The total of that figure is most exact, 5,672,000. In spite of the fact that further foreign civilian workers came in this figure, did not increase considerably and that is proved by the fact that, as I said yesterday, civilian workers who came from western, southern and south-easterly territories mostly had contracts to work for six months and whenever possible and under my care, these contracts were obse rved, because if I had not insisted that they be adhered to, I could not have had any now workers coming in.
If, during six months I occupied several hundred thousand and then returned then, that figure would shift again and again as they went home. reported as a total figure as a certain date and the returning men must be deducted.
There is a French document, which is a report from Paris. My counsel will be good enough later on to the PS number. That document shows that French workers were shown in total, not in accordance with my office, but in accordance with a statement of the French Embassy, and that eight hundred thousand workers from France were taken to Germany, but that in 1944 there were only four hundred thousand in Germany on the strength of these work contracts, because as such contracts would expire daily, thousands of them would travel back. You could say that roughly fifty percent of the contracts were expiring and fifty percent were working and that is an exact statement, made to the best of my conscience.
Q. As to what these work contracts actually were, I will speak about later. what criminal methods were used to mobilize workers; as to how this was done in the east I will speak to you about later.
I would like you to confirm the figures of your report, 5,124,000. Is this an exact figure or is it not an exact figure? I am waiting for your answer. I do not ask for an explanation, I want you to say whether this figure is exact or not.
A. It is correct for the purpose of this document, but it was constantly changed for the reason I have mentioned.
Q. This figure refers to 24 July 1942, it is quite clear to every-
body. Now, take up the second document, 1734-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: 1739? BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. 1739-PS, last page. I read the following sentence:
"Only then can we be sure that a vast number of foreign workers and women workers in the territory of the Reich, which reached seven million, including all working prisoners of war, will furnish the greatest aid to German war industry."
Does this sentence mention seven million?
A. The figure of seven million quoted included all prisoners of war used for work at that particular moment.
Q. Yes, I know that. I have read this. But is this figure of seven million, is this the figure mentioned in the document?
A. It is written in that document, yes.
Q. Is this figure an exact figure?
A. That is a correct figure and I am asking the Tribunal also that I be allowed to read the two following sentences because you are accusing me of criminal methods. I have used my entire knowledge, energy and all the influence I had to prevent criminal methods and that is proof, these two following sentences which I shall now read.
Q. But, I am obliged to interrupt you again.
A. Please, may I add to the answer which I have already given and be allowed the possibility and may be granted by the Tribunal that I be allowed to read the following sentences under -
Q. Defendant Sauckel -
THE PRESIDENT: Let him read the two sentences he wants to read.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: But they are absolutely irrelevant to the question of imported workers to Germany.
THE PRESIDENT: I have not got a translation of the document, so I cannot tell. I want to hear him read the sentences. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. Then read them, please.
A. Beaten, undernourished and half desperate eastern workers, for instance, would be more of a burden to the war economy than an aid to it.
The prerequisite is that all offices and factories concerned have to be quite clear about this point, and this is my aim". tiousness through those two sentences and how I looked after my task which was a very difficult one for me.
THE PRESIDENT: Now defendant, will you kindly answer the questions and only explain when it is necessary as an explanation of the answer. All you were asked was whether the figure of 5,124,000 now in the first document was correct and whether the figure of seven million in the second document was correct and you said both of then were. BY THE WITNESS: I have already asnwered that it is correct, that the figure seven million -
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we do not went any more explanation. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. I can understand perfectly well that you are not interested in increasing these terrible figures even by a unit, not to speak of millions.
Yesterday you stated that in '43 two million further came to Germany and in '44 a further million.
A I must definately rectify that. I did not say that at all. What is correct is that beginning in July 1942 and until the end of '43 approximately there were about two million foreign workers who came to Germany, not only in '43. From February '43 until the end of '43, for instance, only one million came to Germany because we already had considerable difficulties at that time but from June or July '42 until the end of '42 about a million arrived and in about one year and a half a total of about two million did come.
Q As to how many you got in '42, that is already known to us. Yesterday you stated quite definately that in '43 two million came in, Is that right? I am speaking of 1943. ly then it is not correct. What is correct is that from July '42 until the end of '43 about two million foreign workers were being employed in Germany.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is not really interested in the exact number of foreign workers who came to Germany. It does not seem to us to make very much difference whether five million or six million or seven million came there. It is extremely difficult to follow the figures.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, I do not wish to determine with mathamatical exactness the numbers of workers brought to Germany but I consider it quite indispensable to grasp the scale of these crimes and therefore I would like Sauckel to determine how many workers were brought to Germany during the war.
THE PRESIDENT: I just told you we do not consider it important. You say that you do not wish to ascertain with mathematical accuracy but we have spent a considerable time in attempting to do so.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: This can be attributed to the fact that the defendant Sauckel is not answering the questions put to him. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: from occupied territories as slave labor, do you consider these methods as honorable methods of warefare and based on the ethics of moral exigencies?
Karr following statement.
It was my own firm, personal conviction it is no crime. tion to the answer. I have already given the answer.
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. General, you asked the defendant whether he consisdered it honorable. Now, he is perfectly entitled to answer that question and to answer it in his own way.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Let him answer yes or no.
THE PRESIDENT: It is not a question which admits of the answer yes or no. the question whether a thing is honorable. He is entitled to answer it freely.
THE WITNESS: After I have given a clearance, I beg that I may be allowed to state that to the best of my confidence I could not be convinced that I was committing a crime, and that I may read the principle sentences from the document Sauckel 86 as proof of my conviction.
These were the instructions which I had given to my department:
"We are not here concerned", I quote, "with material matters. I emphasize again, most definitely, that we are dealing with people, millions of people, every single one of whom, whether they want to or not, must, from his point of view--be he a German or a foreign worker--be critical. The performance of a human being, on the other hand, be he a member of our nation or not a member of our nation--that is, a foreign worker--be he a friend or be he an enemy, that performance must always depend on the question of whether he recognizes within himself that he is treated justly, or whether he arrives at the conclusion that he is unjustly treated and exposed to cruelties". ments:
"You must be just. Many questions will come to you; you cannot always answer them."
THE PRESIDENT: We don't want to go into a very long speech, you know, about a question like that. I mean, you don't want to read all your instructions to your subordinates.
THE WITNESS: I shall only read two more sentences, Your Lordship, if I may.
"The worker's life is so varied that you cannot put it in even many volumes. That is the feeling which every man has-
THE PRESIDENT Defendant, that is enough . We have heard enough. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Defendant Sauckel, in July of 1944 a meeting was held in Hitler's offices, as to how one should treat foreign workers as a result of the successful advance of the Allied Armies. Do you have any knowledge of this meeting?
A May I ask you to give me the date again please?
Q It was in July of 1944. Do you know anything about this meeting, or don't you?
A I cannot remember for certain. Will you please put a document to me? I can not remember a meeting in June or July because from about the 20th of June, 1944, I was never admitted to the Fuehrer concerning any patters.
Q Then I do not need anything else. That means you do not know anything about this meeting. to Germany used? Were they utilized in war industry and ammunition industry? Is that correct? ment industry. The armament industry is a very wide field, and it is not identical with the manufacture of weapons and ammunition. Within the armament industry all such products like matches, for example, and some types of guns were included, which could be used in any way to supply the army. That means that this conception is a very wide one, and you must realize that it excludes the manufacture of ammunition and weapons. branches of the civilian and war economic system, such as agriculture mines, handicraft, and all that. It was broken down into three stages: time.
THE PRESIDENT: Here, we don't want a lecture upon that, you know. All you were asked was whether they were brought there for work in the armament industry.
THE WITNESS: Some of them. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: to Germany were mainly used in Germany's war industry for war aims. Is that correct? I mean, in the broad sense of the word. tirely to the conduct of the war by Germany. Do you admit that?
A That is too wide a conception. My own views under which I acted at the time excluded the word "aggressive".
Q Please answer briefly if you can do so. Do you admit it or don't you?
bor in the occupied territories has already been clarified. Now I would like to go into the part played by the various ministries. ment agencies of Germany, played an immediate part in the mobilization and the utilization of foreign manpower? For example, the Ministry of Occupied Territories in the East, the Ministry of Armament, and the OKW were already mentioned here. Please enumerate them.
A. Your delegation has submitted a plan, Mr. Prosecutor, which contained small mistakes, which I haven't seen myself. That plan in its original was submitted to me. At any rate, that plan -- after the small mistakes have been rectified -- is clear and gives you the best explanation.
Q. Your defense counsel has stated here that this plan is not quite accurate. Therefore, I ask you which ministries of Nazi Germany, or other governmental agencies, played an immediate part in the mobilization and utilization of manpower, besides these which I have already mentioned.
THE PRESIDENT: General, he says that it is substantially correct, and that there was only one minor alteration suggested in it. Certainly that is sufficient for us.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: But the defense counsel for Sauckel stated himself that there are a number of errors. However, I will try to facilitate this task. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. Please tell me what part was played in this matter by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for instance.
A. The Foreign Ministry had the following connection with this matter. embassies or German delegations were acting. Following that negotiations would then go on, usually under the chairmanship of the head of that delegation or embassy. The Foreign Office always made every attempt to have such negotiations conducted in a proper and correct form.
Q. On the 4th of January, 1944, a meeting was held in Hitler's office. This is document 1292-PS. In point 4 of the record of this meeting we read that the General Plenipotentiary for the Utilization of Manpower must, before taking measures, contact the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. What did that mean in this particular case?
A. In this particular case it was meant to indicate that if I had to carry on negotiations with the French or the Italian Government, I would first get in touch with the Foreign Ministry.
Q. After this meeting which occurred on the 4th of January, 1944 -that is, on the 5th of January, 1944 -- you sent a letter to Lammers, in which you mentioned the necessity of issuing a special order as a result of this meeting so that all aid should be given you by the following agencies -- and I will enumerate them: The Reichsfuehrer SS, the Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fieldmarshal Keitel, the Minister for the Occupied Territories in the East, Rosenberg, the Governer General, Reich Commissars, and others. Do you remember this letter?
A. I remember that letter, but I want you to put it before me because I can't remember the details contained therein.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the number of that document, General?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: That is number 1292-PS, My Lord. It is at page 6 in the Russian text. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. Have you found the place?
A. Yes. Is it the last page?
Q. Yes. That means you considered that all these agencies were to participate in this or that way in the carrying out of measures for the mobilization and utilization of man power. Is that correct?
A That is correct. And may I please make the following statement in that connection? It is obvious that I myself could not do things without informing high authorities of the Reich. It is true that I was attempting to work correctly and that I was working wisely in the Reich, and interfering with other spheres of administration.
Q But I would like to ascertain this. The carrying out of these criminal measures by the Hitler government was accomplished withthe add of the entire state mechanism of Nazi Germany and the government agencies of the Reich; is that correct?
A I object to the word "criminal" in that way; and in the re-examination I want my defense counsel to examine me on that point.
Q It is not a question of the question. But is it correct? or not?
A I must be allowed to explain myself. Regarding the recruiting of workers and their signing up for German construction, the person who was responsible for this, the chief of the commissioner's office or of the District administration, would act. I must emphasize that I could not issue laws, and I was not allowed to do so. I could not interfere with the administration of the State. That was true with every country in the world.
Q Yes. But you were obliged to coordinate all the work of these state agencies. That is the task that was assigned to you. jurisdiction to assist the workers of the state.
Q No; that is not quite so. I did not want to take up this question. But I see that I must return to it and take it up again, for you seem to minimize your part in this action.
A But I must reply to the word "minimize". The distribution of workers in the Reich was my job. It was my main task, and it concerned 30,000,000 people. So it is not a question of minimizing. I did my best to direct these matters in an orderly manner; and it was done. Such were my duties. I must not try to minimize anything.
It was my task, my duty, and my mission.
Q We need not "polemize" on this subject. we will return to the question of government.
A I must apologize to you if you misunderstood me. I am not entitled to polemic, but I am asking that I may present my views regarding this task, because that was the most personal task I had. This document is No. 265. I will read a few excerpts from it, and this will show what your powers were.
THE PRESIDENT: what is the number of it?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: It is U.S.S.R. 365.
THE PRESIDENT: Has it get a PS number?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: No, This is a Soviet exhibit. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Please read Part 4. It says, The general plenipotentiary for the utilization of manpower has the following powers for the solution of tasks assigned to him: the power which has been assigned to him by the Fuehrer to issue orders to the higher Reich agencies, to the party and organizations dependent on the party, to the Reichfuehrers, to the governors, to the military leaders, and the heals of the administrative agencies.
That is what we read in part 4 of this order. I believe, therefore, that you were entrusted as general plenipetentiary for the utilization of manpower with extraordinary powers. Is that correct?
A That is correct. And I want to state in connection with this point that that was limited to my particular sphere. A construction directive of a party character had to be put before me first. And I want to draw your attention to the fact that my officials in the department were limited in their action even further. A witness will make a statement in that connection. and each of them in his own sphere, participated in the carrying out of measures relating to the deportation of slave labor from occupied territories? Please enumerate them.
A (No response) direct leader?
not be conscious of the fact that on the basis of proper recruiting, and decrees, there could be the taking away of population. Measures regarding detail, I should not -
THE PRESIDENT: (Interposing) The question was, Did the defendant Goering participate with you in the bringing in of foreign workers, into Germany? Youdo not seem to me to be answering it at all.
THE WITNESS: In this question regarding the introduction of foreign workers I was directly under the Reichsmarshal of the GermanReich.
THE PRESIDENT: Then why don't you say so? BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
criminal measures?
THE PRESIDENT: General Alexandrov, when you want to ask a question of that sort, I think it would be much better that you should not allege the fact that it is a crime. If you Want to knew whether the defendant Goering took part with this defendant in the work that he was doing, you can refer to that without calling it a crime; and then he perhaps will answer you more easily.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Yes, My Lord. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: carrying out of these measures on the diplomatic line, and did he sanction the violation of international treaties and conventions, referring to the violation -
THE PRESIDENT: (Interposing) There again, these defendants are saying that there was no violation of international law; so the question I should put to him is, Did von Ribbentrop participate with him in these measures?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I want to know now what part Ribbentrop played in the utilization and the procurement of manpower; and I would like the defendant Sauckel to answer that question.
THE WITNESS: The part played by defendant Ribbentrop was that he had conferences with foreign statesmen, or foreign authorities in the occupied territories, and in neutral and allied countries abroad, which he arranged. And he attached considerable importance to the condition that they should be carried out correctly and under the best possible conditions for the foreign workers which were negotiated for. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: concerning the utilization of prisoners of war by German industries do with these measures? one single occasion during a meeting the date of which I cannot remember.
It took place in our chancellery. I think it was in 1944. Minister Lammers was present. Apart from that I had no conferences of any kind with Kaltenbrunner, and I made no arrangements with him regarding the employment of workers. the mobilization of manpower? not a task of the police. And once again I shall ask my defense counsel to consider my instructions which are available, and then he should submit them to the Tribunal, because they show how the tasks were divided between the police and my department. They show it clearly and irrefutably. these measures, or did it not? sans made the carrying out of my task impossible. In White Ruthenia many Burgemeisters were murdered by partisans. Documents will show that.
Q But even in normal circumstances, wasn't the mobilization carried out with the aid of the police?
A I shall tell you most directly. In occupied territories in Europe, there were some 1,500 districts. In these districts, there were 1,700 deaprtments. They were inhabited partly by German civil servants. Apart from that, these departments in the Soviet zone alone had about 1,000 Russian workers who had already worked in Germany, and they had the job of recruiting others. Considering that this service department was working among about 40,000 to 50,000 inhabitants, and assuming that they approached five people a day and examined them, that alone would bring you 200,000,000 men in one year. It is quite clearly a matter of administration. It was a question of having it ordered by me and authorized by me, and I carried it out as far as it was administratively possible.
Q. If you give detailed explanations in answer to these questions of the cross examination it will take a very long time, and I wish you to answer briefly. This is not so difficult for I will put very easy questions to you. Will you please answer briefly?
A. I am trying to answer briefly as possible. I regret that an express job is always lengthy to explain; I found it pretty difficult myself.
Q. Now please answer briefly. What part did the Defendant Kaltenbrunner take in the carrying out of measures having to do with the mobilization of manpower? Did he participate in this or not?
A. I have already given you that answer.
Q. I did not understand it. Did he participate or didn't he?
THE PRESIDENT: He said that he only met Kaltenbrunner on one occasion and that the task of the recruitment of labor was not one for the police. That is what he said.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: MR. President, it was not necessary to multiply the meetings in order that Kaltenbrunner should take part in these measures. Hedid not need to meet Defendant Sauckel at regular intervals.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't want you to argue with me. I have told you what his answer was. It seemed to be an answer to your question.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, I am not arguing. I would only like him to give some explanations on this matter. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q. As far as the participation of Defendant Rosenberg is concerned, I will not put any questions to you for Defendant Rosenberg himself gave quite clear answers when questioned by my American colleague, Mr. Dodd. Now tell me what part did Defendant Frick play in the carrying out of these measures?
A. Defendant Frick, as Reich Minist er of the Interior -- and I don't know how long he remained in office -- was hardly concerned with this question at all. As far as I can remember, I had only the most necessary contacts with his ministry to discuss the necessary laws which were to be published within Germany regarding German workers, as far as that was necessary. Apart from that, he had no further part in this task.
Q. We know it was not an accident that you wrote to Lammers, after the meeting of the 4th of January, that among the agencies who were to cooperate with you was the Minister of the Interior. That is why I ask you, what part did Frick play in the carrying out of these measures? You yourself asked for the cooperation of the Minister of the Interior. what was this cooperation to be?
A. To my greatest personal grief, Reichsminister Frick was then no longer Minister of the Interior, but Himmler, -- if I remember correctly.
Q. But what was the cooperation of the Ministry of the Interior which you foresaw?
A. I believe that it is obvious that in a system of every state the interior general administration must be kept informed about events taking place in so important a sector as the employment of human beings which will necessitate a large number of decrees and laws. They must be informed; they must participate. I couldn't possinly issue laws; I had no authority to do so. They had to be submitted to the Ministerial Council for the Reich Defense. I could only give the experts instructions, and that is quite a different thing.
Q. Did Defendant Funk, as Minister of Economics, and Defendant Speer, as Minister for Armaments, did they also utilize foreign manpower and were they intermediaries between you and the industrial magnates; is that correct?
A. At the end of your sentence there is a considerable erroneous conclusion. These were not agents between myself and industry. Industry was responsible to the Ministry of Rearmament when there were personnel changes. I did not negotiate with industry. They asked for workers and they get them.
Q. But tell us yourself, briefly, what wart did Defendants Funk and Speer play in the carrying out of these measures? I do not want any detailed explanations. Answer me briefly.
A. These businesses of German economy who came under these two ministers you have asked about, they received their workers and that was the end of my task.
Q. I understand. Tell us, did the Defendants Frank, Seyss-Inquart and Neurath play any part in the carrying out of these measures in all the territories which were under their jurisdiction?
I mean the territories of Poland and Czechoslovakia and the Netherlands; is that right?
A. These gentlemen, within their own territories, they were carrying them out in these zones and supported me by publishing decrees and laws. They attached considerable importance to it themselves, that such laws and instructions were humanly justified and properly drafted.
Q And what was the part played by Defendant Fritsche?
A. That I can't tell you. I only met Dr. Fritsche in Germany on one occasion and it was very brief. I think it happened at the beginning of 1945, regarding my tasks and my work. I never talked to him at all and I don't know whether, in turn, he had anything to do with it. I can only state that repeatedly, in the Ministry of Propaganda, I asked that my instructions and orders, as are contained in my document books that have been submitted by my defense, that they should be expressed by the Ministry of Propaganda, particularly to industry, so that the circles of workers concerned would receive them.
Q But one defendant is missing and that is Bormann. What was his part He put at your disposal the entire Party mechanism of the NSDAP, didn't he?
A No, he didn't. No placed at my disposal the Gauleiter, and the instructions which I gave tothe Gauleiter and the letters which I sentto then three of which I think are available here -- these things referred to the fact that I could use the assistance of the Party for the welfare, feeding and clothing, of the workers, and that they should receive everything that was necessary for then and everything that we could possibly supply then with. T was the part the Party played, as far as it could play any part at all. In other words, it was a control in favor of the foreign workers used in Germany, and apart from that the party had nothing to do with the whole thing at all. That is also because I didn't like other authorities to interfere with my works.
Q That is not quite correct. I will remind youof Point 5 of your program for the utilization of manpower which was issued by you in 1942. This is document USSR Exhibit 365. It states that the Gauleiters are nominated to be your plenipotentiaries and that they will utilize -
A May I see this document?
Q Yes, we will show this document to you. I do not quote this point but I only mention its contents, the sense of this point. It says that the Gauleiters will use in their sphere the party organs, and therefore I assume that -
A It doesn't say so at all.
Q Have you found it? enough to read on?
A Thank you so much. "The heads of the highest service departments responsible in the Gaus belonging to the State and economy come under Gauleiters regarding all important questions of workers' employment." That is within their own districts. Then the departments are listed and there is mention of a president of the local labor office. Then there is reference to the trustee of workers. That isn't a Party department either. It is a State department. Then there is the country work leader, who is a. State department -