procedure, if one would say: aggression, and therefore anything the German Administration has done there was criminal; Eastern Territories Rosenberg was the responsible minister and therefore he must be punished for all crimes which have occurred there, at least for what happened within the scope of the jurisdiction and authority of the administrative bodies. I will have to demonstrate that this conception is not correct for legal and factual reasons.
Rosenberg was the organizer and the highest authority of the administration in the East.
On 17 July 1941, he was appointed as Reich Minister for the occupied Eastern territories. According to instructions, he performed before that time, preparatory work on questions concerning East-Europe by contacting the Reich agencies concerned. He planned and set up his office for dealing centrally with questions concerning Eastern Europe. He had provisional instructions for the Reich Commissars drawn up--(Doc. No. 1030-PS)-- he delivered the program speech of 20 June 1941, and, above all, he took part in the Fuehrer Conference of 15 July 1941. Hitler said at that time that the real aims of the war against Russia should not be made known to the whole world, that these present should understand clearly that "we will never withdraw from the now Eastern territories; whoever offers any opposition will be exterminated; never again must a military power develop west of the Ural; nobody but a German shall ever wear a weapon." Hitler proclaimed the subjection and the exploitation of the Eastern Territories, and in making these statements he was in opposition to what Rosenberg had told him before--without being contradicted by Hitler--concerning his plans for the East. ploitation. this: Before Rosenberg took over his ministry he know Hitler's aims for the East; namely, (1) to rule it; (2) to administer it; (3) to exploit it. Therefore, he is not only an accomplice in a crime of conspiracy against peace, he is also jointly responsible for the crimes against humanity perpetrated in the Eastern Territories, since Rosenberg held complete power, the highest authority in the East. Rosenberg's automatic responsibility in his capacity as supreme Chief of the Eastern Territories. First I would like to consider the question of his individual responsibility.
One could refer to two reasons:
(a) because he allegedly participated in the preparation of the war of aggression against the Soviet Union -- I have already states that this assertion is not correct that Rosenberg has neither ideologically nor actually participated in the preparations of the war of aggression ; (b) because he supported Hitler's plan of conquest by making plans, delivering speeches, and organizing the administration. the Chief of State, elaborates plans or takes preparatory measures of an organizational nature for events which might happen later, this activity cannot be considered as criminal even when thereby the interests of other countries are affected, and even when the plans, preparations and measures are intended for war. Only when the minister or general in question directs his activity towards things which have to be considered as criminal, according to sound common-sense and an international sense of decency and justice, can he be held individually responsible. Rosenberg has continuously proved in words and deeds that the traditional conceptions of right are his conceptions also, and that he is willing to stand up for them. His position was particularly difficult indeed, since the supreme chief finally moved beyond the limits in his ideas, aims and intentions, and since other strong forces also like Bormann, Himmler and Gaulieter Kech were involved which prevented and sabotaged Rosenberg's good and fair intentions. Thus we witness the strange spectacle of a minister who governs but with partly cannot understand, partly cannot approve, partly does not knew at all, the intentions of the Chief of State, and on the other hand that of a chief of State who appoints a minister to take office who is certainly an old and loyal political fellowcombatant but with whom he has no spiritual contact whatsoever anymore.
It would be wrong to judge without further examination such constellations according to the democratic conceptions of the responsibility of a minister. Rosenberg could not simply resign, but he also felt inwardly the duty of fighting for the opinion which appeared to him as being right and decent. the Germans to consider that Germany should not have to fight every 25 years for her holdings in the East. He by no means, however, desires the extermination of the Slavs, but the advancement of all the nations of Eastern Europe, and the advancement, not the annihilation, of their national independence. He demanded (Doc. No. 1058-PS, USA-147), "Friendly sentiments" towards the Ukrainians, a guarantee of "national and cultural existence" for the Caucasians; he emphasized that, even with a war on, we were not enemies of the Russian people", whose great achievements we fully recognize. He advocated "the national right of self-determination of the people" -- one of the first points of the whole Soviet revolution. This was his idea, tenaciously defended till the end. The speech in question also contains the passage, of which the prosecution acuses him in particular, that the feeding of the German people during these years willbe placed at the top of German demands in the East, and that the southern territories and North Caucasus would have to make up the balance in feeding the German people. Then, Rosenberg continues literally: "We do not see at all why we should be compelled to feed the Russian people also from these surplus regions.
We know, that this is a bitter necessity which lies beyond any sentiment. Without a doubt an extensive evacuation will be necessary, and there are very hard years ahead for the Russians. To what extent industries are to be kept up there, is a question reserved for future decision." This passage comes quite suddenly and all by itself in the long speech. One feels distinctly that it has been squeezed in, it is not Rosenberg's voice: Rosenberg does not proclaim here a program of his own, but only states facts which lie beyond his will.
In the first directives of the East ministry (Doc. No. 1056-PS, USA-605) the feeding of the population is shown to be especially urgent, as well as its supplying with all medical necessities, On the contrary, the true Rosenberg emerges in the conference of 16 July 1941, when in response to Hitler's plans, he called attention to the university of Kiev, and to the independence and cultural advancement of the Ukraine, and when he took stand against the full power of the police and above all against the appointment of Gauleiter Erich Koch in the Ukraine. (Doc. No. L-221).
One willsay: What is the use of opposition and protests,what is the use of secret reservations and of feigned agreement with Hitler's intentions, Rosenberg did cooperate all the same. Therefore he is responsible too. Later on, I willoutline in detail how and to what extent Rosenberg did adhere to the policy in the East, what things he did not do, and how he opposed them, grave charge of being responsible for the alleged exploitation and enslavement of the East. Here, I would like to point out the following: It was in no way a hopeless task to begin by accepting even Hitler's most passionate statements without contradiction in the hope and with the intention of attaining nevertheless a contrary result later on. In opposition to Hitler's statement, which said that :"No other than a German may ever bear weapons in the East", it was not long, for example, before, on Rosenberg's recommendation legions of volunteers were formed from the peoples of the East, and in opposition to Hitler, an edict of tolerance was issued at the end of 1941 for the churches of the East (Doc. No. 1517-PS.) Eastern nations, he still adhered to his plans for the future in this respect too. First he took care of the urgent agrarian question. An agrarian order was drawn up, which it was possible to present to the Fuehrer on 15 February 1942, and which was authorized by him in its unadulterated form. It was not an instrument of exploitation, but an act of liberal formation of the agrarian constitution in the midst of the most terrible of wars. Right in one middle of the war the eastern countries not only received a new agrarian constitution but also Agricultural machines. The witness Professor Dencker, in his affidavit, has born witness to the following deliveries to the occupied Soviet territories including the former border states:
Miscellaneous (hand equipment, tools, driving-belts etc.)
about 15,000,000.-an exploitation. So, in this, too, Rosenberg accomplished a piece of constructive work that was really a blessing.
In the following, I will first treat the question of Rosenberg's automatic responsibility as minister for the Eastern territories and then his criminal liability on the grounds of his official position. occupied Eastern territories. Two Reich commissariats were set up as supreme territorial authorities: "Ostland " (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and White-Ruthenia) under the Reich Commissioner Lohse and Ukraine under Reich commissioner Koch. The Reich commissariats were divided into general districts and regions. Right from the beginning, the East Ministry was not conceived as an administrative authority built on a large scale, but as a central office and supreme authority, which was to confine itself to overall instructions and fundamental directives, and in addition was to ensure the reinforcing of material and personnel. The actual government was the duty of the Reich commissioner; he was the sovereign in his territory.
the East was not at the head of the whole Eastern administration, but that several top authorities existed at the same time. Goering, who was plenipotentiary for the four-year plan, was responsible for the control of the economy in all occupied territories, and in this respect had authority over the minister for the East, for Rosenberg could only issue economic decrees with Goering's permission. The chief of the German police Himmler was solely and exclusively competent for the security of the occupied Eastern territories as far as police authority was concerned; there was no police division at all in the ministry for the East, neither in the Reich commissariats. Rosenberg's competence was furthermore undermined by Himmler the Reich commissioner for the preservation of German nationality", and by Speer, on behalf of whom a fuehrer-decree detached all technical matters from the East administration. It was further weakened by Goebbels who claimed for himself the control of propaganda in the occupied Eastern territories as well. Later on I shall come to the important question of labor employment which was put under the authority of Sauckel. occupied Eastern territories. In this respect, the following must be emphasized: in this trial, Rosenberg is not made responsible from the political standpoint, since the high tribunal is no parliament; neither is he made responsible from the point of view of constitutional law, for the High Tribunal is not a Supreme Court of Judicature. The liability of the defendant with respect to civil law is not in question either; but only his penal liability, his responsibility for his own alleged crimes and for the crimes of others. I do not need to outline in more detail that for a penal liability and condemnation, it must be proved that the defendant culpably and illegally committed acts forming a case which is punishable by law, and that he may only be punished for a non-action, i.e. a commission, if he had the legal duty to act, and if it was due to his inaction that the criminal result occurred, i.e. if he had the factual possibility of preventing the criminal result. for the occupied Eastern territories, but not a sovereign. The Reich commissioners were sovereigns of the gigantic territories "Ostland" and "Ukraine."
The lines along which these territories were to be constitutionally remodelled were not visible yet, but one thing was certain:
The Reich Commissioner was the highest authority. For instance, it was he, who in the most important measures, like the shooting of inhabitants of a region for acts of sabotage, had the right to make the ultimate decision. In practice, in these cases,the police had exclusive competence. The Reich, i.e. partly the East ministry and partly other authorities, detained the right to make fundamental legislation and give overall supervision. By a slight change in the well known remark of Benjamin Constant, the French professor of constitutional law: "Le roi regne, mais il ne gouverne pas", one may define in the following way Rosenberg's position as minister for the occupied territories of the East: "Le ministre gouverne, mais il ne regne pas". As in certain dominions of the British empire, there existed a sovereignty of the Reich Commissioner with a central over-all supervision on the part of the minister for the East, as in certain districts of the British Empire. Today, nobody would think of summoning the competent English minister before a tribunal, because a governor in India had allowed native villages to be bombed and burned down. And so I come to my conclusion, that in Rosenberg's case there exists no automatic, penal responsibility for the non-prevention of crimes in the East, because although he had the authority of supervision he was not sovereign, the two Reich Commissioners had the supreme authority.
is individually responsible, i.e. individually guilty of criminal exploitation and enslavement of the nations of the East and, may be, of further crimes. What was his attitude, what were the general lines and general trends of his policy, what did he positively do and what did he prevent or at least try to prevent?
In the Baltic countries, national administrations (directorates) were installed under German supervision. The German administration was compelled by the Reich minister for the occupied territories of the East, to show the greatest understanding for all desires which could be gratified and strive for a good relationship with the Baltic countries; the Baltic countries had a free legal, educational and cultural system and were only limited with respect to questions concerning politics, economy and the police. After the war of 1914-1918 agrarian reform in the Baltic states was carried out at the expense of the 700 years old German property. Nevertheless, Rosenberg as minister for the East, made a law giving back to private owners the farms which had already been collectivized in past by the Soviet Union after 1940, and in this restitution of the soil which had once been taken away from the German proprietors, showed the greatest goal will conceivable on the part of the German Reich. confirmed by witness Riecke (Transcript Page 8032). was initiated under Reich Commisser Kube. The "White Ruthenia Central Committee" wasf ounded, furthermore a White Ruthenian relief system and a White Ruthenian youth organization. When a White Ruthenian youth delegation returned from a visit to Germany, Kube said, that he would continue to act as a father to the White Ruthenian youth and the following night he was murdered, but his policy was not changed. -- I should like toobserve in passing that the actual Russian territories between Narwa and Leningrad and around Smolensk had remained all the time under military administration. Likewise the districts around Kharkov and the Crimes.
as possible, on extensive central self-administrative sovereignty, similar to the directorates in the Baltic states and pledged to a definite advancement of the fultural and educational needs of the people. After Rosenberg had originally thought that he could assume. Hitler agreed to this idea, another conception came to prevail, namely that all forces should be directed towards the war economy. Rosenberg only managed to achieve and carry through one thing: The now agrarian, order of 15 February 1942 which provided for a transition from the collective economy of the Soviet Union to personal exploitation, and then to ownership by the peasants. On 23 June 1943 the property decree was issued as a complement to this. At first, it was not possible to carry it out because of Reich Commissar Koch's resistance, but then, military events brought everything to an end. A further fundamental decree was based on a general Adjustment of the school system, which Rosenberg had ordered to be worked out, because the Reich Commissioner of the Ukraine declined to do it himself. Rosenberg provided for elementary schools and higher technical schools, the Reich Commissioner protested against this. On account of the conflict which became more and more acute between Rosenberg and Reich Commissioner Koch, Hitler issued, in June 1943, the following written instruction: The Reich Commissioner had no right to make any obstructions, but the Reich Minister for the occupied territoriesof the East should confine himself to essential questions, and when issuing any orders should make it possible for the Reich Commissioner of the Ukraine to take up his position beforehand, which practically meant Koch's coordination along with Rosenberg.
During his examination of 8 April 1946 (Transcript P.7374) the witness Lammers describe Rosenberg's peculiar constitutional position as Reich Minister for the occupied territories of the East, and his political position which became weaker and weaker. I would like to emphasize the following striking and especially important declarations made by the witness: the authority of the Reich Minister for the occupied territories of the East was undermined by the Wehrmacht, by Goering as plenipotentiary for the four-year plan, by Himmler as chief of the German police, by Himmler as Reich Commission or for the preservation of German nationality (resettlement measures), by Sauckel as general plenipotentiary for Labor utilization, by Speer in the field, of armaments and technique and finally through differences of opinion with propaganda minister Goebbels.
Furthermore, Rosenberg was limited by the fact that two Reich Commissioners, Losse and Koch, were appointed for the occupied Eastern territories. The higher SS and police chief was "personally and directly" subordinated to the Reich Commissioner, but, as Lammers has declared, in technical respects he could not receive any orders from Rosenberg or from the Reich Commissioner but only from Himmler. - Hammers said furthermore: Rosenberg always wished to pursue a moderate policy in the East, he was without any doubt against a "policy of extermination" and against a "policy of deportation", which was often advocated by other parties. He made efforts to rebuild agriculture through the agrarian law, to put order into the educational system, church affairs, the universities and schools. Rosenberg had great difficulties in succeeding, for the Reich Commissioner for the Ukraine before all others simply did not follow Rosenberg's orders. Rosenberg was for setting up a certain independence of the Eastern nations, he especially had at heart the cultural interests of the latter. The differences of opinion between Koch and Rosenberg filled volumes of files. Hitler called Rosenberg and Koch, and decided that the should meet each month in order to consult each other. The witness Lammers said quite rightly that for Rosenberg as the superior minister it was unendurable to have to come to an agreement in each case with his subordinate the Reich Commissioner. Subsequently it was shown that in spite of the meeting they came to no agreement, and finally it was Mr. Koch who was right in the eyes of the Fuehrer. As Lammers finally says, it was about the end of 1943 that Rosenberg was received for the last time by the Fuehrer, and before that time too he had always great difficulties in reaching the Fuehrer. There were no more Reich Cabinet sessions since 1937 already. The East became the ground for experiment. For this group, as is now quite clear today, it seemed hopeless to look for an understanding on the part of Rosenberg, for the development of the Reich as they wished it. Rosenberg had no idea of the extent of the fight put up against him. His argument with Reich Commissioner Koch, the exponent of Himmler and Bormann, is a proof of this ignorance, but it is also a complete proof of Rosenberg's integrity.
Commissioner of the Ukraine (1921-PS, Ro.11); his other instructions have unfortunately not been found. In this, Rosenberg requests the chiefs of the administration to preserve a decent attitude and views, he demands justice and human understanding for the population, which was always seen in Germany as the bearer of legal order; war brings terrible hardship, but every offense must be fairly examined and judged and must not be punished to excess; it is absolutely inadmissible that German agencies oppose the population with contemptuous speeches. One can only show one is the master by taking the right attitude and through one's actions, not by obtrusive behavior; our own attitude must bring others to respect the Germans; those chiefs of the administration, who have shown themselves unworthy of their task, who have misused the authority they were given end who by their pernicious behavior have become unworthy of our uniform, must be treated accordingly, summoned before a court or removed to Germany. in his memorandum of 16 March 1943 (192-PS, Ro.14). Koch writes: "It is st range, that not only a correct attitude must be taken with the Ukrainians, but that we must even be amiable to them end always ready to help." consciousness of the Ukrainian people and according to Rosenberg a high degree of cultural self-administration is desirable for the Ukraine, nations as big as the Ukrainian one is, cannot be kept in permanent dependence, their Eastern campaign is a political campaign and not an economic forage raid. Here Koch is speaking to Rosenberg in a cynical manner about the climax reached in the relations of his organization with Ukrainian emigration.
There are other decrees of Rosenberg's which are criticized by Koch. One of these is the decree of 18.6.1942 concerning the acquisition by Rosenberg of Ukrainian schoolbooks for a total of 2.3 millions Reich Marks to be charged to the budget of the Reich Commissariat without even previously getting in touch with Koch. 1 million primers, 1 million spelling charts, 200,000 arithmetic books, were to be provided at a time when there was not enough left for German schoolchildren.
Koch goes on saying: it is not necessary to point out repeatedly in the decrees issued by your Ministry and in long-distance remonstrances that any coercion in hiring laborers should be avoided and that the East Ministry even demands to be informed of any instance inwhich compulsion has been used. By a subsequent decree Koch is blamed to have caused the closing of vocational schools and that Rosenberg ordered the General Commissars to adopt another school policy, circumventing the Reich Commissar's authority. Gauleiter, the way to the Fuehrer would not be barred. praise and so much proof of absolute decency of his behavior and the farsighted and statesmanlike direction of his office as Chief of the East Administration: regarding the Reich Commissar Koch and the timber region of Zumand of 2 April 1943 (032-PS, regarding which Rosenberg gave exhaustive information as a witness. In this very matter Rosenberg displayed his conscientiousness so clearly. Transcript page 7930 and pages 8019-8021). d) Rosenberg and Bormann secution attached specific importance to it.
In July 1942, Bormann wrote a letter to Rosenberg. Rosenberg replied and a third party, Dr. Markull, an associate of Rosenberg in his Ministry, wrote a criticism of it. Transcript p. 7971). According to Dr. Markull's representation, the meaning of Bormann's letter, the original of which is not extant, contained the following points: the Slavs should work for us: if of no use for us, they ought to die; health provisions were superfluous; the fertility of the Slavs was undesirable, their education dangerous; it will do if they can count up to one hundred.
Every educated person is a potential enemy. We were leaving them their religion as an outlet. As sustenance they should receive only the barest necessities, we are the masters and we come first. only one reply by Rosenberg; feigned consent and feigned compliance. In the inner circle of the East Ministry there arose considerable apprehensions regarding this significant change in the attitude of their chidf, apprehensions which were expressed in Dr. Markull's memorandum of 5.9.1942. Rosenberg as a witness has stated and there cannot exist any doubt about it by reading that writing, impartially, that he agreed only for the sake of pacifying Hitler and Bormann. He wanted to insure himself against an attack from the Fuehrer Headquarters which he anticipated with certainty, because he supposedly did more for the Eastern population than for the German people, because he required more physicians than there were available for sick Germans etc. The memorandum of Markull is the truest possible reflection of Rosenberg's personality and influence asit shows the anxious subordinate trying to conjure the former spirit of his Minister, as he got to know and to love him in his work, against an alien phantom who seemed to have taken his place. policy of the Reich Commissar Koch, but not with the decrees of the Minister and the conception of at least 80 percent of the regional commissars and specialists counting on their Minister, according to which decrees the Eastern population should be treated decently and with understanding, that it is showing a surprisingly high capacity for culture, that their efficiency in work is good, but that we are about to dissipate a precious capital of gratitude, love and confidence. That the controversy between the Minister and the Reich Commissar was well known among the high authorities of the Reich and that it was no secret that the Ministry was unable to carry out its policies against the Reich Commissars, who considered the East Ministry as entirely superfluous. That the writings of Bormann would disavow the total policy of the Minister up to now and that one had the impression that Koch has been considered by Hitler as being right in his opposition to the Minister.
That since its foundation the Ministry had to complain about an ever increasing loss of power. The higher SS and Police officials refused to render to the General Commissar the normal honors such as reports etc. One jurisdiction of the East Minister after another was transferred to different highest Reich authorities, in the offices in Berlin it was openly said that the r emodelling of the Ministry into a mere Operations staff (Fuehrungsstab) was to be expected. On the other hand, the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories, due to the personality of its leader enjoyed the exceptional respect of the public.
Dr. Markull implores the Minister to stand by his original ideas, that the unfortunate Master complex should be as much avoided as the opinion that the intelligentsia were alien to the masses.
The influence of spiritual forces should be taken into consideration. Germany must prove a "righteous judge", acknowledging the national and cultural rights of nations. Such has been the ideas of the Minister before and such they must remain. Rosenberg's attitude did not change in fact, as at that very time he was working on the Great School Order (Schulvererdnung). Later on he effected the reopening primarily of the medical faculties in colleges. And then it came to the conflict with the Fuehrer in May 1943. the Fuehrer (Doc. No. Ro. 14), because of the German Eastern policies and the political psychological treatment of Eastern nations in particular and had been opposed from the very start to his previously conceived plan of autonomy of the Eastern nations and of the cultural development of their capacities amid an all-European conception of a family of nations on the continent. Now he had made up his mind seeing a great statesmanlike program gone to pieces. was going on in his country was merely to accept memoranda from his colleagues in the Ministry or at best indulge in a futile paper war with people like Koch. what plans they wanted to carry out and he was powerless against their influence, being in addition totally unaware at that time of all police and army orders now presented here to the Tribunal. Kiev, Hitler apparently agreed. After Rosenberg had left and he was alone with Goering, Hitler said: "This follow has special worries. We have more important matters on our minds than universities in Kiev. (Transcript of 1-3-46, forenoon 1000-1300 hrs.). No episode can illustrate the theme better than all the documents: The theme, Rosenberg and reality in the East, and the other theme: Rosenberg as the alleged inspirator of Hitler. As Rosenberg did not receive any reply to the request for resignation, he tried-many times to talk to Hitler personally. It was all in vain.
On 11-12-45 Mr. Dodd said: "The system of hatred, barbarism and denial of personal rights, which the conspirators had elevated to the national philosophy of Germany, has followed the national-socialist matters when they overran Europe.
Foreign workers became the slaves of the master race, being deported and enslaved in millions." And on 8-2-1946 General Rudenko said "In the long line of ruthless crimes committed by the German fascist troops of occupation, the forcible deportation of peaceful citizens into slavery and bondage in Germany takes a particularly important place. For the inhuman and barbaris instructions, directives and orders of the Hitler government, whose purpose was the carrying out of the deportation of Soviet people into German slavery", he said, "Goering, Keitel, Rosenberg and Sauckel were particularly responsible. Rosenberg as Reich Minister for the occupied Eastern territory. I have already explained, too., that in the field of labor employment it was not Rosenberg, but Sauckel who, as General Plenipotentiary for the Employment of Labor, was the highest instance and the responsible person, by virtue of the Fuehrer's decree of 21-3-1942 (Doc. No. 580-PS). Thus Sauckel in his field was Rosenberg's superior.
He wrote on 10-3-1942 to Rosenberg (Doc. No. 017-PS): "The Fuehrer has drawn up new and most urgent armament programs which require, the speediest employment of 2 million additional foreign workers. For the execution of his decree of 21-3-1942 the Fuehrer has given me for my further tasks more authority, particularly empowering me to use my own judgement in taking all measures in the Reich and in the occupied Eastern territories in order to insure under any circumstances an organized employment of labor for the German armament industry." In his "Program for the Employment of Labor" of 24-4-1942 (Doc. No. 016-PS, USA 163) he emphasizes the regional employment offices are in charge of all technical and administrative matters of labor employment coming under the exclusive competence and responsibility of the General Plenipotentiary for the Employment of Labor. The defense of Sauckel is not my task. But may I point out that he also did not take over his great and difficult task with feeling of hatred and intentions of enslavement.
In his program for the employment of labor just mentioned he says for instance:
"Everything has to be avoided which, beyond the shortages and hardships caused by war conditions, would aggravate and even cause unnecessary sufferings to foreign male and female workers during their stay in Germany. It stands to reason to make their presence and their work in Germany, without any loss for ourselves, as bearable as possible. On that point Sauckel and Rosenberg shared the some opinion.
Neither is it my task to state and to prove that many hundred thousands of foreign workers have found their good fortune in Germany, that in fact numberless persons were better off here than in their fatherland, but I am only concerned with the bad conditions which have been charged to the defendant Rosenberg. I come now to the Central Agency for Nationals of the Eastern Territories. Several days ago, I read the affidavit of Dr. Albert Beil. Essentially it contains an authoritative statement of whatever can be said about that subject. Therefore, I should like to omit that subject, Central Agency for Nationals of the Eastern Territories, and ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it. To refute the accusation that Rosenberg was active as protagonist of the system of hatred and barbarism, of denying human rights and of enslavement, I must add the following. Rosenberg received further unfavorable reports one being the report of the 7th of October 1942, about the had treatment of Ukrainian skilled workers. Abuses in recruiting and during transportation were pointed out : the workers were frequently dragged out of their beds at night and locked up in cellars until the time of their departure; threats and blows by the rural militia were a matter of course; food brought from home by the skilled workers was often taken from them by the militia; during transportation to Germany neglects and transgressions on the part of the escorting units occurred, etc. Rosenberg had no authority whatsoever to intervene in those matters, but he tried to do so in a letter of 21 December 1942 to Sauckel. Rosenberg first admits his fundamental accord with Sauckel, but after a few tactical and polite cliches, he complains seriously and urgently about the methods used in the employment of labor :"I must emphatically request for reasons of my responsibility for the occupied Eastern territories that any methods to supply the required continents be excluded, if I or my associates might be accused one day of tolerating them and for their consequences." Rosenberg further states that he empowered the Reich Commissar for the Ukrainian to make use, so far as required, of his soveriegn night by giving attention to the elimination of recruiting methods which were running counter to the interests of warfare and war economy in the occupied territories.
He, Rosenberg, and the Reich Commissars could not help being surprised that in numerous instances measures which should have been determined by civilian authorities were first communicated to him by the police or other offices. Without coordination of their mutual wished , he, Rosenberg, was unfortunately unable to accept the joint responsibility for consequence resulting from these reported conditions. In conclusion Rosenberg expressed the wish to put an early and to such conditions for the sake of their common interest Rosenberg also tried a personal consultation with Sauckel, and got Sauckel to promise that he would, do everything to bring about a fair solution of all these questions, in a conversation of 14 April 1942. It was beyond Rosenberg's power and authority to do more. His secret opponent, supported by higher authorities, was Reich Commissar Kech, who was indeed the chief culprit in the cruel recruiting and employment methods for Eastern workers and whose influence Rosenberg was unable to counteract. When the prosecutor Brudno on 9 January 1946 charges the defendant with protesting against these methods not for humanitarian reasons but for the sake of political expedience, I can only say that in my opinion one cannot simply maintain that the defendant Rosenberg is devoid of any human qualities without some sound reasons. As an example of the defendant's particular bestiality the so-called "Hay Action" has been repeatedly pointed out by the prosecution, in 031-PS. It concerned the intention of the army group "Center" to evacuate 40 to 50 thousand juveniles from the area of operation, as they represented a considerable burden to the area of operation and besides were in the majority without any parental supervision. Villages for children were to be established behind the front lines under native supervision. One of these village; had already proven its value. It was expected that through the Organization Todt, its being a particularly appropriate organization due to its technical and other possibilities, the juveniles would be introduced to German handicraft first as apprentices in order to employ them as skilled workers after two years training. At first Rosenberg, as the Reich Minister for the occupied territories of the Eastern, was against it, because he feared that the action might be considered as a deportation of children and on the other hand because the juveniles did not represent a considerable increase of military strength.