demands of your industry, that is, you have talked for your own interests.
A I cannot recall, and I have read some of the records, but in not one of them, there is not one word said that I had any special demands for the Luftwaffe. Apart from the fact that once or twice I remarked that I was equally badly off, I don't get anything, with regards to Sauckel for instance, but that doesn't mean that I was looking after my interests in the GL. If I talked about workers at the Central Planning Board, I said so at Speer's request, to give him in the armament industry all the support. Speer was particularly pleased when I played the wild man and became a little strong. He once told mo you are much better at this than I am; I am only a civilian; I can't do it as well as you can. And some times he pepped me up and said speak a little stronger, please, which I was only too delighted to do for him. That was meant to achieve something which you may wish to ask me a little later on about how we can get Sauckel to speak clearly. How can we get rid of the suspicion that we through our inefficiency cannot bring to German industry up to the high level, to the right level.
Q Witness, did you at all in the framework of the Central Planning Board would you present it individually of your own office, the GL, that is to say, or of the air force as a whole; was it rather your task to be a buffer party.
A The latter applies. As I said before the Navy wanted a representative of their own,and that was imitated soon by other departments; everything was turned down; so we after all didn't wish to become a party to where everybody formed his own party. I had to make efforts to be very neutral because otherwise there would be attacks against me brought to Hitler. Therefore, when questions of the Luftwaffe had to be put, that was only when the question of distribution of raw materials was concerned, for that was always the bone of contention between all departments.Then, to my so-called chief representative, my chief of my planning office, I ordered him to attend, and I had him report the wishes of the Luftwaffe, and then I was there as a neutral agency as it wore and listened and in certain cases when I saw that the demands wore impossible I said at once, refused the Luftwaffe demand, so that the others could see I was fair with the parties.
Q. Witness, during these conferences of the Central Planning Board did it happen that the bulk of the workers was discussed, or was it rather a question of bringing new workers into Germany?
A. No, it only was concerned with the labor question as such, only inasmuch as it was important for the increase of raw materials in accordance with Hitler's order, always meant as an attack on Sauckel in order to get him either to give us the people or to say he cannot do it. As we knew he could not supply them, our main demand which we wished to achieve was an open statement by Sauckel, "I haven't got the workers whom you need."
6. Witness, but if your air force industry, for instance, either the labor offices or the armament inspectorates had made requests to Speer, and when your Planning Office had checked these demands in order to find out what was really necessary and what was unnecessary in these general requests, was it a matter of proposing what kind of workers you wanted to have and what kind of workers should be distributed into these different production programs? Was it a question of deciding whether you needed German workers or rather more foreigners?
A. We did that in one sense, that for certain factories we simply had to have skilled workers, which we asked for, but never did we ask, "Give us foreigners; give us prisoners of war," and so forth. Our wishes were to the effect to have Germans, but it was quite clear to us that there weren't enough German workers to fulfill the demands. Had they been available, one needn't have used prisoners of war or recruited foreign workers or sent the prisoners of war to work unless they volunteered for it.
Q. Several persons of your office have testified to this Tribunal that you made great efforts in order to receive German workers by rejecting and protecting them from being drafted into the armed forces. Was that in connection with the general requests by the factories, or was that a special general measure you took for the benefit of production of airplanes?
A. The industry simply asked for workers, and of course they preferred to keep their own skilled workers or obtain more.
The action was taken quite independently of that. Each month at least once I saw the representative of the OKW or the army, for these tasks were looked after by the reserve army for the OKW, and I fought with this man to suspend the drafts into the Wehrmacht and to take the armament into consideration. Hitler's orders were so sharp that the men of the army entirely saw my reasons because the army worked under similar conditions, and they had to turn me down. But in some cases it was possible to persuade Hitler himself, either through Speer alone or perhaps I was there myself with him, that certain actions were taken to get soldiers back. All these people were specialists. As we went very cautiously and only demanded small figures, we asked for instance for 2,000 once or 4,000, and the maximum case was 12,000. And we told Hitler, only if we can got these people can we build the new gun or the new aircraft, or whatever it may have been. Then Hitler became so interested in the new gun or the new aircraft and he put that above his normal line of soldiers, more soldiers, and more soldiers. That was how the Luftwaffe got a few thousand workers back from the army. It was colossal work to do that. Everybody had to be applied for by name and address. The bulk of the people had been killed anyway; others were in hospitals, wounded; others were missing. In other words, we only obtained a fraction of the original demands, but as they were particularly good people, it was extremely valuable to us.
Q Witness, it has been testified to this Tribunal that at some time large numbers of workers were requested.
A That was an extremely exhausting and tiring work at that time and the people which we got back in this way were not given to us for the duration. They could be taken away from us any month, and new actions became again necessary to preserve these people. That, of course, gave us ideals in the course of events which were no longer to be answered for from the point of view of normal government. The biggest parcel of people which I ever achieved amounted to 40,000, and they were people who had been called up at Hitler's orders. But that was Luftwaffe replacements. The troops had asked for quite a number of people.
The restrictions which we had in the industry were unknown to the troops, and thereafter I had talked to Goering for a long time, the chief of staff and the army office -- that is an office in the Luftwaffe for reserve men. It was under Foerster. It was my own arrangement, actually, but I told Foerster that he must look after his own interests. That is how I had quite a struggle with Foerster on that point, and when he won all other points, on this one I won the day and I kept my 40,000. That,in relationship to the 500,000 workers, as we would put it vulgarly, was just a drop in the ocean. But I could not see how, without these people, I could keep the armament going. Then there was another big parcel of people. They were perhaps 15,000 men. Those I got from our intelligence chief - I must almost call it "by cheating." At the point of a gun I told him that I would not build one single equipment for him unless he would give me those 15,000 men. As he, for his signal corps, had 500,000 soldiers without women, I had no compunction to press him. Had I been C-in-C he would have given me more, even. But those were the methods without which it wouldn't have been possible, and which really could get one down. Col. Eschenauer who wrote on those matters in the General Staff, quoted 70,000 as the total figure, and Gen. Vorwald, I think, also quoted a similar figure, which would, have contained the 40,000. That, anyway, is how I understood him. And one thing is quite certain. Never was there a bigger figure than 40,000, unfortunately.
Q That is sufficient. Witness, only briefly now, what was the bulk, the mass of the workers which Germany could receive?
A They were German workers. They were -- I think these figures become quite clear from the record of the meeting of 16 February, I think it was.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, before I start a larger theme, it is only two minutes now, and I would propose that we take a recess now.
THE PRESIDENT: Recess until tomorrow morning at 0930.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 14 March at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Erhard Milch, defendant; sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 14 March 1947, 0935. Justice Toms Presiding.
THE MARSHAL: All persons in the court room please take their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges, of Military Tribunal No. 2 Military Tribunal No. 2 is now in session.
God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the Court.
ERHARD MILCH - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Yesterday at the end, we were discussing the activities cf the GL in the Central Planning Board with reference to the occupation of laborers and workers. Well then, you hinted at it yesterday that in the Spring of 1944 there came the decisive discussion with Mr. Sauckel, and I should like you to describe to the Tribunal now, first of all merely from the point of view of time, how these meetings came about, and what had been the cause for those rows?
A I assume that you are now thinking of the 53rd and 54th Meeting?
Q Yes, and you will tell the Court what happened from the beginning.
A You mean 1944 ?
Q Yes.
AAs I have already stated, Hitler had put the increase for the program at such a high level that 3.2 million tons of steel would have been required for it monthly, but considering the means at our disposal, only 2.6 million could be produced per month. On the 4th of January 1944; Sauckel had once again reported to Hitler that all requirements for workers which had come up in the previous period had been completely fulfilled by him. This meant strong contradiction of the reports which Speer and I had made on every occasion. Hitler, on the other hand, emphasized that we had no means of checking this and that the figures stated by Sauckel were the correct ones.
For that, we would most certainly be in a position, and have to be in a position, to produce these 3.2 million tons of steel, thus increasing the output of armament material.
The Armament Ministry desired now at last to reach a clear understanding with Sauckel. We were not in a position to check Sauckel's figures because the statistics of the Armament Ministry were based on something quite different than those statistics Sauckel was making. In spite of every effort on Speer's part, Sauckel would not give us clarity regarding the origin of his statistics. As far as we were concerned, it was a necessity for the entire armament system-- I mean, in this connection-- that Hitler should be furnished with clear proof that Sauckel's figures were wrong, so that Hitler's demands too, regarding increased armament production, could not be justified either.
Speer, himself, had demanded this first conference. In the meantime, he had become ill, and I visited him, and I think it was the day before that he informed me that he briefly regarded the necessities he considered existed for this meeting. I, for my own sphere, which as far as this correction was concerned was only of secondary importance, had previously not known that such a meeting had even been arranged. It was during this meeting then that we were going to make preparations for the distribution of raw materials. It was high time too, because raw materials, which were being allocated quarterly, had to be allotted to the various priority holders at least six weeks before the beginning of the wuarter, and the 16th of February, therefore, was really too late as far as I was concerned. As far as we were concerned, we could only distribute 2.6 million tons for the second quarter of 1944, and it was only possible to arrange for an increase if Sauckel was really going to supply further labor for the coal industry. Consequently, in this case, Sauckel was going to be confronted with the very clear-cut question of at last being made to give a statement which would really determine the decisions regarding the distribution of raw materials.
This meeting on the 16th of February 1944, was not attended by Sauckel. He sent somebody else along , someone to whom he had given authority. It was during this conference that we were concerned, as I said before, with the question of forcing the Plenipotentiary for Labor to quote his workers figures. First of all, for the past period, the end of January and for the beginning, of February; secondly, for the remainder of the year, and likewise, for the second, quarter of that same year. I, myself, wasgoing to try to amend it. Speer represented this before Hitler. I wanted possibly to prove that the figures which Speer had mentioned, and as they were presented to Hitler by Speer on the 4th January, should be reduced, since I, myself, had, the feeling and was convinced, that the demand, made by Sauckel was really too high.
In other words, I was going; to try to reduce them to a reasonable level. In order to be able to do that more easily, I was going to use the other experts who were also present. They were invited by Speer, They included the Minister of Agriculture. There was the State Secretary from Reich. There was the Chief of the Reich Forestry Department. There were representatives of the reserve authorities, reserve departments for the any and airforce. The person definitely trusted by Hitler was the State Secretary from Ministry of Propaganda. During a certain period, in the past, the air raid precaution problem had been taken away from the Air Ministry and handed over to the Ministry of Propaganda.
Let me repeat, also, that now we wanted to create a clear statistic report with Sauckel, so we at last could come to a mutual understanding. Furthermore, we were going to contradict the attack which Sauckel had made before Hitler aginst us because Sauckel had stated that much too much manpower was being used by industry, and that with their increased output, one could just as well manage with fewer people. It had been said on that occasion, that workers were standing about for days in various places because of lack of proper organization.
As far as my experience was concerned, I had a serious clash with Hitler about that. This led to the fact that through the armament industry, there had been an inspection in one of my plants which showed that all these attacks were not justified. Once Hitler was told of something like that, it was very difficult to talk him out of such prejudice. The outcome of this conference, then, brought the following results:
One, figures which Sauckel had stated as having been supplied to us for the first half of 1944 were basically untrue. On one occasion he had spoken of 145,000. On another occasion, of 160,000. In reality according to the statement of the chief of Speer's armament department, only 14.500 people had been supplied of that number. The difference with relation to the figures of just one month ago was significant as far as we were concerned and it coincided with our previously formed opinion. We were convinced that for time past, also, the relationship between Sauckel's reports and the real achievements had been exactly They entailed for us, in the Central Planning Board, the clear out conclusion, that under no circumstance could we expect an increased output of iron in the second quarter that year.
The best we could expect was the figure of 2,100,000 and we could not carry out Hitler's risk to increase it.
The second result was that the figures which were mentioned and which had been demanded by Sauckel could even be contradicted by means of questioning representatives from other ministries as early as that meeting; and the figure of two million workers for that year was reduced by 1,150,000 workers, that is to say, on paper. So according to the calculations which I made during that conference, only 950,000 laborers, instead of 2,100,000 could be regarded as really essential. Fluctuations through the transfer of workers from one plant to another, through alteration of programs had already been taken care of in the case of those figures. Later on the armament industry compiled some tables.
Q May I have them put before you at this point?
A The armament industry compiled some table in which these figures of mine were increased a little. I had no knowledge of this subsequent increase.
The third point arising from this conference was that we dealt with Sauckel's statement to the effect that we had not been economical with workers which we succeeded in contradicting. It was essential to lay this down in order to be able to make a report to Hitler on the proper occasion about this. Those two sheets which have been submitted here -
Q Witness, the Exhibit number is at the top. Tell the Tribunal what it is.
A Document Number NOKW 198, Exhibit Number -
Q Would you mind letting me have it again? The exhibit number is NOKW-
MR. DENNEY: Exhibit Number 51.
JUDGE MUSSMANO: Which document book?
MR. DENNEY: It is document book 2-D. If your Honor please, that is Prosecution Exh. No. 51 in evidence. It is NOKW-198. It is page 59.
in Document Book 2-B. Perhaps it might help the witness if he had the original because if your Honors recall, this is the one on which some notations, were made in 1895a red pencil, and did not photastat.
If the witness would like to see the original, I will be very glad to ask the Secretary-General to get it for him.
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honors please, after the prosecution's Exhibit No. 51 in evidence, which is NOKW-198, and it is in page 59 of Document Book 2-B, perhaps it might help the witness if he had the original, because, if Your Honors recall, this is the one on which some notations were made in red pencil which were in photostat, and if the witness would like to see the original I will be very glad to ask the Secretary General to get it for him.
DR. BERGOLD: Do you want the original or are you satisfied, with a photostat copy?
THE WITNESS: I am satisfied with what I have got. I assume that they must be identical.
MR. DENNEY: Well, they aren't Chinese copies, Your Honor,because you can't file the numbers over other numbers. It is as close a copy as we could make. As Your Honors recall, at the time it was offered, the original was produced and handed to the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes; I recall. But the witness doesn't seem to care for it. Unless he wants it -
MR. DENNEY: I just wanted to make it clear in the record.
DR. BERGOLD: Witness, apparently the figures are not enough to tally completely. Perhaps we better have the original.
THE WITNESS: But surely this is a photostat copy.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes; that's what I thought.
THE WITNESS: In that case I would rather see the original.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honors, in the meantime, may I draw your attention to the fact that the statement made by the witness regarding the difference between Sauckel's reports and the real reports are contained in my document book, Document Book 1, on page 15 of the original of the Exhibit No.11. There in the passage where Weger is talking. It is that passage which the witness was making reference to. It's the minutes of the 53rd meeting of the board in my Document Book R-124, Exhibit No.11, and its page of the original.
THE PRESIDENT: Page 24 in the English Document Book.
