I resume reading at the bottom of Page 2 of the French text. That is Page 3 of the German translation: "There is no doubt about their projected adoption by German Gaus for the production of manpower in Germany and especi* for the necessary transformation in the interest of Germany interests of French manpower for the armaments industries in France. This system will h* enormous advantages."
I am passing to the bottom of Page 3 of the French text. I am reading small "d2 "The Central German manpower service in Paris is the representative of Plenipotentiary and his office." in the occupied territories was not under the direction of you as a plenipotentiary but depended on the local authorities. How do you explain this phrase?
A. It can be explained very simply. These men were subordinate to the military commander or chief in the depqrtment. They were sent over by Germany and they were taken from the German Labor Offices and were taken in the administration there.
Q. You say that the Central Labor Service in Paris, that is the representative of the Plenipotentiary and his assistants. The representative of the Labor Service in Paris was therefore your representative?
A The German Labor Board in Paris was a part of thecivilian administration of the military commander-in-chief of France.
This is not expressed in the sentence, for I took it for granted that the Gauleiters knew about this; and the picture as I set it down is entirely correct.
"The Central German Service in Paris" -- that is, the representative of the plenipotentiary and his office -
A (Interposing) Monsieur Herzog -
Q (Interposing) Please allow me to finish.
"They will have, therefore, 12 French organizations to give a good understanding of the French problem, in spite of essential pacificism and resistance which is even certain of French Bureaucracy at all its levels. Therefore, I have entrusted the president and the managers of newly formed Gau authorities to create a newly formed organization in departments attached to them; and I request you in accordance with the wishes of Comrade Bormann to give a favorable receiption to the new mission that has been entrusted to your Gau." subordinate French manpower to German manpower in Germany?
A. Yes. But I should like to ask you and to ask the High Tribunal to be permitted to say and read the following for clarification purposes. On the first page in paragraph 1-- and I am starting to cite fromthe third line -- it says, "Under complete agreement with the Fuehrer, I am in agreement with the French government chief, in France" -- and this is the decisive point -- "and the competent German authorities -- that is, the military commander-in-chief with whom this plenipotentiary had been working add to whom he was subordinate -"that extensive measures would be taken."
And on Page 4, I should like to read, "The special purpose for this adoption system was not to be unfriendliness" -- I am reading from Page 4 inthe German text, under the letter "A" -- "prejudice, suspicion, or lack of care, but the stopping and taking care of complaints" -- that is, complaints by the workers -- "which are working to the detriment of German manpower, through the relations between the adopted Gau and the adopted department.
All of these things can be stopped."
Now I am reading under Point B: "Each French worker in such a department knows exactly where and under what conditions he will have to work in Germany. He will be told about the locality in which he will have to work through German propaganda and enlistment material. He will be informed about all matters which are of interest to him. And that was the purpose of that arrangement. of the French workers.
Q Please answer my question with "yes" or "no". This arrangement was to bring about that questions which had not been settled between the French Departments and industries on the one hand, and the authorities in Germany under which French workers were to be used, were to be cleared and settled. That was the actual purpose, to clear the situation and to solve problems.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now.
(a recess was taken) BY M. HERZOG: beneath your control all the organizations of the Central Office of the 4-Year Plan which were concerned with the recruiting of labor? do with laborwere dissolved. Only Departments 5 and 6 of the Labor Ministry continued to deal with these matters. labor were transferred to you, and that as a result of this transfer, powers concerning regularization and regulative powers were also trans ferred? with my own task. The remaining functions of the Ministry of Labor remained entirely on its own, under theReichminister for Labor.
Q But within the cabinet you exerted the powers of a minister of the Reich, before the transfer; that is to say, as plenipotentiary for labor?
A Within the work of my department, as GBA. But I must emphasize that these departments were not under my jurisdiction; they were at my disposal. And that difference was very strongly noted at the time. It applied to the whole Ministry of Labor. trative autonomy in matters concerning labor?
A Not an autonomy, but only based on elections. In the case o f all decrees, I could not issue decrees everywhere, butcould only give instructions; and it was necessary to have the agreement of other administrative bodies and Reichsministries, and, of course, the fellow's agreement.
Q Did you not have from the Fuehrer carte blanche (full power) for the recruiting and the utilization of labor? steering and directing. If I may say so, it was never the case of the agent for labor and that is, of course, organization of labor, who employed these workers himself -- the firms employed the workers.
Q For the recruiting of labor you had full powers; isn't that true? ment of the officials concerned had been obtained. I myself didn't recruit laborers in France without the express agreement of the French government or their officials and collaborators. The French administration was included in such a case. agreements and obligations which were assumed in France by those whom you call, yourself, "the leaders of collaboration." You know better than any other that these leaders of collaboration, imposed upon France by the enemy, only engaged themselves and obligated themselves and that their acts were never ratified by the French people as an entity. Besides, these leaders of collaboration, whose testimony cannot be suspect to you, have revealed themselves pressure which was exerted upon them and we will discuss that now. Is it true that on the 16th of April 1942, that is to say, one month after your nomination, you stated in a letter to the defendant Rosenberg which states your program and which was presented to you today -- you included in this letter, the recruiting of foreign laborers in your program of the utilization of labor?
A I resent the expression "exploitation." By strictest orders by the Fuehrer, recruitment of foreign workers, that is true, had to be included in my program. in your program, 16 April 1942; you admitted this yesterday, and I ask you to confirm it.
A Yes, it is true. I only emphasize that I did it by the strictest orders from the Fuehrer.
Q Is it exact that this program of 16 April 1942; that is to say, three weeks after your nomination, you also included already the principle of forced recruiting?
recruitment didn't suffice. I said that yesterday.
Q Yes, you confirmed it. Do you remember the announcement that you made on the 29th of August 1942 -- this decree fixed by priority the utilization of labor in occupied territories; decree No.6 of the 22nd of August of the General Plenipotentiary for the utilization of labor. It was handed to the Tribunal as RS-17(?). Do you remember it? underneath the German administration?
AAs far as I can remember -- and I can't at the moment remember the exact wording of every paragraph of that decree -- there was an arrangement for the regulation of working conditions regarding those people who were taken in by German firms. The purpose was to prevent a muddle.
Q Is it exact that you went on a mission to Paris in August 1942? dates.
Q Is it exact that you went on a mission to Paris in January 1943?
Q Is it exact that you went on a mission to Paris in January 1944?
AAlso probable, yes, but I don't know the individual dates. the French de facto authorities, had published the legislative decrees of September 4, 1942, of 16 February 1943, and of 1 February 1944; isn't that true?
A I didn't understand your question exactly. authorities published the three big laws on forced labor of September 4, 1942, 16 February 1943, and February 1, 1944, that you went on missions to Paris in France?
with the French government, and I want to say to that, that for me and in accordance -
Q No, you will explain later. Do you recognize that in the course of these missions, you imposed on the French authorities the laws on forced labor?
A That isn't correct in that way. drafted under pressure from you?
A I deny that the word "pressure" is applicable. I negotiated properly with the French before such decrees and laws were published and I resent the word "pressure"; and there were witnesses during these negotiations. Speer had with you from the Fuehrer's headquarters on January 4 1943?
A Well, very probably. I have had several discussions with Speer and I don't know which particular one you are referring to. of this telephone conversation of January 4, 1943?
A Quite probably. I had several notes put to my files which might have dealt with these telephone conversations I had. to the Tribunal under the No. USA 194 and RS-62. I read that document or at least its first paragraph: "January 4, 1943. At eight o'clock in the evening, Minister Speer telephoned from the headquarters of the Fuehrer in order to inform that according to a decision of the Fuehrer, it is not necessary in the future, when specialists are employed for auxiliaries in France, to have any special respect for the French. One can also in that country use pressure or employ more severe measures in order to procure labor." I ask you, defendant, what you mean when you say that it is not necessary to have any special respect for the French?
A This note or rather this decision wasn't arrived at by me. This was information which came from the Fuehrer's headquarters, based on a decision made by the Fuehrer. In spite of that -- and I want to emphasize that particularly -- my attitude towards the French government did not change and it doesn't say so in this document either; just as before, I adhered to the same polite principle with which I used for these negotiations and I beg the Tribunal to ascertain, by means of a short statement, how these negotiations for the French government were conducted.
Q You will give it later in your interrogation. Do you remember the discussion that you had on the 12th of January 1943, at the German Embassy in Paris,with the French authorities? German Embassy in Paris.
Q That is exactly what I am asking you. Do you remember this conversation that you had with the French authorities on the 12th of January 1943?
Q Do you remember the persons who took part in this conversation?
A Yes; usually the French Prime Minister, Minister Bichelenne used to participate in such negotiations and on the German side, the Ambassador and on behalf of the military commander, Dr. Fischer, and Dr.Hildebrandt coming from me or some such official.
Q. And you do not remember what Laval said to you at this meeting of the 12th January?
A. Very many matters were discussed in great detail during such conferences, and I don't know what you mean. Q. Well, I will submit to you the minutes of this meeting. It is Document 809, which I submit to the Tribunal under the number RF-1509. more exactly, several declarations. THE PRESIDENT: Where shall we find them? M. HERZOG: It is in my document book, Mr. President. THE PRESIDENT: Oh yes, I have got it. M. HERZOG: It must be marked with a slip 809. BY M. HERZOG: Q. First, I read page 7 of the French text and of the German text:
"Gauleiter Saukel demands again 250,000 new workers. Gaulieter Saukel knows very well, and his offices have certainly informed him on this fact, the difficulties which the French Government faces and has assured in order to achieve the program. The Gaulieter must realize that as a result of the number of prisoners and workers who are already employed by Germany, the sending of another 250,000 workers will increase even further the difficulties of the French Government. I cannot conceal these difficulties from the Gaulieter because they are evident, and the Germans who are in Paris know these difficulties.
"The Gaulieter answers to me that they have had to overcome the same difficulties in Germany, and French industry must face them too now. It seems to me that I can remind him that Germany not only demands workers of France, but also is beginning to take away the machines from factories in order to transport them to Germany. France has nothing left. She still had, until now, the means of production. If these, too, are taken from her, France loses even the possibility of working.
"I do everything in order to facilitate the German victory, and you see that Laval could not be suspect to you, but I must also admit that German policy imposes upon me nearly every day heavier exactions, without these being able to be included within definite policy.
"Gaulieter Saukel can tell the German workers that they must work for Germany.
I cannot say that Frenchman are working for France. I see that in many fields the French Government cannot act.
One would almost believe that on the German side they attach no value to the good will of Frenchman, and that they are incluned to Institute in all of France a German administration. Mu task is being made more difficult every day. It is true that I do not allow myself to be discouraged, but I esteem, however, that it is my duty to remind the Gaulieter of the gravity of France-German relations, and of the impossibility of continuing along this path. It is no longer a matter of a policy of collaboration, but, on the French side, a policy of sacrifice, and on the German side, a policy of constraint."
I pass to the next, page, page 11:
"The present state of mind in France, the uncertainty concerning the means which the French Government possesses, the half-freedom in which it finds itself, all these do not give me the necessary authority to supply to Gaulieter Saukel an immediate reply. We can do nothing. We are not free to change salaries; we are not free to combat the black market; we can take no political measures without everywhere coming up against a German authority which has substituted itself for ourselves.
"I cannot guarantee measures which I have not taken. I am persuaded that the Fuehrer does not know that the French Government cannot act. There cannot be, in one country, two governments on questions which do not concern directly the security of the occupation forces".
I skip two more pages, to page 18, and I read only this sentence:
"It is not possible for me to have only power of attorney for the German measures of constraint". you two questions concerning it.
The first question is: What did you answer to the President Laval when he made this declaration to you?
The second one is: Do you not think that there is there the proof of the pressure which you contest?
A. First of all, if the Tribunal would permit it, I should have to read my reply to President Laval. But then, it has been proved, and this has been confirmed to me by President Laval, that I did not negotiate directly with him always, and in spite of the fact that I had orders not to conduct political conversations, but only to deal with my actual task, I did always report to the Fuehrer about these matters.
But I think that the tone of my reply was definitely without reproach with reference to these negotiations which I conducted.
Q. That is not the question that I asked you. I asked you what you answered him when he made this remark to you, when he said to you, for instance, that it was not possible for him to act with power of attorney for German measures of constraint.
A. I would have to read my answers. I myself cannot now remember them.
Q. Di you therefore contest the fact that this represents pressure?
A. President Laval did not complain about me in this connection. He was complaining about general conditions in France, because this was the time of occupation. The situation was that there was a German occupation army.
Q. Well, I am going to submit to you Document -
DR. SERVATIUS (Interposing): Mr. President, regarding the note for the files, I should like to draw your attention to an error of translation which will lead to considerable misunderstanding. According to this note, it says that the recruitment could be started with emphasis and more sever measures, and the word "emphasis" has been translated by "pressure" into the English. But that is he meant. It isn't"pressure"; it is "Nachdruck", "emphasis". That means that the next authority can be approached with energy.
THE PRESIDENT: I am told that the translation we have got is "emphasis".
DR. SERVATIUS: "Pressure".
THE PRESIDENT: No, No The translation is "emphasis". It is in this document, and the translation in English is "emphasis".
DR. SERVATIUS: Oh, I had the French translation.
M. HERZOG: I am going to submit to you Document -
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): Is this document in the PS series?
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President, it is a now document which I submitting now, a French document which will bear No. RF-1509.
THE PRESIDENT: Where did this document come from?
M. HERZOG: That document comes, Mr. President, from the archives of the Majestic Hotel in Paris, where were the German offices in Paris.
Some months ago, these archives were found again in Berlin, and we have extracted from the the Saukel documents.
as well as that of the documents which I intend to submit to the Tribunal in the course of my cross examination. Perhaps, as the document is in French, the Tribunal would like me to read it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, read it, will you.
M. HERZOG: You mean this "Process Verbale?"
THE PRESIDENT: What is this "Proces Verbale?" Who is it identified by?
M. HERZOG: This "Proces Verbale" is identified by two persons, by Commandant Henri, French liaison officer at the American Documentation Center in Berlin, and by my colleague M. Gerthofer, who, with Commandant Henri, took these archives.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you had better read this Proces Verbale so it will go into the record.
"We, Charles Gerthoffer, Substitute, at the Court of the Seine, on duty with the International Military Tribunal for the major war criminals, having gone to Berlin to the offices of the Ministerial Collecting Center, Commandant Henry, Chief of the French Mission, gave to us, with the authority of Colonel Helm of the American Army, Chief of the 6889 Berlin Collecting Center, seven files from the Archives of the military commander in France concerning forced labor and registered as M.C.C. under the numbers:
3 DS, 1 to 213; 40 DS, Nos. 1 to 230; 5 DS, Nos. 1-404; 6 DS, Nos. 1 to 218; 7 DS, Nos. 1 to 118, and one annex, 1 to 121; 50 DS, Nos. 1 to 121; 50 DS, Nos. 1 to 55; 71 DS, items 1 to 40.
"We declared to Commandant Henry that we took the specified files in order to submit them to the International Military Tribunal for the major war criminals in order that they might be used in the course of the proceedings and that they will thereafter be turned over to the French Ministry of Justice, whose property they remain.
"This document, made In five copies of which one is to serve as an affidavit for the International Military Tribunal for the major war criminals.
"Signed/.Charles Gerthoffer." I have a second certificate.
THE WITNESS: May I make a remark regarding the first document, please?
M. HERZOG: I will ask you not to interrupt me.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, the documents camefrom the Hotel Majestic, did they?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was theplace -
M. HERZOG: In Paris where the offices of the German Military Command in France and the various occupation offices were situated. These documents which had vanished at the time of the liberation, have been located again at the Ministerial Collecting Center in Berlin. The document which I have just submitted to you is a certificate of origin of these files, and I also have the certificate of origin of the documents which I have extracted from these files and which I am now ready to read to the Tribunal, if the Tribunal so desires.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was the place where theGerman Military Government was established in Paris; is that right?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President, unless I am mistaken. That is what I believe. Does the Tribunal desire that I should read to it the other certificate of origin; that is to say, concerning the documents in themselves
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you had already read it.
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President. I am submitting to the Tribunal two certificates of origin. The first, the one which I have just read, is the certificate of origin of seven files which contain very large numbers of documents. From these seven files we have extracted only a certain number of documents which we are submitting to the Tribunal, and that is why, after having presented the certificate -
THE PRESIDENT: It only says that the documents which you are submitting are documents which came from those files?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. Chairman.
THE PRESIDENT: And this shows it came from the Hotel Majestic, which was the place where the German Military Administration was carried on. You will put the second document on the record?
M. HERZOG: I submit both of them.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you offering in evidence the original German documents?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President. BY M. HERZOG: will submit to you document No. 1342-PS.
I think that here there has been an error. I understood that you said did I deny that there was pressure upon the Tribunal. I respect this Tribunal much too much to try to exert pressure upon them. You see, I understood you asked me whether I denied that I exerted pressure upon the Tribunal, and, of course, that question I had to answer with No. on the French authorities, I submit to you a new document. It is document 1342-PS, which has already been submitted to the Tribunal under No. 63 R. F. This document represents the minutes of a meeting which you held on January 11, 1943 in Paris with various German authorities, occupation authorities.
Do you remember that on this occasion you made a declaration concer ing your relations with the Vichy Government? I will read this dec ration to you. It is on page 4 of the French and German texts.
Q I will read that declaration:
"The French Government--" It is the last paragraph before the end of page 4.
"The French Government is composed of specialists in delay. If the first 250,000 workers had arrived in time--"
THE PRESIDENT: It does not appear to be the last one on page four of our copy.
M HERZOG: The last paragraph but one on page 4 of the French text.
THE PRESIDENT: That begins, "It is regretable --"
M HERZOG: That is the paragraph, Mr. President. I am quoting the second sentence. BY M. HERZOG:
Q "The French Government is composed of specialists in delay. If the first 250,000 workers had arrived on time, that is to say, before autumn, in Germany, after the negotiations had already begun with the French Government in the preceding spring, we might perhaps have been able to mobilize technicians earlier and to set up now divisions and not reach the siege of Stalingrad. In any case, the Fuehrer is now absolutely decided to reign in France, perhaps even without a French government." sure which you were exerting on the French Government?
A This is not a conference with a French Government. This is a statement of fact. French Government. I asked you what you meant when you stated that the Fuehrer was disposed to reign in France, even without the French Government.
the Fuehrer, for which I am not responsible. I merely repeated it, and in any case it was never realized.
Q Why did you transmit it to the occupation authorities i* France in the course of a conference that you were holding with them concerning the recruitment of labor? situation as I saw it at the time.
Q But don't you think that in expressing to them this declaration of the Fuehrer, you were making of it an element of pressure? cause it was merely a transmission of the state of affairs. I did not tell the French Government that the Fuehrer would overthrow the and that therefore they would have to do that. I did not behave li* that. state in the course of a conference that the Fuehrer was decided to reign in France, even without a French Government? Did you say that? I ask that you answer me Yes or No. January 1944 in Paris with various German personalities? but I cannot remember at the moment what it was. January, and you do not remember the German personalities who were present at this meeting? tell you now which one you are talking about. Of course, I cannot remember, either, what the actual subjects of the conversation were. Abetz, von Stuelpnagel, Blumentritt and others. Do you remember that in the course of this discussion you submitted to your listener.
the draft of a law which you had drafted and which you wanted to impose on the French authorities?
A I was not trying to impose it. I was trying to discuss it. I was negotiating. I was not trying to impose it upon them. The wording of the record shows that quite clearly. which you transmitted to the French Government?
A That I do not deny. That I submitted such a draft law and that I drafted it, that is something I don't deny.
Q Do you admit that you yourself drafted this draft law?
A Yes, but I can't tell you which one you mean. Tribunal under the number RF-1512. It represents the minutes of this meeting of January 14, 1944 and it is document number 813. and yourself.
THE PRESIDENT: Can you tell us where it comes in this brief of yours? Because it isn't marked on mine.
M. HERZOG: Document 813, Mr President. It comes immediately after the one which I have just submitted. It must come immediately after 1342-PS.
I have just submitted to the Tribunal document 1342-PS. Then I skipped one document, which I am not utilizing. Then comes 813 after that one.
THE PRESIDENT: I see, yes/ BY M. HERZOG:
Q I read from paragraph III: "The German delegate elaborated a draft law for the French Government." I stop quoting there. you submitted to the French Government?
A That I do not deny; I had to submit a proposal. However, it was based on mutual negotiations.
Q Do you contest the fact that you imposed this law by pressure? not deny. I negotiated about it. mission which you had achieved in Paris in June 1944?
A It was my duty to report if I made such journeys. They were tasks of the Fuehrer which I was carrying out. the Tribunal under number RF-70. On two occasions, in the course of this report you speak of German demands. Do you not believe that to give an account to the Fuehrer of German demands having been accepted is to give an account to him of the success of the pressure which you exerted? about in this world.The German Government made demands; because of those demand.
there were negotiations with the French Government, and they were considered by me to be legal. its agent, were making demands? Please answer yes or no.
A The German Government was making demands; yes, that is true.
Q Thank you. And the demands or exactions -- did they not, at times, take the form of veritable ultimatums?
A That I am well aware of. I can only say that I was very polite when talking to the French Prime Minister and that our negotiations ran very smoothly. That was expressed by him, and it is in the record. of 1944? Do you not remember that you demanded this mobilization in a veritable ultimatum. Answer yes or no.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, I think you might put to him the last sentence in the letter of the 25th of January 1944, 556-PS. BY M. HERZOG:
Q "I have, however, let no doubts exist concerning the rigor of the measures which would be taken should the demands concerning the transfer of workers not be met."
Q You admit it?
put down in this document. our liberation,you addressed a letter to Ambassador Abetz?
Q Well, I am going to produce this letter. It is French document 822, which I submit to the Tribunal under the number 1513-RF.
"June 6, 1944. Paris.
"Your Excellency the Ambassador, and my dear Party Comrade Abetz:
"The invitation which has been long ex ected has finally begun. This, therefore, ends the period of waiting for the Arbeitseinsatz, whichwas used an unspoken pretext for the fact that delivery of manpower into the Reich was impossible, owing to the political atmosphere reigning in the country."
"Now that the German soldier must again fight and bleed in the region of the Channel, now that the struggle can extend, hour by hour, to many other French territories, any call or any words from Laval can be of no weight whatsoever. The only language which can now be understood is that of the German soldier. Laval to finally do something which will certainly be very difficult for him; that is to say, that he should at last deign to sign the order for the conscription of the class of 1944.
"I do not wish to be kept waiting any longer. neither do I wish to leave with an opinion which might be unjust, but which, at the same time, will force itself upon me, concerning the temporizing of the French Government "I beg you therefore, instantly, to obtain -- by tomorrow morning, 10 a.m. -- the signature of the President of the French Council of Ministers on the decree for the mobilization of the class of 1944, or else to inform me directly in the event that Laval answers with a categorical 'no'. I would not accept, under any form, dilatory excuses since all technical preparations regarding the division of the departments, as well as the channels of transport, have either been made or are now at the point of being made, thanks to our constant discussions."