Q Now, the transcript of defendant Rosenberg's statement will be handed over to you. I will limit myself to very short excerpts from this transcript. Please read after me. "A section of these mobilized workers believe that the read to Germany is somewhat similar to the read to imprisonment and the read to Siberia." And further, I quote: "I know that if one halfmillion came here, we cannot create brilliant conditions for them. The fact that thousands of people who are here live in bad conditions or are submitted to bad treatment is quite natural. It is not worth while to be too preoccupied because of that: however, this is a very grave question. I believe that Gauleiter Sauckel has already discussed it or will do so, for these people from the East have been brought to Germany in order to work and to work as much as possible. It is a very earnest matter to get this work out of them. It is not right to bring them over three-quarters frozen and to make them stay standing during their voyage hours on end. We must give them food in order that they should have sufficient strength in them." Is this correct? Does defendant Rosenberg correctly describe the conditions in which the workers brought by you from the Occupied territories were handled or do you consider this statement of defendant Rosenberg not correct?
A I cannot say or recognize when Rosenberg made this speech. I myself didn't hear it or receive the notes of it but I can definitely state that as soon as I came into office, I did make considerable preparations so that conditions as they are being discussed by Rosenberg in this connection -- which did not in any way have any connection with my term of office -- were to be avoided under any circumstances, because it was for that purpose that I issued these individual instructions of mine just to prevent such conditions; and for every nation working in Germany, I published hundreds of valid and standing instructions of a legal nature which I brought about, which made that sort of thing impossible. That is all I say to that in so far as conditions are concerned during my term of office.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: MR. President, I will limit myselfto this single excerpt from defendant Rosenberg's speech and will not utilize time when numerous documents have already been submitted to the Tribunal and which ascertain without any possibility of doubt, the criminal methods of the organization of manpower in the Occupied Territories adopted by Sauckel in view of deportation of slaves to Germany.
I will only submit to the Tribunal one single new document which is USSR Exhibit 458. This document is a certificate of a worker issued by the German authorities in Breslau to the Polish working woman, because there is a stamp on the reverse, and the worker woman has testified under oath that these certificates were issued by the German authorities in 1944 in the town of Breslau to all foreign workers. I find together with this original document, a certificate of the polish State Commission which quotes the testimony of the witness Maria Adler. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Defendant Sauckel, have you looked at that worker's certificate? Have you found this picture of a pig on that care? pig, which are insulting to pride and human dignity?
A Such a card and such knowledge, I did not have. I can't recognize this speech, at any rate. I can't recognize what it is meant to be. I had nothing at all to do with this and I don't the meaning of such a card and I don't know what I could do with it. It is impossible and it wasn't the task of the labor administration to fix such a thing. utilization?
A No. This card and such stories, I had no idea. I had neither any interest nor any reason offending anyone working in Germany. I cannot guess and I don't know what this was meant to be.
Q Now, I will quote a brief excerpt from USSR Exhibit 139. This is a transcript of the conference of Reichsmarshal Goering,dated 1942. I will quote that part of this statement in which defendant Goering gave an evaluation or an opinion of your activities. Reichsmarshal Goering said: "To that I must say that I do not wish to laud Gauleiter Sauckel, he does not need it but what he has done in such a brief time in order to collect the workers from all over Europe and to bring them to our factories, is an unique feat. I must say to everybody that if everybody, each one in his sphere of action, could apply a tenth of the energy which has been applied by Gauleiter Sauckel, then indeed, the tasks which have been assigned to you would be easily fulfilled.
That is my standing opinion and not at all beautiful words." Did you hear such an evaluation of your activities from Reichsmarshal Goering?
A It is possible that the Reichsmarshal said that. I cannot remember the details of a meeting that took place so long ago. What is correct is that I, as a man, as a member of my nation, had the duty of doing my duty. My documents prove that I tried to do my duty decently and humanely and that, I think, was enough.
GENERAL AIEXANDROV: I will submit to the Tribunal now document USSR Exhibit 462. It is an article by Dr. Friedrich Giegler, which appeared in the Reichsarbeitsblatt, in 1944 and 1945. This is an official publication of the Reich Labor Ministry and of the General Plenipotentiary for Manpower. The article is entitled "Fritz Sauckel, to his 50th anniversary." BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: article but I would like to ask you, defendant Sauckel, are you acquainted with this article?
A I do not know this article. I can't say what is in it. I didn't always read the Reich Labor Magazine. The periodical wasn't issued by me and it is an old institution of the Labor Ministry which contains all the decrees published by that Ministry and also thedecrees of Weimar in the Reich Labor Pamphlet all testify to my concern for the foreign and German workers. contents of this article. It will be handed to you.
THE PRESIDENT: What document is this that he is reading?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: It is an article in the Reichsarbeitsblatt, entitled "Fritz Sauckel, to his 50th anniversary." We are submitting this document for the first time as USSR Exhibit 462. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Are you conversant with it? Tell us, does this article correctly characterize your political activity?
A The author of this article is an expert and I can't give any comments on the birthday article. It is a generally correct representation of my career and my sphere of work.
Q And one last question. In a speech which you made at the first meeting of the staffs for the utilization of manpower, in January of 1943; at Weimar, you stated, and I quote according to the third book of documents of your defense counsel, document 82. I read: "Now, as far as the foundations of our work is concerned...." I skip one first point. "We are true to the Fuehrer and to the people. It gives a justification for the execution of the severest measures." I repeat: "Now as far as the foundations of our work is concerned..." I skip the first point and read point two: "We are true to the Fuehrer and to our people. This loyalty gives us a justification for the execution of the most cruel measures." And then, the end of this document: "In this respect, I will assume another major responsibility." Now, tell me, as to this forced deportation to slave labor, do you consider yourself responsible for this and for the misery of the millions who were sent into slave labor? Do you consider that you are also responsible that you have selected the dismal period of slavery? at this very moment. I should be grateful to you if you could put this document before me so that I can give the correct representations of my views. necessary, you can ask your defense counsel to examine you again.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I have terminated the examination of the defendant Sauckel, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, do you want to re-examine again?
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. THOMA (Counsel for Defendant Rosenberg):
Q Witness what was Rosenberg's part as Minister for Eastern Affairs in carrying out the employment program? was that the departments under his direction in theEastern Ministry should receive my wishes and directives. That is to say, of course, Where they were connected with my task. I was not, of course, in any way connected with any other departments in the Eastern Ministry. Commissioner Koch directions to use his supreme powers?
A That is correct. It was within Rosenberg's task that he should give orders to Reich Commissioner Koch, who was under his command in every sector of the administration there. instructions. In whatway? instructions to Koch to stop an unpermissible methods which were against my instructions, and that Rosenberg did. wanted to say that your recruiting methods were to be prohibited, and that it was no longer to be permitted that your Action Groups, Einsatzgruppe, should take Eastern workers away?
A That Rosenberg never said before me, no. These commissions during the time they were there in the Ukraine came under the Einsatzgruppe department under Koch, and he was the supervising authority, and he had the administrative authority for such matters. That is quite clear.
DR. THOMA: May I point out to this High Tribunal that a document, Rosenberg 10, shows that Sauckel didn't understand Rosenberg's statement in this connection.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you refer to some document there, Dr. Thoma?
DR. THOMA: RO-10.
DR. SERVATIUS ( Counsel for Defendant Sauckel): Mr. President, the re-examination of the witness through the Defense Counsel for defendant Rosenberg, must be limited, for the Defense, to such matters which have now been newly mentioned and which are up for argument.
Every opportunity existed when his client took the witness stand to clarify these questions. I intended to clearup this question on my own initiative, but it was indicated to me that I ought to ask Sauckel. Sauckel made a clear statement and, in my opinion, there is no cause once more to come back to documents in this connection which belong to a previous period of the Defense, and I object to such questioning.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Thoma, I think you had better go on and ask your next question. I have not got the document before me yet that you are putting to the witness, or referring to. What is your next question?
BY DR. THOMA:
Q Mr. Witness, did you not have in your program all responsibility for the employment scheme, and did you not assume all such responsibility? of my powers. I can not do more than that, and for what I have ordered and for what I have caused -- this collection of decrees -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, the defendant has been ever all this before. He has been all through this before -- about his responsibility.
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, may I point out to you that regarding the question of responsibility, there is a certain paragraph which has not yet been read. It is Document 016-PS, referring to the workers' program, and it says under page 17 of the document:
"All technical and administrative procedure of employment are matters exclusively for the jurisdiction and responsibility of the General Plenipotentiary for Labor, as well as the Labor Offices --"
A In Germany, Dr. Thoma. Outside Germany they were, of course, tied to the chiefs of the districts in question. That is quite obvious.
DR. THOMA: I draw the attention of the Tribunal to page 15 of this labor program, in reply to that answer, and Figure (1), which I have just read, comes under the heading "Prisoners of War and Foreign Workers". BY DR. THOMA:
Q May I point out that it states clearly under (1):
"All technical and administrative procedure connected with The employment program --" to interfere with Koch's powers. He expressly said that he would resent that. especially provided you with powers, referring to all departments, and in my opinion, it is not right that you should now den y methods of recruitment and pass responsibility for them on to the Eastern Ministry.
DR. THOMA: I have no further questions.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the Defense Counsel for Rosenberg may put questions, but it does not appear to me to be the right moment for him to make a prosecution speech against my defendant.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I am well aware of the facts that there have been two cross-examinations, and I have no desire to go on with another one. However, we do have one document that we think is of some importance and which was turned over to General Alexandrov, but I think there must have been some language difficulty in it. The translation was not presented. I would like the permission of the Tribunal to ask one or two questions of this defendant about it and to present it, I think it is rather important that it be presented.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, the Tribunal does not think that this ought to create a precedent, but in view of your statement that the document was supplied to General Alexandrov and that, for some reason, he did not deal with it, we will allow you to cross examine upon it.
MR. DODD: Very well, sir.
BY MR. DODD:
Q. Mr. Witness, do you remember an occasion in 1942, just after your appointment, when you met with some officials of the Ministry of Labor and you discussed with them the program which you were about to institute and over which you were about to take, for which you were about to take responsibility? Do you recall it?
A. I can not, of course, remember details of that discussion. Several points were discussed, and it may be I can also refer in this connection to the attitude of the Defense Counsel for Defendant Rosenberg, and say that what he has been quoting -
Q. I simply asked you if you remembered this meeting, and you said you did not, and now there is the documents.
A. Details of that conference I do not remember.
Q. Take a look at the minutes of the meeting.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document?
MR. DODD: This is FC 318.
THE PRESIDENT: Has it been offered or not?
MR. DODD: I am now offering it. I was waiting to get the number from the Secretary.
I will have to get the number a little later, Mr. President.
I haven't made preparations to submit this document, so I didn't have the number in advance. BY MR. DODD:
Q. Now, I want to call your attention particularly to a few passages. You start out by telling the officials who were gathered there that you want to closely cooperate with them, and then, moving along, you give some idea of the number of workers whom you intend to recruit. You say there is an estimated requirement of one million, and you also made perfectly clear that day that you were to get most of these workers from the east, and particularly from Soviet Russia. with the Reichsmarshal, and that you were all agreed that the most important problem was the exploitation of the manpower in the east.
You further stated -- do you see that in there?
A. Where does it say "exploitation"? I don't find that word.
Q. Well, do you find where you say you had discussed your task with the Fuehrer in a conversation that had lasted for several hours? Do you find that?
A. I can't find it.
Q. You have the German there before you, don't you?
A. Yes, but please will you be kind enough to tell me the page?
Q. Have you found it?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I want to point out to you the difference between the Words "exploitation" and "use of". "Exploitation" has a connotation which, in workers' language, is somewhat smelly, but "use of" is quite an ordinary word, and to make use of a matter means that you make available the use of it, and there is quite a difference in the German language.
Q. Well, we'll stand by ours and you may stand by yours, and the Tribunal will ascertain between the two of us who has the correct trails lation.
In any event, whether you said "use of" or "exploit" you did say that the most important solution was either the use of or the exploitation.
A. But that isn't the same thing, Mr. Prosecutor. In German there is an elementary difference in the language. I must point out that, that the word "exploitation" is a word which I didn't use and didn't want to use.
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, would you speak a little bit lower. You quite drown the interpreter's voice.
THE WITNESS: I beg to apologize. my Lord. BY MR. DODD:
Q. I am not concerned whether or not you agree with the word "exploit".
A. That is a very important poart of this document, as I think you recognize.
Q. I won't argue with you.
A. That word is most important from the human point of view.
Q. I don't care to have any argument with you at all.
THE PRESIDENT: Defendant, the Tribunal is perfectly well able to understand the difference between the use of the words, and you have told us the translation you say is right. BY MR. DODD:
Q. Now, if you move on a little bit, do you recall having said that one million Russians would have to be brought into Germany as rapidly as possible, to become available even prior to the offensive It is the next sentence or two there in your text.
You won't see it by looking at me. Do you read the next sentence?
A. Yes, I read the next sentence: "The prerequisite for taking on the task would be the assurance that Russians would be fed approximately the same ration allowance that was in force for the German civilian population".
Q. You have skipped the sentence that I want you to read. I know that one comes along, but I want you to read the one where you say you would have to bring one million Russians into the Reich as rapidly as possible, and that is the very next or almost the next sentence after the one you have been discussing, about the word, "exploit" or "use of".
A. "---must be brought to the Reich as quickly as possible".
Q. That is all I want to know. Do you remember saying that?
A. Yes, I said that, but I must say in connection with this question that this is a record which I have never seen before or checked.
Someone made it, but I didn't have it put before me.
Q Well, I suppose it could be truthful even though you didn't make it. Let's move on here to the next to the last paragraph, and you will find a sentence which suggests:
"They" -- referring to theRussians -- "would have to be handled so roughly by the German administration in the East that they should come to feel that they would prefer to go to Germany for work."
Do you find that?
A Will you tell me where I can find that sentence? negotiation with Himmler. Maybe that will help you. SS; you succeeded in getting him to remove the barbed wire? Surely you have read that.
Do you find the sentence:
"They would have to be handled so roughly by the German administration in the East that they should come to feel that they would prefer to go to Germany to work."
Do you remember saying that?
A I can't remember that expression, and I can't say for a fact that I said, it because I have already stated that these minutes are proclamations which I myself didn't make. I cannot tie myself down to something which a third person has written down from memory. This is not a shorthand record, and it isn't signed by anyone.
Q I don't think you need to give usany long dissertation on the fact that it is somebody else's minutes. It isn't offered to you as being -
A (Interposing): Yes, but I have the right to say so.
Q Let me put a question to you once in a while. I haven't suggested that the so are your minutes. I have merely put it to you for the purpose of determining whether or not on seeing it you remember it. And do you or do you not remember it?
A I certainly de not remember that passage. I can only read here something written by a third person and I don't know who it was. He may quite well have misunderstood me.
Reichsfuehrer SS. Do you remember having said that in the course of this conversation or speech or whatever it was that you were making? to get the Reichsfuehrer SS to remove barbed wire fences. I did that. Right at the beginning of my term of office, the instructions of the Reichsfuehrer SS were being alleviated by no, and that, of course, caused arguments between us.
Q The that part of theminutes of this meeting is correct, isn't it? The reporter, or whoever it was that took this down, correctly reported what you said about your negotiations withthe Reichsfuehrer SS, did he? You find no fault with that? I haven't yet read.
Q Now, listen. You look back at that paper at which you have just been looking. You find fault with the sentence that reports that you said they were to be handled roughly in the Hast, but you don't find fault with the sentence ahead of it which says you had the barbed wire taken down, isn't that so?
You seem to be complaining about the fact that this was somebody else' report and not yours. Have you read it? about.
Do you really mean you can't find it? Do you want help?
Q All I ask you, Mr. Witness, is whether or not the sentence about your meeting with Himmler is a fairly accurate report of what you said. Is it?
A That I cannot tell you from memory. I had very few conversation with Himmler. There may have been negotiations carried out by my offices. That I can't tell you.
Q Well, your answer to all of this is, then, that you don't remember what you said there; this doesn't help you any to remember.
Q I am perfectly willing to rest it there. There is the written record against your failure of memory, and I will leave that with the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT : MR. Dodd, I think you should put to him -
THE WITNESS (Interposing): I didn't know before.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you should put to him the next paragraph, "Thirdly..." which follows after the sentence about handling then so roughly.
MR. DODD: Yes, sir. BY MR. DODD: you won't lose it, and you will find the next sentence begins.
"Thirdly, he had termed the prevailing wage rates decreed by the Reichsmarshal as intolerable, and had persuaded the Reichsmarshal that Russians should have the possibility to earn up to one-half of the wages of German workers." by the way? length temy defense counsel -- there were instructions from the Ministerial Council regarding wages, and I continuously improved those wages, four times, in fact, as far as I could manage to.
THE PRESIDENT: That is not on answer to the question. The question you were asked was: What had the Reichsmarshal suggested as the wages for these workers? You can answer that.
A The Reichsmarshal did not make any suggestion to me. When I came into office I found provisions which I considered insufficient.
Q Well, tell us a little more about it. What do you mean insufficient? You use the word here "intolerable." What was the situation when you came into office with respect to wages? counsel and I have an example to show that. An eastern worker, when I came into office, drew wages of about 60 pfennige per hour, which after deductions for food and lodging would leave him about four and a half marks in cash. I altered that after I came into office and the cash payments were doubled after I came into office. It was probably the purpose of the earlier instructions, for reasons of currency, that too much circulation of cash should be prevented.
MR. DODD: This exhibit, Mr. President, becomes U.S.A. 881.
DR. BALLAS: Dr. Ballas replacing Dr. Horn for defendant von Ribbentrop. BY DR. BALLAS: under the French Ambassador Scabini was discussed you made the statement and it was said that this was done for Frenchmen in Germany. Is it true that it was on defendant Ribbentrop's request that this was organized? That is correct. create this organization? standing between the French and German population by means of having particularly careful welfare for Frenchmen working in Germany. treatment of French prisoners of war. Just me minute. make such an arrangement even when there was still a state of war between France and Germany and establish an institution which after all is unusual?
Petain and the German Government and there were careful attempts made to bring about an understanding. of war. necessity and I wanted to say in that connection that this organization did not in any way get divided later on. APart from Scabini there was Herr Broehne who was particularly taking care of French civilian workers. created an organization for the purpose of bringing artists, lectures and books from occupied countries into Germany so as to win these workers over and have them return to France as friends of and with an understanding of Germany? Minister and with the collaboration of the Reich Propaganda Ministry and the Greman Laborers Front and my service department, that this organization was created so that foreign artists and lecturers should make the free time of these foreign workers pleasant. Many Russian artists came to Germany for that purpose and they also served the purpose of bringing periodicals and books from their home countries to these people.
DR. BALLAS: Thank you, we have no further questions.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, for the purpose of rectifying the draftsmants error in document 1 I shall just toy and obtain confirmation from the witness.
(witness handed document) BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q Witness, under the "Bedarfstraeger" you have mentioned Dr.Funk's department. inspectorate and under that the Reichsautobahn. These two departments have been wrongly drwn by the draftsman. They do not belong there. Is it true that these two squares should have to be crossed off?
DR. SERVATIUS: May I ask, MR. President, that the drawing be rectified by merely raising these two squares? They belong to Speer's ministry but I have not concentrated on that side and I do not wish to have a discussion about it. pictures which have been offered, which show the defendant together with Himmler. BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q Mr. Witness, can you ascertain the time, approximately when that meeting took place, from that picture? There are certain indications which you have discussed with me. Will you briefly state that to us?
A Yes. The left-hand top picture shows that this is still a state of affairs during which construction work was still going on -there is construction still taking place. I see unfinished roadbeds and such. This appears to be a period of construction, therefore. dress of the various people?
A. The dress shows quite clearly that this is a time before the war because Himmler was wearing a black uniform which, of course, he never were during the war.
Apart from that he was carrying a sword which was never carried during the war.
Q. Are these people wearing decorations?
A. That I cannot see as to whether they are wearing decorations.
Q. And so I can assume that these pictures were taken sometime before the war?
A. Yes, quite certainly some time before the war, because I myself have not worn a SS uniform during the war and not for sometime before it.
Q. The Document 810 was submitted yesterday. That is a report about a meeting on the Wartburg. On page 25 thereof is the German version of a report which was compiled by Dr. Sturm, according to which it had been said that there had been collaboration with the Gestapo in concentration camps and that was the right road to take. You were asked whether that was your view, that such collaboration would be correct.
How did you understand that. Do you want to say by that the methods in concentration camps, such as they were employed in practice by Himmler, were agreeable to you?
A. Under no circumstances. I wanted to indicate that it was correct as the document shows, that step by step the workers discipline should be enforced if it was not obeyed. First of all there should be reprimands, then small interior fines which are in fact contained in my instructions 13 which I want you to submit in the document and that only after there had been reprimands and internal small disciplinary penalities and these were found insufficient should there be further treatment of those cases such as is mentioned in the document through the attorney general's office and through proper procedure. I was thinking of the correct penal procedure. Methods in concentration camps were not described, as correct by me and they were not even known to me at that time in any way.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I have a document, 1764-PS, before me and I have not been able to ascertain when and if it has been offered.
I have only now received a photostatic copy. It is a so-called Hemmen report, a report which Ambassador Hemmen had made about a sector of the employment program in France.
I want to read a short passage to the defendant which deals with the number of Frenchman employed in Germany, and I want him to confirm it.
BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, I shall read youa passage.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, it is not usual to allow documents to be put in re-examination. Why was this not used in examination in chief?
DR. SERVATIUS: There was an argument about figures during crossexamination. That is why I wanted to put it. I was not too interested in finding out how many people were being sent back and forth.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. SERVATIUS: But I can come to that when I plead.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal was not saying you could not use it now. As it arose out of cross-examination, I think you may be able to use it.
BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, I should briefly like to read to you the important passage and I want you to tell me whether the conception which is represented there is correct.
Ambassador Hemmen's report in a letter of the 2d February 1944. It was received on the 2d February 1944, in the Foreign Office at Berlin.
"Reports under III as follows:
"Regarding the employment of workers Germany:
"It started with voluntary recruitment of workers which until the end of 1942 produced four hundred thousand men. During the first half of 1943 two further voluntary actions for two hundred fifty thousand non each were being carried out. The first, which promised all the advantages of holidays; of prisoners of war, at the ratio of one to three, or the granting of the workers statute, produced some two hundred thousand men, whereas the second, by using the new compulsory service, that is to say, coercion, when carried out, only produced one hundred twenty-two thousand men."