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."
Do you not call this a veritable ultimatum? and nothing else. Any pressure,or any threats against Laval, could not be used by me.
Q What did you mean when you said, "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 should answer with a categorical 'no'. I would not accept, under any form, dilatory excuses."
Is that not an ultimatum? I had to leave, because I had orders to leave. an ultimatum, defendant Sauckel? Prime Minister would sign it or not.
Q Thank you. The Tribunal will appreciate that. of your various actions?
A So far as I can remember -- and I can't be exact offhand -- there were seven to eight hundred thousand French workers used in Germany. However I can't tell you exactly. of workers for forced labor was regulated by the legislation of the occupation army?
A I don't know about the legislation of the occupation army; the Administration of Labor did that. forced labor in Belgium and in the North of France?
A We called it military duty in accordance with German law. That is correct.
in Belgium and in the North of France, signed the order of October 6, 1942, and did it under pressure from you?
A No, he didn't sign it under pressure from me, because I talked to him about it and there wasn't any argument. This happened at the request of the Reich Government and the Fuehrer, everyone. testified before a French Magistrate on November 27, 1945. I submitted this interrogatory under No. RF-15 in the course of my exposition in January of this year. I read from page 1. I take up question 3:
" Question: Will you swear that you will give the truth, nothing but the truth, the whole truth?
" Answer: I swear.
"Question: October 6, 1942, there appeared an order which instituted forced labor in Belgium and in the departments of the North of France "-
"Answer: For the north of France and of Belgium, yes.
"Question: Does the witness remember having promulgated this order?
"Answer: I do not remember exactly the text of this order, because it was done as the result of a long argument, a long fight -with Sauckel.
"Question: Did you have any difficulties with Sauckel?
"Answer: I was fundamentally opposed to the institution of forced labor and it was only after having received orders that I consented to edict the order." under pressure from you?
Q You dispute the testimony of General von Falkenhausen? testimony today. The Tribunal will appreciate it.
this version is not completely correct. Legislation regarding labor in occupied territories wasn't carried out on my order but upon order of the Fuehrer, and I have not had any discussions about that with General von Falkenhausen. We had a very agreeable chat and he introduced the law. I do not remember that I had had any difficulties in that connection. that time he gave all his instructions on Hitler's orders at the time. I myself had neither arguments nor difficulties with him. forced labor was regulated by the Reichs Kommissariat for Labor?
A Please, will you hear the Defendant Seyss-Inquart about that? The expression is entirely new to me. In France, Belgium and Holland this matter was dealt with only through the administration of the labor departments, that is to say -
Q Who signed the orders concerning forced labor in Holland?
A I assume that Mr. Seyss-Inquart did. constituted a local application of the general program which you were charged with achieving? Holland the Defendant Seyss-Inquart was only implementing your program of forced labor?
A It was a realization of the Fuehrer's labor program as he, the Fuehrer, had ordered it. the implementation of the laws on forced labor?
A Not to investigate. I was only in Belgium and Holland for a very short time. I had conferences there with the department heads and according to my recollection I visited labor departments there and inspected them. measures for the implementation of the labor program, isn't that true?
A I didn't work it out during the journey; I talked about it -but of course I used the travel time to work.
Q I submit to you Document PS-556, RF 67. It is a letter which you wrote to the Fuehrer on August 13, 1943. In this you declare, paragraph 1 of the letter:
"My Fuehrer, I take the liberty of informing you of my return from France, Belgium and Holland, where I went on official business. In the course of difficult and long negotiations I imposed upon the occupied territories of the West for the five last months of the year 1943 the program which is indicated here below, and I also prepared detailed measures for its implementation in France with the military commander, the German Embassy, the French Government; in Belgium with the military commanders and in Holland with the officers of the Reich Kommissariat". in order to prepare detailed measures?
A. I have never denied that, and I want to say that I resent that expression. It was only the tendency as you represented it, that was wrong. It says quite clearly that I discussed, not prepared.
Q. One last question on this set of problems: hat is your estimate of the number of Dutch laborers who were deported into Germany?
A. I can't tell you exactly from memory how many Dutch workers were employed on the basis of contracts end on the basis of these laws. May be there were two to three hundred thousand, but maybe more. I can't tell you offhand what these Dutch figures were.
Q Thank you. Is it correct that the forced recruitment of foreign workers was implemented with great brutality?
A. Regarding the instructions which I published, there was talk about that sufficiently in detail yesterday. My instructions are available practically without a gap, as to brutality measures -
Q Defendant, you weren't asked about your instructions, but whether brutailty was shown. If you know, you can answer.
A. I cannot know. From time to time I heard about infringements and I stopped them at once. I protested against them at once, if I did hear of them.
BY M. HERZOG: the recruiting of workers was implemented in the occupied territories?
A. I received protests, to the extent that they were discussed yesterday with my Defense Counsel.
Q. And when you received those protests, what did you do?
A. I had those cases investigated and furthermore, measures were left to the authorities concerned. I did everything at my end and that is something that will be testified to here, that such events were in future to be prevented and stopped.
Q. Is it correct that you appealed for the help of the Armed Forces to insure the recruiting of foreign workers in those areas where the Army was exercising jurisdiction and through the Quartermaster General of the Army.
A. I approached the supreme military commanders and passed orders on to them.
Q. Is it correct that you asked the military authorities that commanders of troops should be put at the disposal of your offices and services?
a. I do not remember such commanders. There was the labor attachment there. What is correct is that in areas whore there were uprisings or partisan battles, I asked that those areas should be pacified, so that administration could once more be possible there, administration which had been disturbed or interrupted.
Q. You therefore asked that the commanders of troops should be put at your disposal?
A. Not at my disposal. It wasn't my task to pacify those areas. It was ones of the prerequisites of the fulfillment of my own tasks that I could only carry them out if the pacification would once more allow proper administration -- but not recruitment of labor.
Q. Did you not ask that these troop commanders should participate in the tasks assigned to the service for procurement of labor? I submit to you Document 815, which I submit to the Tribunal under the number RF-1514. It is a letter of April 18 1944, from General Field Marshal von Runstedt and which is addressed to you. I read the first paragraph of it:
"The General Delegate for the recruiting and utilization of labor" -that is you, isn't it -- "has addressed" -
A. That's me, and there was a department in France, too -
(Continuing) -- "Was addressed a request for the intervention, that is to say, to the Commander-in-Chief of the West, in order that in sectors stationed, the Commanders of these units should receive the order to where there were units belonging to the Commander-in-Chief of the West facilitate the execution of the tasks assigned to the service of procurement of labor by putting commanders of troops at his disposal". should be put at your disposal?
A. I personally didn't ask for them. This appears to be the office -
Q. Are you not the General Delegate for the Recruiting and Utilization of Labor?
A. Yes, but this order isn't known to me personally.
Q. This request, do you know whether it was seconded by the Defendant Speer?
A. I can't tell you.
Q. I submit to you Document 824-PS -
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you better put that over until after the adjournment.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours).
(Hearing reconvened at 1400 hours, May 30, 1946)
M. HERZOG: Mr. President, I believe that Mr. Dodd has a statement to make to the Tribunal.
THE MARSHAL: May It please the Tribunal, the report is made that the defendant Jodl is absent.
MR. DODD: Document number 3057-PS, concerning which Mr. Herzog questioned the defendant this morning, was in the document book offered by the United States with reference to the slave labor program but it was not offered in evidence and I found the reference in the record at page 1397 of the transcript for the 13th day of December, 1945, and the President of the Tribunal particularly asked why we had not read document 3057*PS and I answered that we had intended to offer it but that counsel for Sauckel told me that his client maintained that he had been coerced into the making of the statement and for that reason we preferred not to offerit and were not offering it.
THE PRESIDENT: I want to announce that the Tribunal will rise this afternoon at half past four to sit in closed session.
THE WITNESS: May I be permitted to give my explanation to that document?
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY M. HERZOG:
Q What document are you speaking of? von Rundstedt. In this document we are concerned with a letter, which, of course, is addressed to me.
THE PRESIDENT: I did not hear you ask any question. Did you ask your question?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President. It is the document which I presented before the session was ended and the document states that the general delegate for the recruiting and using of labor asked that commandos of troops should be put at his disposal.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean 815 -- yes, very well.
MR. HERZOG: That is exactly right, Mr. President.
BY M. HERZOG: fact that you requested troop commandos? for I personally did not receive this letter. Instead it was sent to Paris to the office which applied. This letter is not initialed by me. But in order to clarify my position I should like to emphasize specifically that I did not demand troops in order to recruit workers. I asked for troops when in areas the administrative procedure could not be carried through because of resistance activities by the resistance movement. In that connection there is an errorin this letter. I did not received this letter myself. It is initialed by the office in Paris. Tribunal under number 1515 RF. This document 824, is a letter from the commander-in-chief of the west, from his headquarters, dated July 24, 1944. I read it:
"One can conclude from all this that on the order of the Fuehrer and after the abrogation of all dispositions, which are contrary to the desires of the general delegate for labor --".
This general delegate for labor is yourself, is not that true?
"--and of Reich Minister Speer must in principle be established. Following my telegram and following letters, the conference of ministers of the 11th of July in the Reich Chancellory and concerning which the commander-in-chief of the west has been informed by him, the other existing disposition is to remain in full force and effect without taking into account hesitations which night concern security and order within the country. Recruiting will have to start everywhere where the matters referred to in his telegram are applicable. The Fuehrer has therefore decided that in the sector of the army no methods of coercion will be used against the population as long as the latter will be helpful to the Wehrmacht. However, the recruiting of volunteers must be handled energetically amongst refugees from the combat zones. Moreover, all means will be considered good in order to recruit as much labor as possible from elsewhere by the means of which the Wehrmacht disposes." Speer troop commandos went about the recruiting of labor? this in the way pictured. At that time the commander-in-chief under the stre* of combat conditions was in a very serious position. But I can testify that after the date of the 25 of July, 1945, these things did not apply and were not effective for the withdrawal of German troops had gone on much too fast so that this decree, which had been given out by the Fuehrer, was in no way effective any longer.
Q Do you remember the conference, the ministers' conference of the 11th of July, 1944, to which the document which I have just read refers?
Q Do you remember the persons who were present at this meeting?
Q I submit to you the minutes of this meeting. It is document 3819-PS, which has been handed to the Tribunal under number -
THE PRESIDENT: the Tribunal would like you to read the last page of document 824, that is not the last, but the last on that page beginning with "Enfin --". It is on page 346 of the French translation.