Then, in fact, he had a great success, in that the Turkish President, in 1942, in a big public speech before the Turkish National Assembly, offered the services of Turkey in mediating between the belligerents.
Q Did you have knowledge of the efforts of Mr. von Papen to avert a spreading of the war towards Turkey against the efforts of the Axis partners? During the war there were several crises.
A I should like to say first that Papen's activity in Turkey can be summe up in one word. He considered it his mission to represent the interests of Germany, his country, and to bring them together in the interests of peace. That meant, in effect, that he endeavoured to prevent the spreading of the war to Turkey and the Near East and thus to create the prerequisite in order, at the proper time, to employ Turkey as mediator.
Now, as to the crises. I should like to limit myself to those cases in which Mr. von Papen had the impression that the neutrality of Turkey was endangered by the intentions of the Axis partners.
THE PRESIDENT: I think I did before draw your attention to the fact that there was no charge against von Papen in connection with his activities at Ankara; and also, I may add, that this was a summing up in one word I thought.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: There are only a very few case, Mr. President. He will tell us about them briefly.
THE PRESIDENT: The only way in which the evidence can be relevant at all is insofar as it throws light upon von Papen's activities before he went to Ankara. That is what I pointed out to you before.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I said the other day, Your Lordship, that the personality of a person charged with war conspiracy cannot be judged correctly if only one period of his activity is mentioned. He was at a post where he could do only negative or positive things. It is not immaterial.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Kubuschok, this witness has been telling us for a considerable time that his activities -- that Papen's activities were entirely peaceful and that they were endeavours to make Turkey mediate; and what he is doing now is simply going on with further details on the same subject and it is over a period when, as I say, no charge is made against von Papen at all by the prosecution.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: If the Tribunal understands the Defendant von Papen's mission in Ankara as a peace mission, I need put no further questions to the witness. Then I come to my last questions. BY DR. KUBUSCHOK:
Q What was the position of Mr. von Papen in regard to the party, especial as to the Landesleitung in Ankara?
A On his arrival von Papen was received with unconcealed distrust. No wonder, for it was known that he was known as no Socialist. In his four years in Turkey I did not meet anyone who considered him a National Socialist.
His relationship to the Party became worse in the course of the years and finaally it resulted in open conflict. That was in 1942, when the Landesgruppenleiter of the Party in Ankara once told his comrades, if it were up to him he would have Mr. von Papen shot. Then he was challenged about it and corrected himself. He said he didn't say that; he only said he would have had him put in a concentration camp.
Q What was the attitude of von Papen to the Jewish question?
A In repeated public speeches as well as in his actions, Mr. von Papen quite clearly opposed the anti-Jewish policy of the party. He was acquainted with Jewish or partly Jewish emigrants. He employed Jewish doctors; he bought in Jewish stores. In short, I believe that was one of the reasons which brought about his tension in connection with the Party.
Q Did Mr. von Papen even employ a Jewish woman in the Embassy?
AAs far as I know, yes. I believe that was the wife of his servant.
Q She was employed as a telephone operator there?
Q Do you know a Mr. Posemann? Did he have any connection with the German Embassy?
AAt my time, Posemann was not in the German Embassy. I recall that he had a bookstore in Ankara. He had nothing to do with the Embassy.
Q. What was the attitude of Mr. von Papen in the personnel question ? Did he employ National Socialists in the embassy, or to what extent did he interest himself in these questions ? What were his demands of personnel ?
A It is well known that the Party was never satisfied with von Papen's choice of workers. That was shown by the very severe consequences on the 30th of June and after the Anschluss. It was somewhat dangerous to be one of his first co-workers. a National Socialist position out of the embassy as was done in the Balkans and when he asked for personnel he chose people who he knew were not National Socialists.
I will only mention two names, Mr. von Haften and Legationsrat Trotzesolz, two men who I believe were executed in connection with the 20th of July. all efforts to remove me from my post. I don't know whether I should go into that.
Q. Please do, briefly.
A. Repeatedly -- I might say every month -- an attempt was made to have me eliminated as a deputy of von Papen. Finally, when that didn't do any good, since von Papen always opposed these attempts, the Landesgruppenleiter met with the Ortsgruppenleiter of Ankara and Istanbul in the spring of 1942 and came to see von Papen and officially in the name of the party demanded that I should be removed from my post. Von Papen refused this once more, but finally, in 1943, the pressure of the Party became too great, especially since other sources conspired against me, and so I was excluded.
Q. Finally, in the years of cooperation you observed the activity of von Papen and his personality very closely. Perhaps you can outline briefly a picture of the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: He has already sketched it at very considerable length and we don't want it briefly reiterated.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I will dispense with this question. I have finished the examination of the witness.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: I have no questions, my Lord.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the defendants' counsel want to ask any questions ? Then the witness can retire.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I should like to refer briefly to a few documents.
In Document Book 1, I submit Document 24, page 86. I refer to the note and agreement was reached with the Prosecution to the effect that the fact should be accepted that the Enabling Act of 24 March 1933 was preceded by two Enabling Acts in 1923. Stripes of the 27th of March 1946. These are the peace efforts through Earl. The article is to supplement the interrogatory of Lersner.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you say 36 ?
DR. KUBUSCHOK: No, 63, page 153.
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. This document that you just put before us is a document of March 27, 1946. What are we going to do with that ? It is a newspaper article.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: It is a newpaper article on an interview with Earl. The partner in this talk was Lersner. To supplement the testimony of Lersner whom we do not have here I should like to use this newspaper article. It adds to something which is briefly mentioned in Lersner's written testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: But you had the opportunity of getting an affidavit from Lersner or for putting what questions you wanted to Lersner, and now you are putting in a newspaper article dated in 1946 whilst the trial was joins on
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Mr. President, I cannot hear Lersner because of his absence. It was intended to hear him as a witness. The question in the interrogatory was answered rather briefly.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the date of the interrogatory ?
DR. KUBUSCHOK: The Lersner interrogatory is dated 15 April 1946. It is Document 93.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the Tribunal doesn't think that this document ough to be admitted. Newspaper articles whilst the trial is going on are not the sort of evidence which the Tribunal thinks it right to admit.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: In Volume 3 I submit Document 99, an affidavit by Schaffgotsch, page 245. It is just being submitted, Mr. President . It is a brief affidavit concerning Papen's vain efforts in July 1934 to reach Hindenburg. Government of the 1st of February 1939, which was mentioned yesterday, and also an excerpt on foreign policy from Hitler's speech of the 23rd of March. Yesterday it was referred to during the proceedings. ask that you take judicial notice of them.
Then I have one final request. Yesterday, in the discussion of the affidavits of Schroeder and Meissner, parts were read into the record. I believe the Prosecution, since they have not made use of the documents, will be willing that these parts be stricken from the record.
THE PRESIDENT: It was Meissner's affidavit which was used to some extent, wasn't it ?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes, my Lord, it was. My Lord, I should have thought the most convenient course was that the Tribunal would take it that I have merely put the facts out of the affidavit and would not consider that the evidence of the affidavit was before them. Otherwise, I think it would be very difficult to correct the record, but of course I accept that position.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we think so. We will treat it as those facts having been put to the witness and the witness having answered them, without considering it as a sworn statement.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: Yes, my Lord, purely as my questions.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I end the case of the defendant von Papen.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn.
(A recess was taken.)
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will sit on Saturday in open session from ten to one.
DR. FLAECHSNER: Dr. Flaechsner on behalf of the defendant Speer.
Mr. P resident, gentlemen of the bench: we were discussing matters of evidence, matters of proof which I suggested. at that time I dispensed with the testimony of witnesses and stated that I would satisfy myself with the use of interrogatories. I had hoped I should thus be able to produce my entire evidence. However, I am not in possession of all the interrogatories I sent out. I have not received all the answers but only a part of them. Those replies which are at my disposal I will use in the examination in chief of the defendant. Therefore, a presentation and introduction of those interrogatories will take place. in such a manner that in my estimation I should acquire a day or at the most seven hours. to call the defendant S peer to the witness box.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. follows: BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q What is your name?
Q Will you repeat this oath after me: will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(the witness repeated the oath)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
BY DR. FLAECHSNER:
Q. Mr. Speer, will you please tell the Tribunal about your life up until the time you were appointed minister?
A I was born on the 19 M arch, 1905. My grandfather and my father were successful architects. First of all I wanted to study mathematics and then entered into the profession of architect mere by tradition than Inclination. I attended the university at Munich and Berlin and at the ago of 24, that was in the year 1929, I was the first assistant at the technical academy in Berlin ( Technische Hochschule).
At the age of 27, that war in the year '32, I went into business for myself and I remained in that position, that is being my own independent boss, until 1942 . first time. I met him and from that period of time onwards I had a rather enthusiastic course in my chosen profession of architecture for Hitler was quite fanatical on the subject of architecture and from him I received many contracts for building work, such as putting up a new Reichstag building in Berlin and *---* other buildings and here in Nurnberg on the P arty grounds. Berlin and Nurnberg. I had sketched buildings which would have become the largest in the world and the carrying through of those plans would have cost no more than two months of Germany's war expenditure. That would have been the cost to Germany. for building I lad a close personal contact and relationship with him. I belonged to a circle which consisted of other artists and of his personal staff. If Hitler had had any friends at all I certainly would have been one of his close friends. during peace, were carried on until 1941, December of '41 and only after the catastrophe which occurred in the winter of '41 in Russia was the further constructions of these buildings stopped. Workers, insofar as they were German, were used for the restoration of works which had been destroyed in Russia, and were placed at the disposal of the war effort by me.
Q The P rosecution, in document 1435, which is U.S. Exhibit 216, had quoted a remark from your first speech as a minister, dated February 1942, in which you stated that at that time you had placed ten thousand prisoners of war at the disposal of the armament industry.
DR. FLAECHSNER: Mr. P resident, this remark may be found on page 4 of the English text and page one of the French text. BY DR. FLAECHSNER:
Q. Mr. Speer, what can you tell us about this document? exert any influence as to whether these workers were to be taken into armaments or not. They were put at the disposal of the Stalags of the OKW. I assumed, I took it as a matter of course that they would be put at the disposal of armaments in the larger sense.
Q M r. Speer, did you over participate in the planning and preparation of an agressive war?
A N o. Up until the year 1942 I was active as an architect. For that reason you cannot talk about this matter at all. The buildings which I constructed were completely representative of peacetime building and as an architect and in this connection I received workers and money for these purposes. I used the material at my disposal. This material, in the last analysis, was lost to armaments. had supported or sponsored was, on the whole, especially psychologically an obstacle to armament.
Q You were the Golden P arty Emblem. When and where did you receive it?
A In the year 1938 I received the Golden Party Emblem from Hitler.
It was because I had completed the plans for a new building program in Berlin. Besides myself, five other artists received this Golden P arty Emblem.
Q Were you a member of the Reichstag? that is outside of an diction, and I was to substitute or replace a member who had been lost to the Reichstag. Hitler at that time told me that together with me, he wanted the artists represented in the Reichstag.
Q Did youever receive any donations'?
Q How did your activity as a minister start?
A On 8 February 1942 my predecessor, Dr. Todt, was killed in an airplane crash. Several days later I was called in to be his successor in his many offices. At that time I was 36 years of ago. Up until that time, Hitler saw the main sphere of Todt the building sphere, and that is why he called me tobe the successor of Todt. I believe that it was a complete surprise to everyone when I was called to office as a minister. not building but the intensification of armaments was to be the main concern, for the heavy losses of material in the winter battles which had taken place inRussia during the winter of 1941-1942 had brought about much damage. Hitler called for an intensification of armament. did you find a completely set up office?
A No, Dr. Todt had neglected this function of his up until that time, and in addition in the fall of 1941 Hitler had issued a decree according to which the armament of the army was to take second place to the armament of the Air Force. At that time he foresaw a victorious outcome of the war in Russia. He took that for granted and had decreed that armament was to be concentrated on the imminent war against England and was to be converted to that end. Because of this tremendous optimism of his, the rescrinding of that order was postponed until January 1942, and only from that date onward did Dr. Todt start -- that is, during the last month of his life -- to build up his organization and to develop it. Therefore, the task fell to me, first of all, to work myself into a completely new field and at the same time to create all organizational prerequisites for my task, to set them up, and thirdly, to restore the decreasing armament production, and first, especially, to increase production in a few months. As is very well known, I succeeded in doing that. of your task and about the circle of your collaborators? How was that to be composed?
duration and that after the war I might once more resume my profession of architect.
DR. FLAECHSNER: At this point I should like to mention a passage from document 1435 which deals with a speech delivered by Speer, which he made ten days after he assumed office, and this document shows that he very unwillingly and hesitatingly changed his sphere of activity, and I quote:
"I can say for myself that my personal contribution is a very large one. Up until very recently I moved in an ideal situation." 2 of my document book, page 5 of the English text and page 2 of the French and Russian texts, on 8 May 1942 Hitler stated, and I quote:
"The Fuehrer thereupon stated repeatedly that the Reich Ministry Speer would be dissolved on the day when peace was concluded." 20 September 1944. Mr. President, this may be found on page 6 of the English text, page 3 of the French and Russian texts. From this document you can see that Speer was considered hostile to the Party because of his collaborators. Bormann said that. Speer said in his memorandum -- and I quote "The task which I have to fulfill is a non-political one.
So far I have enjoyed my work, since I personally and my work were evaluated strictly according to professional achievements, but I do not feel strong enough to carry out without hindrance and successfully the technical work to be accomplished by myself and my co-workers if it is to be measured by Party political standards. BY DR. FLAECHSNER:
Q Mr. Speer, can you give me the fundamental principles according to which you set up and developed your ministry?
THE PRESIDENT: What exhibit number are you giving that?
DR. FLAECHSNER: Exhibit No. 1, Mr. President. BY DR. FLAECHSNER
Q Mr. Speer, can you tell me the fundamental principles which you applied and observed when you built up your ministry?
expert. Therefore, I gathered the best possible experts to be found in Germany and selected them as my co-workers. I believed that these men were to be found within industry itself. Therefore, set up my ministry from industry. It took these man in, in a position of honor, and this was something which was carried on in the United States in a similar way during the war, especially which it came to matters of production. Civil servants or professional officials were lacking, and you can not really consider my ministry a real ministry along the old lines. that in June 1944 I delivered a speech in Essen, in order that I could defend myself against the various attacks in Party circles upon my system.
DR. FLAECHSNER: Mr. President, I believe that the High Tribunal is not yet in possession of the document book volume which contains the interrogatories Otherwise I should like to refer the High Tribunal to the statement given by witnesses Sauer and Schieber, which are relevant in this connection.
THE PRESIDENT: If you will given us the reference--Give us the names oft** witnesses. We can take notice of them afterwards. What is the name?
DR. FLAECHSNER: The witness Sauer, and we are dealing with his answers t Point 4,5 and 8 of the interrogatory. The witness Schieber under figure 12 of his interrogatory gives a statement and testimony relating to this point.
Now I shall take up the speech given by Speer in June 1944. I should like submit it as Exhibit No. 2. It confirms the testimony which the defendant has just made about the development of his ministry, in regard to the honorary memberships on the part of industry. I should like to quote it, for I am sorry t say that this speech is contained in my supplementary volume as well. I am sorry I will just have to read it, and I quote:
"These honorary co-workers dra*---*om industry--"
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Flaechsner, it is a little bit inconvenient to the Tribunal not to have these documents before them. You could not possibly postpone the particular documents that you have not got here until tomorrow morning Shall we have the supplementary volume then?
DR. FLAECHSNER: The promise was given me that it would be at our disposal this afternoon. I expect to have it by tomorrow, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, well, then, would it be convenient to leave those Parts which are contained in the supplementary volume over until tomorrow?
DR. FLAECHSNER: Mr. President, in the supplementary volume we find only five very short documents, with which I shall not concern myself today, except for this one speech which I am mentioning new. It is the first document found in the supplementary volume.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. FLAECHSNER: I quote:
"These honorary co-workers, drawn from industry, carry the responsibility to the last detail for what is going on in the various enterprises and industry and how."
Then a few lines further down;
"Among your tasks, next to the awarding of contracts to these industries, the duty to limit the type and the specialiazation of these industries and, und certain circumstances, to close certain enterprises, the rationalization of raw materials along constructive and productive lines, and the unconditional exchange of experience, without regard to schutzrechte--paterts." considered his office an instrument which was improvised for the existing authorities of the Reich for the fulfillment of this task and was to be used without concerning himself with these tasks personally.
in the speech of Speer, shows that he prohibited his offices from turning into administrative offices. The defendant did not went a bureaucratic system in his Ministry.
THE PRESIDENT: What speech of Speer are you referring to? You said the decree of the 10th of August.
DR. FLAECHSNER: It is still the same speech, Mr. President, which I just mentioned, and the decree is mentioned therein.
THE PRESIDENT: I didn't get what the year was when you began. What was the year?
DR. FLAECHSNER: The year was 1942, the 10th of August, and the speech was given in the year 1944. Therefore, he was referring to a decree which had been in force for some time. bureaucratic, new forces in his Ministry is shown from the passage which I would like to quote now:
"Any arrangement which is to last for some period of time and which exceeds a certain size has a tendency to become bureaucratic. Even if, in a large attack on Berlin, large parts of the current files of the Ministry are burned and therefore, for all time, we are lucky enough to have unnecessary ballast taken from us, we cannot expect that an occurrence of that sort will bring new vigor into our work." BY DR. FLAECHSNER:
Q Mr. Speer, so far as the Tribunal wishes, will you please supplement these statements, but briefly?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Flaechsner, you read us the speech.
DR. FLAECHSNER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to be very remote as it is, an why you should want to supplement it, I don't know.
DR. FLAECHSNER: Mr. President, I thought it might be of interest to the High Tribunal to know the sphere of activity and Function which the defendant had in his capacity as a minister.
This speech was made to experts and, therefore, it contains only these things of interest to an expert. I assumed that the High Tribunal would wish to know just what was the task of the production ministry of Mr. Speer. I think the prosecution grow a wider circle about his tasks than actually was the case.
THE PRESIDENT: If you want to know what he says about the tasks of his ministry, you can ask him. But you have just been reading his speech, and we don't want to-
DR. FLAECHSNER (Interposing): No, no, Mr. President. No, no, he is not to read his speech. I don't want him to read his speech. He is just to give us some of the technical tasks of his ministry, but briefly.
THE PRESIDENT: You don't seem to be hearing me accurate ly. Wouldn't it be better if you put your earphones on? didn't want to hear any more argument upon the speech from the defendant. If you want to ask the defendant what the tasks of his ministry were, ask him. What you asked him was, "Do you wish to supplement the speech?" BY DR. FLAECHSNER:
Q Mr. Speer, will you please tell us briefly what the tas*---* were which your ministry had to carry out? And please do not refer to the things that I mentioned in the speech. ter are the same and are well known in all industrial states. I just wanted to summarize briefly which functions I had to concern myself with in detail in this ministry. metals, steel, and we had to do away with that deficiency. Then, through an introduction of the Fliessbandarbeiter, workers on the assembly line, as is customary in the United States, which was not current in Germany, it was being produced. That is, the use of chain production, to save room. Also, it was imperative, further;
to have the production bases expanded for fine steel, for aluminum, for forgings, for ball bearings. One of the main tasks was the development of new weapons and the introduction of new weapons into the production sphere. Then, finally, beginning with 1943, the doing away with of the tremendous damage which obtained because of tremendously heavy bombing attacks, and which forced us to use improvised means and methods.
Q What was the importance of your activity? was of the utmost importance at home, especially since it concerned itself with equipment for the army, because I claimed that during the war the rest of the economy would have to be set up according to the demands of armament. In times of war, at home, there are only two aims or purpose : To furnish soldiers for the front, and to supply weapons.
Q Why was the task of your ministry a war function or task ?
but during a war this regulating factor is lacking. to have a hand in the distribution of orders ? at the end of 1944. However, you were responsible for the entire sphere of armament and war production. Can you tell me briefly in what fields this development was carried through, and how the extent of your task grew ? with the number of workers.
In 1942 I had armaments and building programs. I had taken those over, and I had 2,600,000 workers. In the spring of 1943 Doenitz gave me the responsibility for naval armament as well, and thereforem at this point, I had 3,200,000 workers. In September of 1943, through an agreement with the Minister of Economy, Mr. Funk, the produdtion task of the Ministry of Economy was also transferred to me. With that I had twelve million workers working for me.
Finally, I took over air armament. I took that over from Goering on the 1st of August, 1944. With that my total production had risen to fourteen million workers, and all production was marshalled under me. The number of workers applies to the Greater German Riech, without the occupied countries. ministry that consisted of honorary members and a ministry which did not concern itself with purely administrative matters ?
A We had no experience along those lines. The administrative sectors in the various departments retained their tasks. In that way, in the Army, the Heereswaffenamt--the Army Weapon Office-- which contained several thousand workers, supervised the carrying through of this work and saw to it that the orders were carried out in a proper way. Only in that way did I succeed in having the entire armament production--which amounted to three to four billion marks a month--carried through with an honorary co-worker staff of about six thousand people.
Q Were all enterprises subordinate to you ?
A No. There was a small group of enterprises and industries which were run with their own workers, and these were exempted.
In this connection, the work of the SS was excluded from my domain as well. of foreign workers, you were responsible for the bringing in of prisoners of war from concentration camps and prisoner of war camps.
A In this connection neither I nor the ministry were responsible. The ministry was a now establishment, which had a technical problem to deal with. None of the offices which existed assumed any jurisdiction or competence in this regard. The conditions of work were still handled through the old existing authorities. The Food Ministry and the various offices connected with it were responsible for this, and the various supervising agencies in the Reich Ministry were responsible for maintenance, for working conditions at the place of work; the Trustees of Labor, working under the Plenipotentiary for Manpower, were responsible for the time of work, or for conditions of work and work achieved; and the Health Office of the Health Ministry was responsible for health conditions. The Justice Department and the Police Department were responsible for violations against labor discipline, and finally, the German Labor Front was responsible for representing the interests of labor, as compared to the factory manager. Reich Commissioner. The fact that the SS and its concentration camp internees were outside the control is not a matter which I or my ministry represented.
Q. Your co-defendant Sauckel testified to the effect that with the carrying out of the recruiting of workers to the industries, his task was finished. Does that apply in that way according to your opinion?
A. Yes. As far as the recruiting of workers is concerned, yes, for it was one of the points of an issue of conflict between Sauckel and me, that the suitable use of workers in industry itself was to be a matter of the man in charge of the industry and that it was not to be regulated or influenced by the labor office but it applied only to labor recruitment and not for the observing of labor agreements. In this connection, the office of Sauckel was the supervising office.
Q. How far could the entrepreneur carry through the demands put by Sauckel and by his carrying through of arrangements, and so forth, with the workers?
A. The decrees issued by Sauckel are not without objection but the entrepreneur did not always find it possible to carry through the decrees and directives given out by Sauckel and for the reasons which were beyond their power. Because of the bombing attacks, it brought about difficulties of transport and transportation or the destroyed shelters, places to live. It is not possible to tell the entrepreneur under the circumstances which applied after the summer of 1944 and make him responsible for the observing of these decrees. These were times of crises and it is a matter with which the Reich authorities would have to concern themselves and to determine just how far possibilities would exist to carry through these decrees and it is impossible to give responsibility to the small entrepreneur.
Q. How far was the entrepreneur subordinate or responsible to your ministry in thisregard?
A. In the framework of the economy which industry enjoyed, the entrepreneurs of armament had received a para-state function by me. This, of course, applied only to technical problems, technical tasks.
Q. Were there any industries which were not permitted to be inspected by the Gauleiters?
A. There were some industries which concerned themselves with secret matters but the entrepreneur was informed and he could report to the Gauleiter on these matters.
Q. Did you approve the punishment of people who could not work?
A. Yes, I considered it quite correct that workers who violated labor discipline should be punished but I did not demand supplementary directives or measures in this regard. As a matter of principle, I represented the view that a satisfactory work output on the part of fourteen million workers could be brought about in the long run only through the good will and good faith of the worker himself. This is a bit of experience which applies generally, which causes every employer in the world to do everything possible to have his workers satisfied.
Q. Regarding the efforts made by Sauckel, did you support them so that the social conditions of the workers would be improved and if so, why did you?
A. Naturally, I supported them even though I did not have any jurisdiction along that line and the same reasons which I have just mentioned applied, for our experience showed that labor which is satisfied has much less loss in the line of material which was quite important, considering our deficiency of raw material. It is quite obvious that better quality which is produced through a satisfied labor coprs is of special significance especially in time of war.
Q. In the records of your discussions with Hitler, there are various statements made by Hitler dealing with the treatment of living conditions of foreign workers. Were you responsible for that?
A. Yes.
DR. FLAECHSNER: In this connection, I should like to submit three pieces of evidence -- first of all, document Speer No. 11. Mr. President, this is found on page ten of the English text, pace seven of the French text. In this document, Speer's request, in March of 1942, it was put down and I quote: "that the Russians were to receive sufficient food and that civilian Russians were not to be put behind barbed wire and were not to be treated as prisoners of war;" and as my next piece of evidence which will be Exhibit No. 4, I would like to submit Speer document No. 13. In May 1943, according to this document, Hitler determined, at the suggestion of Speer, that the German as well as Russian minors would receive additional rations and it is said there that the Russian prisoners of war are to receive additional rations such as tobacco and similar items and they are to be allotted them for special performance.